Voicelessness and Emotional Survival Message Board
Voicelessness and Emotional Survival => Voicelessness and Emotional Survival Message Board => Topic started by: write on May 22, 2005, 08:27:53 PM
-
I hate to put this here, amongst so many people who are hurting, but it has to be said:
EVERYONE deserves respect and fair treatment.
The narcissist, the abuser, the idiot, even ( G_d help us ) the child molestor....
Every single time we let our frustration or hatred or being judgemental get the better of us- we're diminuished.
We need to find a way of collectively rising above all this crap which came our way, and saying- STOP- enough. No one should be ill-treated ever again if I have anything to do with it....
-
Maybe you're saying don't impulsively lash out, but try to take the high road? Because there is no way I'm going to respect a child abuser or molester.
bunny
-
WRITE says that we should treat everyone with respect -even those who abuse us . And the 'judgemental' word popped up in her post too .
If you read Nathaniel Brandon ( The art of living consciously)- he points out that we NEED to make distinctions and NOT be inclusive to the extent that we accept the unacceptable. I agree. In order to stop abuse we need to name it, face it and point the finger of condemnation at it. And if that entails hating it and getting really angry then that is what we must do until it stops and we are healed.
Is that what you mean by being "judgemental" ?...
-
Dear WRITE -I refer you to LUKE 17: 3,4 where Jesus is counseling LUKE on the art of forgiveness. Jesus instructs LUKE to REBUKE the wrongdoer and then he further instructs LUKE to forgive the wrongdoer IF he repents.
So Jesus if making forgiveness conditional upon the wrongdoer taking responsibility for his 'sin' and being willing to make amends ...Hmmmmm . Most Christians miss this point.
-
Bunny, :D me either. Glad to hear someone else out there thinks the same way.
Jophil, just to be a pedantic, if you're going to preach to us about St Luke I want to point out that it is widely agreed amongst historians and theologians that St Luke never actually met or knew Christ personally, before the crucifixion anyway, in the flesh (know what I mean?) , but was converted later. Maybe/probably by St Paul.
St. Luke was a proselyte to the Christian religion, but whether from Paganism or rather from Judaism is uncertain; for many Jews were settled in Antioch, but chiefly such as were called Hellenists, who read the Bible in the Greek translation of the Septuagint. St. Jerome observes from his writings that he was more skilled in Greek than in Hebrew, and that therefore he not only always makes use of the Septuagint translation, as the other authors of the New Testament who wrote in Greek do, but he refrains sometimes from translating words when the propriety of the Greek tongue would not bear it. Some think he was converted to the faith by St. Paul at Antioch; others judge this improbable, because that apostle nowhere calls him his son, as he frequently does his converts. Though some evangelist says he wrote his gospel from the relations of those "who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word."[4] Nevertheless, from these words many conclude that he became a Christian at Antioch only after Christ's ascension. Tertullian positively affirms that he never was a disciple of Christ whilst he lived on earth.[5] No sooner was he enlightened by the Holy Ghost and initiated in the school of Christ but he set himself heartily to learn the spirit of his faith and to practice its lessons. For this purpose he studied perfectly to die to himself, and, as the church says of him, "He always carried about in his body the mortification of the cross for the honour of the divine name." He was already a great proficient in the habits of a perfect mastery of himself, and of all virtues, when he became St. Paul's companion in his travels and fellow-labourer in the ministry of the gospel. The first time that in his history of the missions of St. Paul[6] he speaks in his own name in the first person is when that apostle sailed from Troas into Macedon in the year 51, soon after St. Barnabas had left him, and St. Irenaeus begins from that time the voyages which St. Luke made with St. Paul.[7] Before this he had doubtless been for some time an assiduous disciple of that great apostle; but from the time he seems never to have left him unless by his order upon commissions for the service of the churches he had planted. It was the height of his ambition to share with that great apostle all his toils, fatigues, dangers, and sufferings. In his company he made some stay at Philippi in Macedon; then he travelled with him through all the cities of Greece, where the harvest every day grew upon their hands. St. Paul mentions him more than once as the companion of his travels, he calls him "Luke the beloved physician,"[8] his "fellow labourer."[9] Interpreters usually take Lucius, whom St. Paul calls his kinsman[10], to be St. Luke, as the same apostle sometimes gives a Latin termination to Silas, calling him Sylvanus. Many with Origen, Eusebius, and St. Jerome say that when St. Paul speaks of his own gospel[11] he means that of St. Luke, though the passage may be understood simply of the gospel which St. Paul preached. He wrote this epistle in the year 57, four years before his first arrival at Rome.
If this is going to become a Christina instruction site, let's stay as close the known/agreed facts as possible. Otherwise it's a case of the blind leading the blind.
Personally, I think it's best to stay on the topic of N'ism AND HOW TO DEAL WITH IT.
Cripes.
-
Hello Cripes , I read most of your post.What did all that history have to do with the point in discussion?.
I reserve the right to put my point of view forward in a way that best expresses my perspective -or maybe you would prefer that I check with you first in future. My point about Luke stands.
-
Hi Jophil,
Your point about Luke was based on your own personal presumption and assumption, whilst being passed off to us as the 'gospel'. Is 'counselling' usually spelled with 2 ll's? You also seem extremely hostile and agro for some reason :shock: . Especially when someone else presents their own point of view which opposes yours :roll: .
Cripes.
-
I hate to put this here, amongst so many people who are hurting, but it has to be said:
EVERYONE deserves respect and fair treatment.
The narcissist, the abuser, the idiot, even ( G_d help us ) the child molestor....
Every single time we let our frustration or hatred or being judgemental get the better of us- we're diminuished.
We need to find a way of collectively rising above all this crap which came our way, and saying- STOP- enough. No one should be ill-treated ever again if I have anything to do with it....
You are right. Child abusers deserve respect. They deserve respect from the police officers as they are arrested, and from the judge and jury as they are convicted, and from the prison warder as he locks the door on them for life.
They do not deserve to be strung up from lamp posts, because that would make us as evil and twisted as they are, tempting though the thought may be to any right thinking person. So we rise above that, and throw the law books at them instead, whenever possible.
As for anger, too right they get anger. If we are not rightly angry about adults mistreating and abusing innocent children, then what kind of people are we?
However, I am intrigued as to why you felt you had to put here that everyone deserves respect, particularly as you had the expectation of hurting people in the process (which fortunately I think has not happened). :?
I do not know a more respectful, accepting place than this one. Trolls excepted, of course. They can just go back to the bridge from whence they crawled, imo.
-
Bunny, :D me either. Glad to hear someone else out there thinks the same way.
Jophil, just to be a pedantic, if you're going to preach to us about St Luke I want to point out that it is widely agreed amongst historians and theologians that St Luke never actually met or knew Christ personally, before the crucifixion anyway, in the flesh (know what I mean?) , but was converted later. Maybe/probably by St Paul.
Cripes.
Ooooh goody. I love playing Pedants' Revolt; one of my favourites. :lol: :lol: :lol:
If you are going to be pedantic, there is no evidence that Luke actually wrote/dictated/whatever the Gospel of Luke. It is ascribed to Luke by tradition, but none of the Gospels were signed by their authors. :lol:
I am not sure why that invalidates someone quoting from the Gospel of St Luke, however. Perhaps I am not pedantic enough to understand. :(
-
Most Christians miss this point.
Candidate for 'sweeping generalisation of the week' award. :lol:
-
To Cripes , you have your opinions and I have mine. Apparently you are not a fan of my forthright approach and your way of dealing with it is to start to get personal -hence your comment about my being 'agro' and your cheap shot about spelling. It is not compulsory to reply to any of my posts,so if you do respond to me you signal your willingness to engage.
Your choice --
-
I hate to put this here, amongst so many people who are hurting, but it has to be said:
EVERYONE deserves respect and fair treatment.
The narcissist, the abuser, the idiot, even ( G_d help us ) the child molestor....
Every single time we let our frustration or hatred or being judgemental get the better of us- we're diminuished.
We need to find a way of collectively rising above all this crap which came our way, and saying- STOP- enough. No one should be ill-treated ever again if I have anything to do with it....
So you are saying child abusers deserve respect, you are mad, when i was aged 3/5 did the man who put his pen.s in my mouth, and different objects, including trying the pen.s in my front and back passage, respect me, i think not, and that goes for every single child abuser going, not one deserves any respect or fair treatment in any shape form or fashion, and that goes for all the wicked bastar.s that are walking around, obviously you have never been sexually abused, or you would never come out with such a statement!
Denise
-
Write I agree with you. I’ll repeat your post to remind me of your words as I reply:
I hate to put this here, amongst so many people who are hurting, but it has to be said:
You can say what you think. Freedom of speech is important. It's the most important thing maybe?
EVERYONE deserves respect and fair treatment.
The narcissist, the abuser, the idiot, even ( G_d help us ) the child molestor....
I’d like to define ‘respect’. Perhaps ‘be given consideration as a human’? (What it doesn’t mean in this case, IMO, is to ‘look up to’ which the word can sometimes be confused with.)
So when we respect someone, we consider them as a human being, rather than as a ‘thing’ or an object, or inferior to us, yes?
‘Fair treatment’ I agree with as an idea. But defining what fair treatment is – that’s tricky I think.
Every single time we let our frustration or hatred or being judgemental get the better of us- we're diminuished.
When we view someone else as less than human? When we allow our minds to be clouded by our experiences, our emotions…but who then should pass judgement and how? I wish there was a way for our legal systems to be non-confrontational, but I don’t know what alternatives there are and how they would work.
We need to find a way of collectively rising above all this crap which came our way, and saying- STOP- enough. No one should be ill-treated ever again if I have anything to do with it....
Controlled reproduction has been playing around my head but we automatically find the idea repellent it seems. Of course we’d only need controlled reproduction for – er – one generation? – not sure. I think I think about this topic because of my own experiences though. If I was a product of a loving family, would I think differently?
‘The Sun’ tabloid sensationalist piece of rubbish that poses as a newspaper printed the photo of Saddam in his underwear last week: front page, the photo filled the page. I saw it in a shop. I felt sick. That was so wrong, it was disgusting.
-
‘The Sun’ tabloid sensationalist piece of rubbish that poses as a newspaper printed the photo of Saddam in his underwear last week: front page, the photo filled the page. I saw it in a shop. I felt sick. That was so wrong, it was disgusting.
Saddam in his undies. Hmmm.... I wonder how all his tens of thousands of victims feel about those pics... rather, the ones that are still alive.
-
To Cripes , you have your opinions and I have mine. Apparently you are not a fan of my forthright approach and your way of dealing with it is to start to get personal -hence your comment about my being 'agro' and your cheap shot about spelling. It is not compulsory to reply to any of my posts,so if you do respond to me you signal your willingness to engage.
Your choice --
Jophil,
Thankyou for 'allowing' me to respond.
'Forthright'? hmmm? 'Fan' hmmm? No comment a.t.s.
'Engage' hmmm :roll: again. Shall it be pistols at 10 steps then Jophil? :D Do you love a drama that much? Silly talk really.
I'm forthright too Jophil, and so speaking to you 'forthrightly' I have a question for you? Why are you, or why do you seem so agro here? Those were my words in my previous post. And that is me being forthright on how you 'seemed' to me when I read your posts.
I am very happy to discuss with you how you seem to me. But not to engage. That's just silly.
So yes Jophil, to me you seem very touchy, and also quite agro. Is that okay for me to say that here?
I'm also very aware that there may be very good reasons why you come across that way and 'seem' like that.
Add to that, that you 'seem' so easy and willing to 'engage' with a person whose motives you don't fully understand?
I wonder if you've considered that perhaps, umm, is it possible, that I'm a genuine party?
Perhaps you just don't 'get that', yet, here on this forum. You 'seem' (you read) to me as a very adversarial person.
I'm interested to understand why that is.
Also, from where I sit Jophil, you don't have a monoploly in the 'being abused by N's' dept. From my reading and my personal experience here, everyone here has had their fair share of that. Isn't that why we're here afterall ? I always think that it's always worth keeping that in mind when reading and posting here.
Cripes
-
anotherguest:
I wonder how all his tens of thousands of victims feel about those pics... rather, the ones that are still alive.
I don't know. What do you think about The Sun publishing the pictures?
-
To Cripes, in recognition of your pretentious pedantry - I want to ship you a carton full of commas in the typeface of your choice. You are surely a compulsive 'right fighter' and so you will be looking to have the last word - go ahead. I will not spoil your victory with a reply.
-
Can I ask a quick question please?
Jophil, I am puzzled when you say:
I want to ship you a carton full of commas
I don’t want to get involved here but I am curious (bad habit, I know) – do you mean Cripes uses too many commas, or too few? Or maybe I’m misunderstanding more than I can think and you don’t mean that at all? Sorry, I just don’t like not ‘getting it’ because then I feel stupid.
Hope you sort whatever it is out and sorry to interrupt.
-
Hi Portia,
As Jophil indicated he may not return here let me hazard a guess as to what he meant. Cripes appears to use a lot of commas in his/her writing style. It would appear to be a jab at Cripes in response to Cripes' jabs at jophil.
Which brings me to another subject; the title of this thread. I see a lessening of respect on this board and frankly it is pretty depressing. I only post occasionally on the open board anymore. Most communication I do is through PMs to people I can have an honest, helpful discussion with.
I wonder if I might ask Cripes a question or two?
What was the point of your long dissertation to jophil when he had merely made reference to Luke?
Why did you refer to it as preaching?
If he had quoted the Buddha or the Bhagavad Gita would you have reacted similarly? Are you a Buddhist or Hindu scholar as well?
You state that in your opinion we should all stick to Ns and how to deal with them, and then make two subsequent posts which are snide, snotty attempts to provoke jophil and have more to do with his spelling than Ns or how to deal with them.
I wonder if you've considered that perhaps, umm, is it possible, that I'm a genuine party?
Why did you ask this question?
At no point did jophil state or even imply that you are not a 'genuine party'.
Why would you feel the need to even raise the subject?
I know why, do you?
mudpup
-
I'll stick my oar in. Here's what I think happened. Someone quoted the Bible. That was a huge trigger (it usually is) and another person, or people, reacted. Then it turned into the usual bickering and "Let me just ask you this" questioning. It can be stopped, we can just pretend there's a red light on this stuff, put on the brakes, and then turn on a green light refocusing on the topic. That's my observation for what it's worth. Carry on.
bunny
-
You know, I was really interested in hearing more about respect and now this thread seems to be getting off topic.
How do you respect a N when it is your own mom or dad?
-
Hi cat,
This thread appears to have been a train wreck from the get go.
You might have better luck with your respect question if you start a new thread.
I struggle with your question as well, but have no intention of addressing it in the context of this derailed mess. Maybe someone else will though. Good luck.
Just my 2cents as the saying goes.
mudpup
-
that some people will hate their abusers or tormentors, and I've felt like that too, so angry I thought my head would explode. I've made myself physically sick with anxiety and rage.
But I also think that being able to let go of that is essential for me- and that means I have to accept that that person is sick or damaged or just evil or whatever and they deserve no relationship with me but a respect, yes.
I used to think- I wish (s)he'd die( about more than one person actually )
I was so consumed with impotent rage.
How could someone hurt me like that?
Now I have respect- very much so given the damage I know particularly my father can do.
But it's respect which says- you deserve your life ( and whatever you've reaped therin ) and I deserve to go on with mine. Without your voice in my head, without your pernicious presence in my life.
And it's applying the same thing to all the other relationships I've got into because of this faulty pattern of relating.
I don't think until I lose all the anger and bitterness that I will consider myself healed and ready to move on.
-
My guess is, you're saying, "I respect myself, and I respect your right to be a messed up abuser. In fact, I respect your disorder and sickness so much that I will detach and remove myself from it. Have a nice life." If that's the case, I agree.
bunny
-
Mudpup,
Which brings me to another subject; the title of this thread. I see a lessening of respect on this board and frankly it is pretty depressing. I only post occasionally on the open board anymore. Most communication I do is through PMs to people I can have an honest, helpful discussion with.
I have to strongly agree with you my friend. It seems there are a lot of negative comments flying around in regard to many subjects and I can't understand why this is happening so suddenly. I guess I am going to have to get myself a pm so I can distance myself from all this bickering and negativity.
Brigid
-
Brigid,
Looking forward to a PM from you sis. :wink:
mud
-
anything I don't understand or doesn't feel it pertains to me.
I think I've missed something- I also find it incredibly hard to concentrate to read lately, especially on the computer.
But I hope I haven't said anything to offend anyone here.
-
"I respect myself, and I respect your right to be a messed up abuser. In fact, I respect your disorder and sickness so much that I will detach and remove myself from it. Have a nice life."
I think that's exactly how I need it to feel!
Sometimes I've felt so resentful that people who can be so cruel or thoughtless seem to get away with it, and in my mind I thought I was punishing them with my feelings. But it was just holding me in that position.
I'm not going to care if the handful of difficult people win the lottery, fall in love, have great success- and of course I know they'll flaunt it if any of these really happen.
I'll try to concentrate on the people who do give me positive feedback, and the next time I find myself in the midst of someone's emotional fireworks just extricate myself and book a therapy appt then move on.
I've wasted half my life on people who will never value or care about me and it's definitely a pattern I want to break.
Someone said in another thread- why would I want a non-reciprocal painful relationship.
The answer is I don't.
I'm going to concentrate on detaching and I'm afraid the only punishment I can dish out to people who hurt me is to move on as fast as possible and deny them having wonderful me in their lives! ( smile )
I don't really think that yet, haven't built myself up to that, but that's going to be my next goal, to feel so good about myself and my life that if someone hurts me it feels awful and immediately out of place...and I shout stop...not make excuses so I can catch a few crumbs of affection and feel like I should be grateful.
-
But it's respect which says- you deserve your life ( and whatever you've reaped therin ) and I deserve to go on with mine. Without your voice in my head, without your pernicious presence in my life.
Respect is a very odd commodity, in my opinion. I think one of the complicated issues here is how to respect yourself, and consistently act on that respect, without belittling other people. It so often seems like an either/or proposition.
I know that I always have to be careful not to confuse my desire to "live" self-respect with my (rather less mature) desire to "demand" respect from others--when what I'm really demanding is attention. I think "respect" for others is all about recognizing both their rights and their sovereignty, and above all, to recognize that one of those rights is the right to choose not to have anything to do with me. That doesn't have to be narcissistic or abusive, it can just be. Certain people in my life are never going to love me, accept me, recognize me, and the more I'm "in their face" about it, the more I'm disrespecting both them and myself.
It's hard to make sense of this--at least, I suspect I'm not doing a good job--but I think any discussion of respect has to include this distinction between respect and attention. Someone can "respect" me (i.e., not infringe upon my boundaries) while paying no attention to me at all. And I can do the same.
In that sense, I think what outrages us about the idea that criminals and abusers deserve respect is that these people consistently violate individual and societal boundaries. They barge into other peoples' lives and take things that do not belong to them (or which they cannot legitimately claim). And in doing so, I think they forfeit their right to respect (at least, as regards the offending behavior). They still maintain certain "human rights," but they lose individual sovereignty--control over their own space, associations, and so forth--because they have failed to govern themselves.
I work in the criminal justice system, so I get a lot of opportunity to contemplate issues surrounding offending behavior and the social contracts through which we react to it. So I guess almost everything I say about "respect" passes through that filter. Sorry if anything I've said is way off base.
Very interesting issue.
daylily
-
Write, please keep writing, I’m finding a lot of sense in what you say.
Daylily
It's hard to make sense of this--at least, I suspect I'm not doing a good job-
Daylily, you’re doing a blooming great job in my book :D (if my opinion is worth posting? :wink: ). I’ll come back to digest your words some more.
I think one of the problems with ‘respect’ is how we define it. Over here (UK) I perceive that when we say respect, we think of deference, and that isn’t what we mean here at all (and it isn’t the true meaning of the word from what I can tell). Great thread, very educational for me. Thanks all :D
-
Certain people in my life are never going to love me, accept me, recognize me, and the more I'm "in their face" about it, the more I'm disrespecting both them and myself.
It's hard to make sense of this--at least, I suspect I'm not doing a good job--but I think any discussion of respect has to include this distinction between respect and attention. Someone can "respect" me (i.e., not infringe upon my boundaries) while paying no attention to me at all. And I can do the same.
The difficulty with this one and living in the US is the culture isn't like my own.
People can be all over me here, they love the accent & my musical talents, we have a wonderful time, I can think it's the start of a long close friendship-and two weeks later they have forgotten everything we discussed or arranged.
It's happened over and over again, and I'm learning now to have less to do with superficial people, to be more wary of someone who wants to be my best friend ten minutes after meeting me, and to ignore all the cues which in my own country mean someone cares about you: repeatedly asking after you- which here is often just a greeting & you're not meant to answer truthfully! being physically affectionate, giving gifts etc.
Don't get me wrong- not everyone's like this by any means, I have some wonderful friends here, and it's something some of my american friends worry or complain about too.
But the biggest thing I had to learn about living here was not to take it personally.
Of course in england people can be more negative and hostile, it takes a long time to 'belong' ...but I didn't get the 'mixed messages' which happen frequently here.
The other thing is- I am very gullible. I pay too much attention to what people say- too little to what they do.
Like with the church. I believe it when people talk about compassion and respect and taking care of one another, and I thought I had found a community which would cushion me during my long illness and marital breakdown. A couple of my friends have been wonderful- but there was no wider community, last time I went to church the minister never even asked how I was, the support group for people with bipolar never got set up, and the twice I was suicidal in the past year the church was the last place I felt safe to go and ask for help.
So I left. And I know over time I'll be glad about that. Sincerity is very important, especially for people trying to heal old wounds.
But it's been a painful-if necessary- process.
Thanks for helping me unravel all this. I really think it's the key to changing the way I do relationships and take better care of myself.
-
I'm glad this thread got back on track.
Write,
Sorry you've met so many superficial Americans. Most people I know are not like that.
About churches. They're like any other institution or even people for that matter. Some are good, some are mediocre, and some are down right bad. It usually depends on the leadership. Apathetic pastors and leaders attract apathetic followers. An angry pastor attracts an angry congregation. Likewise for a loving one.
You would not have been treated that way in my church. You might have gotten sick of all the busybodies trying to help you :? , but you would not have felt alone or unsafe.
Which isn't to say its perfect. There are weirdos and evil people everywhere. That's life. Someone suggested putting them all in a cage somewhere. I would that we could. :twisted:
If you don't mind me asking, just out of curiosity, how long have you been in the USA and are you on the west coast, east coast or somewhere in the middle?
mudpup
-
People can be all over me here, they love the accent & my musical talents, we have a wonderful time, I can think it's the start of a long close friendship-and two weeks later they have forgotten everything we discussed or arranged.
Of course in england people can be more negative and hostile, it takes a long time to 'belong' ...but I didn't get the 'mixed messages' which happen frequently here.
Write, I just wanted to add a comment on that cultural distinction.
I've often wondered why Americans seem to put such a premium on being "nice." By "nice," I think people generally mean that sort of surface concern, warmth, and attention that could easily be mistaken for genuine feeling--except that it isn't genuine feeling. One of the "nicest" people I know is my mother-in-law: generous with hugs, asks after the extended family, tries not to speak ill of anyone. Not bad in itself, of course. Except that her concern lasts for exactly as long as it takes to ask the question or make the comment. If you ever dared to answer, "How are you?" with "Well, not so good," I think she would die of shock. More than that, the mention of anything remotely personal or serious makes her really uncomfortable. She simply doesn't want to talk about it.
I've been to England a few times, once for an extended stay, and I felt very comfortable there. It seemed that, in general, people made a clearer distinction between social contact and friendship. In other words, they didn't ask unless they really wanted to know, and they weren't nearly so lavish with the praise (which is something that kind of drives me nuts about American culture, but that's another story). Take that for what it's worth, of course--I didn't even try to "belong" there. But I do see the differences you've mentioned, and I can understand how a transplanted Brit could find it difficult and dispiriting to try to read American social signals. I was born and raised in Pennsylvania, and most of the time I get it wrong.
Wishing you a good day,
daylily
-
Hi Cat,
Since this thread is repectful again, let me take a crack at your question about how to respect disrespectful parents.
Hmmmm............ I have no idea. My mom has assisted my brother throughout his war on me and I am really at a loss as to how to deal with her respectfully. We haven't spoken in over two years. I never really blew up at her when she was repeating false accusations about me or telling me to kiss my brother's rear end.
I was too astonished that she would behave that way to be truly disrespectful, but I can say I zero respect left for her.
Maybe somebody else can help us out. I have no answers for you.
mudpup
-
Hi write and daylily,
A question occurs to me.
Are there less people who truly care for others in America or does it only seem that way because there is a culture of niceness in the USA?
Lets try a mind game.
Lets say twenty percent of the people in each of two countries are truly loving, caring people.
In one country the remaining eighty percent are aloof or hostile.
In the other the remaining eighty percent are superficially kind and caring.
Is it possible the plain spoken, genuinely hostle and aloof country would seem to have more caring people because the decent people stood out in stark contrast to the snots;
while the superficial country would seem to have less decent people because so many people seemed like niceness hypocrites?
Personally after all the genuine open hostility I've been subjected to the last few years a little phony tea and sympathy sounds pretty refreshing. :wink: :roll:
Just a thought.
mudpup
-
Mudpup - glad the thread's back.
Been struggling with the words honor and respect. Churches that I've gone to say honor. . .so I checked on the definition in Webster's.
Honor:
1:good name or public esteem : REPUTATION b : a showing of usually merited respect
2 : PRIVILEGE
3 : a person of superior standing -- now used especially as a title for a holder of high office
4 : one whose worth brings respect or fame
5 : the center point of the upper half of an armorial escutcheon
6 : an evidence or symbol of distinction
7 : CHASTITY, PURITY
8 a : a keen sense of ethical conduct : INTEGRITY b : one's word given as a guarantee of performance
9 plural : social courtesies or civilities extended by a host <did the honors at the table>
Respect:
1 : a relation or reference to a particular thing or situation
2 : an act of giving particular attention : CONSIDERATION
3 a : high or special regard : <paid our respects>
Going by Webster's - HONOR to me - is showing merited respect. MERITED. By being someone's daughter or son - does that alone make it "merited".
Respect though - different animal. . .paying particular attention to a situation or thing. Goodness gracious - - I think we all pay attention to a particular thing or situation the N parent puts us through.
Very confusing topic - and tough to figure out what's right. Ultimately, in terms of the parents - I think everyone would like to do what is right. But then again, when the parents haven't done what is right, what is right? ? ?
A vicious cycle.
-
cat, your post touches something in me. I guess I identify with feeling confused about things which seem like they are obvious to others, but never got explained to me. So, I'll do here what I do with myself when I feel confused.
cat, what do you REALLY want by getting the "right" answer? Do you want someone to tell you that you have done enough and it is OK to stop trying? Do you want someone to tell you that there is nothing wrong with you, that you have done all you could in a difficult situation? Do you want someone to tell you it was never your fault?
I'm sorry if I misread and am justing projecting onto the situation. I feel such a searching in your post and would like to help (if able).
-
4 years/ 3 moves/ all Southern states.
I feel remarkably calm for having been able to acknowledge all this, and it's not triggering any panic or free-floating-anxiety or specific fears.
Do you want someone to tell you that you have done enough and it is OK to stop trying? Do you want someone to tell you that there is nothing wrong with you, that you have done all you could in a difficult situation? Do you want someone to tell you it was never your fault?
I think that's exactly what I wanted- not realising that I will only believe it when it's me telling myself! ( if that makes sense )
My therapist asked me similar questions earlier this week, encouraging me to examine how I feel, not look outside myself for reassurance. And especially- not to look for that reassurance from npeople or other difficult people. I don't know whether I thought I could reprogramme my life by doing that & finally get my parents ( one of whom is dead ) to realise I'm ok...but that's in a way how it feels, and that I've approached several relationships this way, making myself vulnerable and then waiting for them to come and take care of me...
I've been thinking up some new 'relationship rules' for me for the future, will post again later.[/i]
-
Longtire - I think you hit the nail on the head with your last post.
My sister and I have coped by each of taking turns taking time out from parents. . . and then feeling guilty that we're not respecting or honoring them.
Your thought swere very insightful and helpful.
-
Another point to consider:
Let's say we all agree that respect is basic consideration and treating a person with enough consideration that the treatment is at least humane.
Then let's say that people who perpetrate horrific deeds do not deserve the least bit of respect.
Does that mean then, that we should give them no basic consideration, treat them with so little of it that the treatment is inhumane?
Wouldn't that make us exactly like them?
-
Guest wrote,
Let's say we all agree that respect is basic consideration and treating a person with enough consideration that the treatment is at least humane.
I'd say thats a pretty low bar for the term 'respect'.
Then let's say that people who perpetrate horrific deeds do not deserve the least bit of respect.
Does that mean then, that we should give them no basic consideration, treat them with so little of it that the treatment is inhumane?
Wouldn't that make us exactly like them?
There seem to be a lot of potential definitions in here.
What is inhumane to you might be perfectly fine to someone else.
Lots of people think hanging rapists by the neck until dead is perfectly humane, as long as they get a tasty and nutritious breakfast beforehand.
I'm not sure how respectful it is though.
The moral equivalence argument is pretty slippery ground.
Lets take an example of false imprisonent.
Say a criminal keeps an innocent person locked in his basement for twenty years.
Now is society exactly like him if they choose to punish him by locking him in prison for twenty years? Unequivocally no, it is protecting itself from a predator.
If someone breaks into my house and is trying to kill my wife, am I exactly the same as him if I deprive him of his life? H#%l no! I would have neither the least amount of respect for him nor any desire to treat him humanely.
Respect and humane treatment are sometimes luxuries when the horrific deeds you speak of are being done, in my opinion. Afterward when the danger is past the perpetraters of horrific acts are entitled not to be cruelly treated. That is about as far as I'm willing to go to extend respect or humane treatment to them. If you are stating that basic consideration for horrific deeds means not being tortured or lynched then I guess I agree with you. If you're saying much more than that then I guess I don't.
mudpup
-
Isn't it funny how we do that? "How are you today?" We expect to hear "Oh, great, and you?" "Just fine." It is superficial most of the time, but I think it's just more of an acknowledgement that you "count"...
But if you really count, wouldn't someone want to know how you really are doing?
I'd rather just have someone wave and say 'hi' to me. Ask me how I am if you want to know; don't if you don't... life's too short to spend it pretending.
I was born in the States and grew up here, but I have never in my life been comfortable with this kind of interacting myself. I felt completely at home - for the first time in my life! - only when I lived in England and Europe, in my 30s. Where people waved and said hi if they didn't know you well enough to ask how you were; so when they asked, they meant it.
And no, I'm not at all a stolid, serious, sententious type. Far from it!
Hang in there write, you aren't alone with this, even some of us Colonials mind it :P :P :P .
-
There seem to be a lot of potential definitions in here.
Agreed.
Afterward when the danger is past the perpetraters of horrific acts are entitled not to be cruelly treated.
Thankyou for clarifying this as this is what I meant. Ofcourse, while a horrific deed is being perpetrated on us, or others, we must self defend, and save those who are innocently being harmed, first, imo, hopefully by using as little force as necessary.
Ofcourse, "not to be cruelly treated" means what? Does that mean treated with basic respect?
The reason I ask is what if the perpetrator happens to be one of your loved ones?
After they've behaved horrifically, perpetrators remain someone's son, daughter, wife, mother, brother, sister, husband, father, etc.
If we treat them cruelly, disrespectfully, etc, don't we also harm parents and loved ones of perpetrators by doing so? Those people must stand by and watch their loved one being treated with disrespect and cruetly? So in the end, we end up behaving in a similar way as those we wish to stop, punish, or correct?
-
Write, :D hello, how are you (serious question)? This is Portia. How am I? Oh fine thanks! :D
I think everyday etiquette is just great. It stops us from murdering each other. It makes us all feel like we belong and we’re a part of a society. It’s superficial but very important. Good manners = a kind of respect. Good manners = acknowledging that other people actually do exist (which is a pretty good feeling for kids of Ns). If we don’t do that, we all start feeling terrible and take to expressing that feeling through destruction of our immediate environment, and stuff :? . So I like etiquette.
But we can’t expect more than we give. Everything is give and take - reciprocal. If I ask how you are and you spend an hour telling me and never ask me how I am, how do you think I feel? (This is me talking from past experience with people who just love to talk but never listen.)
Re-spect is to look back at, consider.
Write specifically:
to be more wary of someone who wants to be my best friend ten minutes after meeting me, and to ignore all the cues which in my own country mean someone cares about you: repeatedly asking after you- which here is often just a greeting & you're not meant to answer truthfully! being physically affectionate, giving gifts etc.
Someone who wants to be your best friend 10 minutes after meeting you? I’d wonder what scam they were running. People who do that are after something. If someone repeatedly asks after me, gives me gifts (shock!) I think they’re softening me up for some deed. Opening up the supply vein. :evil: Oh yuk, sorry.
Ordinary people simply do not behave like that. Ordinary (good, self-aware, self-confident, self-respectful) people aren’t overbearing like that. IMO this has little to do with countries. In my country (England) if someone treated me like that I’d be very suspicious. They’d be trampling all over my boundaries, or I’d be allowing them. I’d refuse gifts. I’d shrink from physical contact (I have yelled at sales people on the street “don’t touch me!” because that’s my boundary, cultural issues or not, I really don’t care).
The things you describe Write, about ‘caring activities’? I would judge them to be ‘taking advantage of’ activities. But then I have no friends! Hmmm. Apparently most people have about 4 or 5 people who are friends (‘they’ did a study). Finding those 4 or 5 people is hard work; most people you meet (er….95%-96%?) will not be ‘good friend’ material because that is simply how it is. :? Apparently.
-
Hi guest,
This is the kind of discussion I appreciate. Nice and friendly, nobody taking offense over a simple disagreement of philosophies. :D
I'm having a hard time understanding exactly what you are saying. A definition problem again maybe.
I said a person who commits a horrific act should not be treated cruelly, and defined that as being neither tortured nor denied due process of the law.
It almost sounds as though you are saying once the act is in the past this perpetrator is entitiled to the same respect and consideration as people who have commited no such act or possibly even the victim of the act, and that to do anything less is to be just like the perp.
If that is what you are saying then I disagree utterly.
Once a person has demonstrated the willingness to commit a horrific act they have forfeited many rights, including the right to equal respect and treatment from others. They may regain that right after many years of redemptive behavior, but to accord someone who has done something awful the same consideration as those who haven't, is to truly harm the parents and loved ones of the victim.
It is unfortunate that the parents and loved ones of predators are harmed by the reaction to what the predator does, but I'm afraid that is one of the unfixable facets of life. The alternative of pretending like nothing happened is worse.
If I misunderstand what you're saying let me know.
mudpup
-
Portia,
But then I have no friends!
Hey! What about me.
I thought we were scrumpy grill buddies. :wink: :D
mudpup
-
Did I say I have no friends? :shock: I meant fiends! :D Now I'm being silly. Sometimes I like to be silly too, talk nonsense and roll around in the grass. 8) ...the green kind that we make lawns out of .... :D
(((((scrumpy grill buddy Mud))))) (((((everyone))))) bye for now
-
This is the kind of discussion I appreciate. Nice and friendly, nobody taking offense over a simple disagreement of philosophies.
Yes, me too and I'm not so sure that we so disagree anyway.
I said a person who commits a horrific act should not be treated cruelly, and defined that as being neither tortured nor denied due process of the law.
Got it. So, does the neither tortured part include neither mentally, neither emotionally, or just physically? (Important distinction, I think you're right, it needs defining).
In treating the person not cruelly, by not torturing (mentally, emotionally, physically), or denying the person due process under the law, then would you say that would be treating the person with basic respect?
If the torturing definition includes all 3 then I think I agree with you.
It almost sounds as though you are saying once the act is in the past this perpetrator is entitiled to the same respect and consideration as people who have commited no such act or possibly even the victim of the act, and that to do anything less is to be just like the perp.
If treating the person with respect means not torturing them mentally, emotionally, physically, not being cruel, allowing for due process in law, then yes, I think all people are equal and should be allowed these basic things, whether criminal or victim.
Do I think the horrific deed doers should be given ample opportunity to repeat their deeds? Absolutely not. I'm not talking about how we might treat behaviours, I'm talking about how we might treat the people who do the behaviours. Do you understand?
Once a person has demonstrated the willingness to commit a horrific act they have forfeited many rights, including the right to equal respect and treatment from others.
Once a person has committed a horrific act they have demonstrated their utter disrespect and consideration of others. They have ignored their victims basic rights. So then do you think by doing so they forfeit their own rights? I'm not sure about that. If so, then they would not be entitled to be treated with any consideration, or any respect, and cruelty would be an alright, acceptable way to behave toward them. See what I mean?
to accord someone who has done something awful the same consideration as those who haven't, is to truly harm the parents and loved ones of the victim.
There are more victims than might be considered is what I guess I'm trying to point out.
It is unfortunate that the parents and loved ones of predators are harmed by the reaction to what the predator does, but I'm afraid that is one of the unfixable facets of life.
It is unfortunate.
-
I said a person who commits a horrific act should not be treated cruelly, and defined that as being neither tortured nor denied due process of the law.
What about the person who doesn’t commit a horrific act (I know some of the people on this board have had that happen to them). By displaying the N personalities and beating down either physically or emotionally would respect be not treating them cruelly or tortured?
Instead of the attacker coming into your house to kill you, instead put in the attacker as being your parent, spouse, relative, etc – in your life attacking you. While injury may not be imminent the person being attacked knows immediately there is going to be an attack.
Once a person has demonstrated the willingness to commit a horrific act they have forfeited many rights, including the right to equal respect and treatment from others. They may regain that right after many years of redemptive behavior, but to accord someone who has done something awful the same consideration as those who haven't, is to truly harm the parents and loved ones of the victim.
So, Mudpup, I like your comments above. It certainly helps me to watch, to understand, maybe they can change. To allow them the space to rebuild trust. . . to see if their behavior is redemptive, and can be trusted again. I think by watching or hoping their behavior might change – that is a form of respect or even honor.
-
hi Portia!
I’d shrink from physical contact (I have yelled at sales people on the street “don’t touch me!” because that’s my boundary, cultural issues or not, I really don’t care).
well, when you live in another culture you do have to conform somewhat, or life becomes a daily battle. I'm quite used to the hugs and loud greetings etc, and don't even mind them sometimes. Some have led to long-term happy friendships ( or acquaintanceships- I am learning to differentiate the two, )
I guess I have met a few jerks along the way. Always when I've been vulnerable as it happens...
Apparently most people have about 4 or 5 people who are friends (‘they’ did a study). Finding those 4 or 5 people is hard work; most people you meet (er….95%-96%?) will not be ‘good friend’ material because that is simply how it is
You mean 4 or 5 people at the same stage as you, who're available right now?
I have many good friends, but their lives and mine aren't always intertwined or overlapped. Like some are now overseas, or I've noticed that say people who first get married or have a baby tend to drop off the radar for a while. But they're people I can count on to be interested in me and care about me.
I talked again with my therapist about this politeness etc issue, and she says I'm being too hard on myself because I didn't spot the handful of n-people who have given me grief. She said they are accomplished at pretence or deception which is exactly why they leave a trail of misery behined them, loads of people all wondering wtf? ( or in my case wtf is wrong with me...? )
She says I'm getting better all the time because this latest n didn't get more than a few hours of my consideration, admittedly during which time he caused me upset and was belittling.
I have a major problem with letting go of relationships even if they're bad for me, so I guess this is progress.
We're all here P, I've had so much support from this board I think of everyone as friend-material even though we don't know each other!
Back to the respect- I respect all the ns out there. I respect them enough to know that they are miserable pernicious individuals who suck the life out of genuine relationships and emotions. I respect them enough to say- go get therapy so you can rejoin the human race and not perpetuate misery forever.
And most of all I respect them enough to keep away from them and as soon as I realise I've met another, to end the relationship and go on with my healthy life without them.
Gotta go, will read the other posts later.