Voicelessness and Emotional Survival Message Board
Voicelessness and Emotional Survival => Voicelessness and Emotional Survival Message Board => Topic started by: Portia on June 16, 2006, 08:30:37 AM
-
Storm,
Are you referring to the thread where I’ve just told Seeker that their behaviour is out of line? Well are you? Are you are you are you are you....hmmmmmmmmm? Come on Storm, please tell me, I wanna know! If you are, why not say so?
I don’t think I’m playing Victim, Rescuer or Persecutor in that thread. I’m calling a specific piece of behaviour as I see it. I take full responsibility for my action. Nobody else has to be involved – unless they choose to be.
We all make choices about the time we spend here and what we say. It's a free choice! :D Brilliant! You made a choice in posting your ‘Cycles of Conflict’ thread. What was your motivation? Was it a role from Karpman? :? :(
From that thread:
I'm wondering if this type of weekend conflict does indeed fall into a pattern. And I wonder why, if this is a cycle we're experiencing, we 'need' it. Do we need it? If we do, do we need it in quite this way?
Yes I “need it” :D. Are you telling me I can’t have it? :( And who exactly is the ‘we’ you’re talking about? Are you gathering a group around you Storm? :x
I am really sorry, everyone. I'll unlock it Monday, and people may castigate me here to their hearts' content at that time.
No you’re not sorry at all Storm. However, your locking a thread does not stop me starting a new thread. :o My goodness! :D
Fancy a little conflict for the weekend Madam? (barber-shop style). I’ll leave this thread open and try to quell my curiosity and not return to it…too often!
ahhh freeee willllllll is a terrible thing...................................
..... 0
0 0
0
000 0
0 0
0
0
(gone snorkelling in deep water)..................................
-
Hiya P honey,
So glad you and your emoticons are back...I've missed you.
I had a different reaction to Stormy's thread, I was grateful to read it.
I think it's because I think she's onto something. My inner percepo-meter started gonging.
As to locking it...I know everyone has different takes on that...but I see it as a healthy thing. When someone feels the desire to edit or delete or lock their own written record, I see it as a built-in function on the board that just enables boundary setting. Not a perfect parallel to rla-world taking a break from a lively conversation or leaving a room to take a nap...but close enough for me.
I think we'd sense the difference if someone was, say, flouncing out of the room in a huff in order to spitefully cut off dialogue, versus someone saying, this conversation is important to me, and I want to take some time in between, so I'm going to go meditate, but I'll be back and listen.
I think this instance is an example of the latter. It didn't hurt me or offend me.
I think Storm dug deep to share that lightbulb she'd had, and went off to meditate. And she'll be back, so I don't feel abandoned or dismissed.
We all make the world go round, but for what it's worth...
I'm tickled pink you're here. Next time you go to Spain, save me a horse.
(((Portia))))
Hops
-
I'm in my warrior position.... sword & shield at the ready... my stand is held, sword out, shield to the side, left leg slightly forward.... right, I'm ready! :lol: :lol:
-
I'm sticking a marshmallow on the end of your sword so we can have S'mores.
Do you Brits know what S'mores are? We ate them at GirlScout camp.
You roast a marshmallow over the campfire until it's brown and crusty on the outside and gooey on the inside. Then you slap it between two graham cracker (sweet biscuity things) squares with a square slab of chocolate layered in. Then you eat it. Then you eat six more. Can I have S'more?
Hops
-
No, not heard of S'more's before (I actually read it is Snores initially!!! Hmmm)
Looking forward to trying some xx
-
Oh S'mores!! Yum!!
Sticking a chunk of chocolate and a graham wafer on the end of your sword with Hoppy's marshmallow.
Where's the tin foil?
:D Sela
-
You can't get graham crackers here in the UK. Everyone is going to have S'mores and I can't have any. It isn't fair!!!!!!!!!!!!
-
Hey Jona,
You got marshmallows over there? Hmm...well, any flat, mildly sweet square biscuit would do.
And y'all oughtta give them a British name. What would someone from the East End call a S'more? (I LOVE that accent...)
:D
Hops
-
I am an American. I don't know what someone from the East End would call it. No! You cannot fake graham crackers. I tried that with making a crust for cheesecake and it came out Yeeewwwwww.
-
Hi Hops
I had a different reaction to Stormy's thread, I was grateful to read it.
I think it's because I think she's onto something. My inner percepo-meter started gonging.
Good! I’m glad and happy you were grateful for Storm’s thread. I like balance.
My thinking: I don’t know if Storm’s onto something or not. I don’t see anything to be onto.
I don’t see this board in one way or another, apart from a good place to watch folks interacting in whatever way they do. When we had weekends of folks on the edge, that was one time. I learned from that. When we have folks who do different things, that’s a different time again and I personally learn from those things. Change is good. The status quo isn’t. Stagnation.
Today I learned how to say “that’s not okay” out loud and somewhat more positively than when I last tried to say it. I thought about asking Dr G to say it but then I thought, hey I’m a big girl now, I can say it, no need to bother Doctor G. But then he was bothered so I guess my effort was wasted. But no it wasn’t! I got to use a new part of my voice, I got to say “that’s not okay” and boy that’s scary stuff. I expect to be told off for saying it. Every time.
I don’t want to stop anyone doing whatever they do here – that’s Doc G’s job (but isn’t it also ours….to take some responsibility for ourselves and each other?...). I don’t want to impose my world view on others. Saying “that’s not okay” was for me. Doesn’t matter what happens next, I said it and felt okay.
Of course I don’t know if Storm was even referring to that thread. I’m assuming for now. Perhaps Storm will clarify, will you Storm?
My inner percepo-meter started gonging.
What does your percepo-meter say Hops? Was it about that thread with Seeker and RM/Laura? Did you think Seeker is another member?
Okay….let’s assume you say yes.
Okay. Now what?
Just saying Hops: being onto something – what does that mean? Is it clear, honest, out in the open, straight forward, helpful, truthful?
Or does it contribute to a feeling that is not helpful? Who knows the big secret of what’s really going on here?
Haha
There are no secrets. I hate secrets. I like clarity and truth and compassion and love and peace. I don’t like manipulation.
Saying : “that’s not okay” to Seeker isn’t Karpman. It’s calling a bad piece of behaviour for what it was. Okay it wasn’t murder and it wasn’t a problem for Laura, but it’s a problem for Seeker. Where does that kind of behaviour get anyone? It was just one bad choice of words.
I will say what’s bad behaviour when I see it. No need for conflict: the evidence is obvious, the facts speak for themselves, I don’t need to argue them and I don’t need to make a big deal about it. Is this thread a big deal? I don’t think so. It’s serious yes, but not conflict-serious. I don’t have a conflict here.
I want to: be honest, say what I mean, have a grumble, have a laugh, try and get folks talking. As long as no-one tries to eat H&H’s piece of chicken….because she’s armed and dangerous now 8).
Hops I have one of those beautiful Andalusian horses on order for you. They’re treated abominably to get to how they are, so we’ll free one and let him or her run wild. In fact let’s free them all. Yeah :D. And we can eat s’mores around the campfire (I don’t know them but they sound yummy).
And if it ain’t obvious,
Seeker
you’re invited here too if you want to talk about it, why it doesn’t work saying that type of thing and why you felt you wanted to say what you did. It’s not necessary to attack someone just because you don’t agree with them, or you don’t even like them. What’s interesting is to look at why you don’t like them or what it is you disagree with. If you want to. What’s really interesting is comparing your view, or my view, with someone else’s view and seeing how they differ.
Laura/Really Me
Is it okay if I talk about you? You have to agree to that before I would do it. See I don’t see you as bullying at all and I’d like to say that. But I do see you as (and this is where I’ll stop because you’re not here, so to speak).
I think it’s odd that Seeker does the very same thing to Laura, that Laura did to someone else. Very often we fight that which we see in ourselves? I can make a conspiracy theory out of a sugar lump, so I tend to fight anything that remotely sounds of secrets or ‘knowing’ ….that is, when I’m not involved in some paranoid grandiose conspiracy spiral of my own making. Oh and I have to watch that control button. I’m not in control, I don’t want control, I will fight control! Haha. Controlled anarchy.
I just know I won’t give in to my own fear about what I say here. I won’t be voiceless (but I’ll try and be honest and respectful at the same time, tricky balance).
Better go before I start to fry my own brain. Take care.
PS Warning - while you were typing 5 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.
:shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: :shock: no please...that took ages to type...can't I just press that liddle button...POST :D
-
Hey P:
Love your post and just thinking........labels.
That's what the part of the trouble is, isn't it? Labelling?
I mean.....I know we need to have words to describe what we are trying to say but when labels get going.....
Kaaaaaafluuuuuuuuuueeeeeeeeewwwwweeeeee!!
All heck breaks loose eh?
"You're an N!"
"No you're an N!"
"Nope you are!"
"Uh uh....you are!"
ON and on...... :roll: Gets tiresome after awhile eh?
And labels are so absolute (almost, sometimes). They remind me of name calling, which isn't fair fighting, if you ask me. And defining others. "You are.........." (rude, mean, derogatory, whatnot end to that sentence). Automatically gets a person......some people.......a lot of people.......perturbed, etc. Name calling can wound. Labelling can too. Defining, also. :( :( Takes me back to the mean kids in the school yard who did all that. They thought they were funny too. I didn't. :x
Wouldn't it be nice if we could just leave the labels out? Sometimes I think so. And the defining and the name calling too.
And pointing out bad/poor/inappropriate behaviour? Behaviour that has the potential to hurt or does or has hurt someone? I'm with you there P. It needs pointing out.
Just some days......I admit......I don't want to be the one. Today's one of those days.
So thanks! I like your voice! I like that you used it! I like how you've used it. I like that you are learning and speaking about learning and that helps others too.....like me......your talking about it and having the courage to try. Good lessons for more than you P. 8) 8) 8). So seriously thanks.
:D Sela
-
Thanks Sela
Wouldn't it be nice if we could just leave the labels out? Sometimes I think so. And the defining and the name calling too.
It takes careful thought for me. I mean, I read your words and thought: but I am labelling a small piece of inappropriate behaviour, right? What gives me the right to that? Shouldn’t I keep my own counsel (or is it council??) and let it go? ??????? oooo...self doubt....doubt.....close allay to guilt! bah.
Decisions, judgements etc.
But heck I thought, it’s plain not respectful and it’s not helpful.
Has it got anything to do with me? Does that matter?
All this stuff goes through my head and then I come up with an answer for today. If I see a child being hurt, I will intervene and if I’ve misunderstood the situation, and the child was being saved from something, hey, what did I lose? Nothing. I just got it wrong.
Won’t be the first or last time I get something wrong 8)
Thanks for your post. Made lots of sense to me. Gotta go..take care.
-
Tis a sunny day, the birds are tweeting in the treetops, the green grass beckons. Think I'll haul out on the warm bank and snooze. I 'really' hope no one 'seeks' me out to give me a 'portion' of their mind. :)
mud
-
Hiya P:
I am labelling a small piece of inappropriate behaviour, right? What gives me the right to that?
Yes. You are, I think. It's so tricky, isn't it? I mean.....back to the old.....two wrongs thingy.
"You're an N!"
"You're behaving badly!"
"No I'm not!"
"No IIIIII'm not!"
"Yes I am". :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
I read.....the three least used words on the internet are........................ready?
I was wrong.
Supposedly, and don't ask me who counted up all the words on the internet and looked for these and measured and came up with this ......but......
I bet it's accurate. Maybe even accurate for what goes on in the real world eh? The 3D world? In life?
Yep. You might have injured when you labelled. But you didn't do the same thing, did you? You labelled the behaviour. Not the person.
Not the whole person.
Name calling that defines and labels a whole person: "You're a................."
Has the potential and can indeed.....sting......hurt......cause damage even eh?
It's how the parenting books tell me to deal with my children.....to avoid that stinging, hurting, damaging stuff that comes to my head.
"You're a good child. I just don't like the way you're behaving right now. Please do blank."
I suppose that's the way we might all try to commmunicate. Especially when we see what we think is ....poor/bad/inappropriate behaviour? Could work?
Thing is......do we stand by and watch a person get beaten with a baseball bat to a pulp by a big, ugly thug or do we grab the nearest large rock and ping the thug's bean with it (assuming we're not strong enough to restrain him)? Or do we run away, call for help and hope like heck it gets there before the poor first dude ends up a pile of mush under the thug's boots?
Do we jump in and try to do our part or restrain ourselves and leave it up to others?
I've done both. Both are risky. Both may injure. Both might help.
But heck I thought, it’s plain not respectful and it’s not helpful.
And you voiced your thought. You must have felt a great desire to do that? Had reasonable reasons? And no one died, P.
I think.....my bet is.......there is more healing in your words than hurting. But.....I suppose it all depends on how they're perceived and digested and whether or not understanding comes along to help them work.
:D Sela
-
Dear ol' P,
I loved your post, and love your brain.
I don't think you were hurtful when you explained to Seeker that labeling (disgnosing, as Doc G puts it) someone as "an N" is not appropriate here.
I think you were being a constructive, caring contributor to the board...helping one of us steer back on track, reminding us all of our higher intentions, etc.
You could remind me of anything like that, any time. Because I trust your intentions. (Dearie, don't want to presume but I'm just imagining that reading this, you feel an urge to explain how you're not pure goodness and you might have mixed intentions sometimes. No need. You're human and you're good enough.)
Dang.
I think sometimes children of Ns strain to be morally perfect, because they grow up with so much moral ambiguity and in some cases perversity of what (parenting) is supposed to be love.
Plus, I love the idea of seeing conspiracies in a sugar lump. :lol:
Hmm. You asked me something. Oh. What I thought Sela was "onto." Nothing to do with any individual, I just thought she sounded quite perceptive about the pattern thing, how sometimes individuals will sort of act out by getting mad or upset, and then others rush to help, and then the original poster just wanders off, unchanged by the effort poured toward them. I've only been here since November so I don't have the long view, but it sounded insightful to me.
Nothing's ever totally true to patterns, of course. And your style too, of coming into the board and just interacting with it in the present, is a nice outlook too. Just as interesting and valuable.
Mud: glubbbb. Whee. Mud's good for your skin.
Hops
-
Good thought, Sugarre.
Sure makes sense to me.
Hops
-
Dear Mud:
I 'really' hope no one 'seeks' me out to give me a 'portion' of their mind.
That sounds like a good way to avoid.........mud wrestling!!
:D Sela
-
Hi Portia,
I realize this conversation doesn't directly involve me, but I am curious, anyway...what is your goal in asking Stormy if she's
gathering a group
[/color]
and telling her:
No you’re not sorry at all Storm.
[/color]
in response to her posting:
I am really sorry, everyone.
[/color]
I would really like to know what kind of information you're looking for. Because, best as I can tell, Stormy's 'we' includes all of us, 'we' being the board. imho, that is obvious, and I read no implication as to anything else. So far as I know, Stormy had no reason to say "I am really sorry" if she didn't feel that way. I guess I don't understand why you would contradict her on the topic of her own feelings?
I guess the part I'm most puzzled about, is that, personally, I don't see evidence of this assertion:
I like clarity and truth and compassion and love and peace. I don’t like manipulation.
[/color]
in your initial post. Especially in light of the fact that Stormy has previously admitted, publicly, a reluctance to speak to you again here.
LoH
-
Hi Bean
I think you're referring to Reallyme calling me an N once?
Yes I was.
I'm not seeker, if that's what you're implying.
I wondered but didn't know. Very glad to hear you're not! Thank you for telling me and us that. I appreciate that a lot.
Hi LoH
I've been thinking about your post. I wonder if you want me to reply, or you wanted to make your views known and a reply from me isn't necessary? I don't mind either way. I feel you're ....disappointed maybe? Confused? Not sure how you feel about this. I'm happy to talk about how my posts have affected you; I don't really want to discuss what I said to Storm with you, if that's okay with you. I don't think that would be fair somehow. I don't know, it would feel wrong.
Night all.
-
I was concerned about Seeker and also thought maybe RM was guessing that she was Bean. I went and looked up Seeker's posts all in a row and it cleared things up for me--it was quite obvious from the posts that Seeker is an up front participant in the board and not posing. She just doesn't post a lot.
Seeker, I'm sorry to be speaking about you in the third person. I wanted to give an example of a way to mitigate suspicion when it crops up. So, I looked up your posts and remembered your story again. Actually I've done this a few times when I started to forget someone's story. There is so much happening here at any one time that it is easy to forget who is who. Or maybe I'm just quite absentminded :shock: .
Pennyplant
-
Hi Bean,
I understand you didn't ask for an answer. But you do bring up a lot of valid points. So, I want to explain my point of view. The reason I thought RM was accusing you of being Seeker was because of the previous debate between you and RM. I thought when she said she knew who Seeker was she was referring to you. Put it together with what happened when freedom1 appeared here for a few days and it was a matter of previous experience leading to a possibility. That is why I decided to read Seeker's posts--so I could see what her story was. It became obvious to me right away that Seeker is a geniune member of this board. I am sorry I fell into paranoid thinking. But I did resolve any question in my own mind in a non-accusatory way. It was a good learning experience for me and my own worrisome way of looking at things. I don't like to worry about things happening that are not happening. But I obviously needed to learn a way to be rational. And that is how I did it. When people clash here it does effect the by-standers. Maybe in some subtle ways. And it does seem like I wasn't the only one with questions.
I'm not sure there is a simple way to resolve some conflicts since we can not do things in person here. Without a face to attach to each personality then mistakes like this could be more likely. Or again, maybe that is just me being absent-minded.
Pennyplant
-
Hi bean,
I used the word debate to be tactful. I'm not even so sure what to call it. There were a lot feelings, that's for sure. And I do think you're wise to not try to be friends with RM anymore. I don't think you are responsible for all discord here. Each person here is responsible for their own feelings, their own take on things, their own words.
It takes me a long time to get to know people. Both in 3-D life and here. It is probably taking me a long time to get to know myself. Your posts are helping me with that as are the posts of the other members. I will continue to read your posts with interest and also hope to be able to have some back and forth with you if you also want the same thing. Because I do learn from you.
I have taken breaks from here myself. It was mostly necessary for me to get my head together. Had some a-ha's to absorb. But sometimes it was because I didn't have anything to say. But I keep coming back. And each time I do, it feels like some growth has occurred. I'm guessing you have experienced healing here too. Just something about this place....
Pennyplant
-
Bean
Now, I'm staying clear of reallyme and people like her (Portia is starting to make we wonder) cause I got better things to do, like focus on my healing. That's why I'm here. Not to create drama
You’re making an attack on Portia and saying you’re not here to create drama?
What do you mean by
(Portia is starting to make we wonder)
?
If you have something to say about me, how about saying it to my face, to me, and being honest, upfront and direct about it?
-
Pennyplant
This wasn’t for me:
It became obvious to me right away that Seeker is a geniune member of this board. I am sorry I fell into paranoid thinking.
but I’d like to comment. I’ve been through a fair few paranoid loops about members. I’m trying not to assume anything these days and boy is that difficult! Yes, very very difficult.
I don’t know anything evidential (I mean backed up by facts that can be verified in the real world) about the vast majority of members here. I’m trying not to assume anything – that includes what I might judge to be evidence of a genuine member, if you see what I mean? I.e. how do I judge that??
I tend towards the sceptical, depressive realist position. Sometimes I go a bit mad and go to the other extreme – and trust gullibly, without any good evidence. I guess balance is good! I think trust in someone’s persona here grows over time: if a member behaves in a consistent manner, I’m more likely to trust them, the more I see of them.
Please don’t be sorry you fell into that thinking as you put it. Admitting you have that thinking – and doing something to satisfy your curiosity/scepticism (?) is good I think.
In this kind of cyberland I don’t see how anyone can be expected to completely trust another member’s persona unless they’ve been around to their house for tea and cake. I’m exaggerating there just to make the point. I do trust people here and I’m a realist too. It’s balance again!
-
Storm,
interesting 3rd post on your thread, particularly:
There is also a paradox associated with splitting, as I see it: when you've split someone off as all bad, you still can't seem to 'let go' of them. Not really... there's always that longing to 'check'... But if you stop splitting, and give them back all the facets of their personality, it becomes much easier to give up on them - for a while, or forever, if necessary - when that is the only way forward. How can this be? Shouldn't it be easier to 'write someone off' if you regard them as purely bad?
It works the way it does because once you stop splitting, you are no longer carrying part of their personality within yourself. You're no longer enmeshed. You have returned to them what is theirs, good as well as bad; your integrity and theirs - in the sense of wholeness - is restored; and that makes it easier for you to own what is yours, separately, and do what you need to do to protect it.
Yes, war can only happen when you make your enemy all bad and you think you know that you are ‘right’.
When we see people as people and not enemies, when we see ourselves as people and not Gods, we might be able to get real, or at least a little closer to reality.
One question or ponder-point, when you say “and do what you need to do to protect it” I wonder what you mean or how this would sound. I think sometimes in protecting what is ours, we protect ourselves against imagined threats – possible enemies – and that builds up our unrealistic thinking. I guess it’s easy to see the theory but in practice, we’re all only human and fallible.
I got a bit lost in the next part – are you describing what is basically ‘divide and rule’ tactics? I wanted to ask:
In my reading I find this type of triangulation commonly described as a favorite pastime of people with specific diagnoses, and as though it only happens in an inpatient setting [patients playing staff members off one another].
What specific diagnosis - anti-social? Or what I used to call ‘being a right bastard’ when I saw it used by my bosses in the past? I mean, I've seen this and it stinks. The only way out of it is to leave, refuse to talk (document everything), or kill your boss (yes I am joking). The only way out is to leave. If you can wait until the bastard does something against employment law, then you can achieve some money in the process (usually not in tribunal or court, but through simple fear on the company's part). But it can take so long to reach that point and in the meantime, your brain is turning into a mess and your vital organs are giving you warnings (heart in my case). Yes, divide and rule, bully a scapegoat on the side and screw all the young female staff you can convince you're God to - my ex-boss and he wasn't even bright. In IQ terms he was dim, but as a street-fighter, not bad. What a jerk.