Voicelessness and Emotional Survival Message Board
Voicelessness and Emotional Survival => Voicelessness and Emotional Survival Message Board => Topic started by: lighter on January 05, 2011, 12:11:44 PM
-
I spend a good deal of of time pondering the fallout caused by Sociopaths (and N's) in society... particularly that in my own life.
It's ongoing and pervasive.
Finding our voices, and gaining understanding from peers/family/co-workers/friends and/or the justice system, with regard to a sociopath's behavior toward us is maddening. I'd like to find some answers, and learn how to deal more effectively, with this insane puzzle.
Here's an article I came across while doing some research. It's referencing spiritual abuse, but I'm sure we can all see parallels when we spoke out about our own experiences. It's termendously helpful for me to see these dynamics written out in black and white. The COMMON GAMES OF COLLUSSION, referenced at the end of this article are of particular interest.
Basic Facts about Collusion
by Dee Ann Miller
Collusion with evil can and does occur in every culture and organization. It occurs in families, as well, especially when there is a serious problem that brings a sense of shame to those who engage in whatever behavior needs to be addressed.
By this author's definition, collusion is the conscious or unconscious collaboration of two or more individuals to protect those engaged in unethical practices.
The degree of collusion seems to correlate with the amount of power or respect, whether warranted or not, that is held by the perpetrator. The more sacred the institution is deemed to be in it's idealized form, the greater the collusion. This is why clergy perpetrators bring the greatest amount of shock to so many congregates.
While people are often surprised and horrified when a father or mother abuses their child, the shock is multiplied and the degree of collusion is therefore magnified in most cases. This starts a vicious cycle--the more collusion we find, the more shocked we are. The more shocked people are, the greater the fear of speaking up. The greater the shock, the less likely people are to believe. The less they believe, the more persecution there is for the messenger and the messenger's family. Shooting sometimes seems merciful! The greater the collusion, the less likely one is to find justice--sometimes even in the courts.
So, anyone wanting to study collusion, even in general society, will do well to go where it can be studied “under a microscope.” For the faith community seems to be the most shocked of all when they find a perpetrator in a place where that person is least expected to be (ie. in leadership in the church itself) This is true whether the violation is abuse of children or vulnerable adults, whether it involves sexual, physical, or domestic abuse, whether it is an incestuous relationship with one's own child or a congregate).
Most shocking to many: people often collude to protect other colluders!
Persons who collude may do so actively (the fighting mode) or passively (the flight mode).
Collusion is usually far more devastating to victims than the primary abuse.
Please note: The DEMONS are NOT the perpetrators. They aren't the colluders, and certainly not the survivors. I've named the collective demons in an acronym--DIM thinking--DENIAL, IGNORANCE, and MINIMIZATION. We are all prone to participate in any or all of those elements. In fact, survivors generally do for a long time before facing reality. Sadly, few realize that those to whom they report maybe stuck in DIM thinking, either from previous cases or because of what they believe is the novelty of the current one. For every person who hears of such horrific trauma will be forced to go through the same process that the survivor did. Like survivors, most take a long time to face reality, if they ever do.
Behind collusion one will always find some form of DIM Thinking* (Denial, Ignorance, and Minimization). Ignorance here may refer to one or all of the following: misinformation about the dynamics of abuse, Resistance to attempts to provide education, or a choice to ignore what one knows. Colluders may be guilty of DIM Thinking about the abuse, about collusion itself, or both.
Examples of passive collusion:
1. A member of the congregation decides that it is "none of my business" to get involved when she overhears the girls in her youth group discussing how uncomfortable they have felt in the past when alone in a counseling session with the minister or youth leader. Rev. Smith is approached by a member of his friend's church about concerns that the member's pastor, one of Smith's close friends, has been seen several times recently in restaurants at a table-for-two with a recently-widowed member of the congregation. Rev. Smith chides the member, telling him: "I know your pastor well. We fish together at least once a month. Why he was even president of our Ministerial Alliance last year! I'm going to pray that your spirit will be cleansed of this suspicious nature." Rev. Smith refuses to speak to anyone else about the problem. He does not even confront his friend. Biblically speaking he "walks by on the other side." (See the story of the Good Samaritan for further insights.)
2. A pastor ignores the recommendations of his denomination, refusing to encourage his congregation to adopt policies which would help insure safety and adequate supervision of the children and youth during church-sponsored programs and events. Bishop Johnson puts a letter from a victim in his "low priority" stack. In it, the young woman is voicing her weariness that she continues to be left hanging as the adjudicatory committee of their denomination holds meeting after meeting without taking any decisive action. She asks that the bishop call her at his earliest convenience. Later, when confronted by the victim's husband, he defends his passivity, saying: "I didn't see anything in the letter that needed a response."
3. Colleagues of the perpetrator, along with their wives, either shun the wife who is a victim of domestic violence and/or whose children are victims of incest by their father. The shunning gets worse once the woman files for divorce. Old friends quit calling. If they meet her on the street, they may strike up a conversation about the weather or politics, but never about the greatest trauma she has ever known!
Examples of active collusion:
1. Upon hearing of the allegations being investigated against his pastor, a church leader manages to find out the alleged victim's name, then calls other church leaders and key people in the community to make certain they know that the accuser is "crazy" and "has a history of immoral and untrustworthy behaviors.
2. Mrs. Anderson, a wealthy congregate, certain that her denomination did nothing wrong by ignoring the reports of "trouble-making" victims for almost two years, contributes $500,000 to help denominational leaders find the best attorney to defend itself against a civil suit. Several members of a congregation tell their minister's wife that she is no longer welcome in their services, but that her husband will continue to occupy the pulpit, even though she has recently been forced to go to a shelter for safety. They tell her that they are very disappointed that she is not willing to forgive, move back in the parsonage, and “start making things right again.“
3. When a young woman who is a recovering alcoholic reveals to people in the church that she is an incest victim, she is told that her story is not something that is appropriate for discussion in the women's group or anywhere else in the church. They insist she is blaming her father and not taking responsibility for “her part” in the abuse.
Later, she courageously approaches the pastor after she has maintained sobriety for several years. She wants help in starting a survivors' group in the church. She wants to give her testimony in worship service. The pastor tells her there would not be enough interest in her group. He is happy for her to give her testimony, as long as she avoids using disturbing references to her history of incest in any way.
4. Denominational leaders tell victims of abusive clergy that there is no money to help with their therapy. Yet these same leaders take in millions of dollars every year for missions or other causes to help oppressed people around the world. In addition, they have no difficulty announcing that they have a fund set up to help ministers who have been terminated for a variety of causes, including sexual abuse of congregates.
COMMON GAMES OF COLLUSION
ROLE REVERSAL--thoughts or behaviors which treat victims as perpetrators and perpetrators as victims.
SEE NO EVIL, HEAR NO EVIL, SPEAK NO EVIL--shaming of self or others for even daring to think or speak or be in conversation with anyone who is speaking about the abuse.
PASS THE BUCK--an endless game which allows persons at every level and in every capacity of an organization to rationalize that the work of investigating and then holding a perpetrator accountable belongs somewhere else. (Almost invariably the buck repeatedly gets passed back to the victim, who must either ignore the evidences of DIM thinking or search for the energy to once again speak out.)
LET'S PRETEND--going about all of the usual activities of the church while refusing to acknowledge the "elephant" issue of which most members are already aware on some level--an issue which is managing to impact the church in virtually everything it does. (might also be called "OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND") This game assumes that it is the responsibility of victims and advocates to initiate every conversation about the "elephant." If they do, then the problem is obviously theirs. If they do not, then there is no problem.
LET'S MAKE A DEAL--offering a victim or advocate something, either tangible or intangible, to keep quiet. (Examples: "If you will just go quietly to another congregation, we won't tell anyone that you had an affair with the minister." OR actually paying "hush money" in exchange for the victim's agreement not to take the perpetrator of denomination to court.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This article, like all at www.takecourage.org is copyrighted by the author. Other writers, by copyright law, may use up to 300 words in other published works without asking permission, provided the author is given full credit. This also applies to the acronym "DIM Thinking," a term coined by Miller. You may download and/or distribute copies of any of these articles, for educational purposes, PROVIDED the pages are distributed without alteration, including this copyright statement.
www.takecourage.org by Dee Ann Miller, author of How Little We Knew: Collusion and Confusion with Sexual Misconduct and The Truth about Malarkey.
-
Interesting article Lighter.
You say you'd like to learn how to deal more effectively with the puzzle - can you say to what end? More personal understanding, less being maddened by injustice?
What
I
would
like,
Guest,
is
for Quentin Tarantino to make an absurd off beat easily identifiable cult film about the irrational insanity of dealing with domestic sociopaths, so that society can make more informed knee jerk assumptions when viewing situations that involve what appears to be irrational victims of seemingly very rational N/sociopaths.
People could refer to ignorant harmful characters in the film.... as in "Hey, Judge Joe Brown, don't Judge Seeliger up this case." like they said "don't get Munsoned out in the middle of nowhere" in the movie KINGPIN.
People would be quoting lines from this film like they quoted lines from AIRPLANE and VACATION.
It would be BIG.
Perhaps then there could be a collective understanding about what domestic sociopaths are, and fewer stupid questions asked of the victims regarding what they did to MAKE the sociopath
act
like
a
SOCIOPATH.
More information = Less Collusion.
Maybe.
That.....
is what I'd like.
-
OK Lighter...
maybe Tarantino could pull this off. But I have a question for ya!
Since the psychos and socios of society are so good at appearing to be normal, rational people - and using seemingly logical rationalizations to explain themselves.... masters of this, really, since they aren't bothered by any distracting emotions that would jar their eloquence, their persuasiveness...
what's the never-fail, telltale sign? That's common to all these varieties of monster? Isn't it weird, that all the real "Hannibal Lector"s are all described as nice normal neighbors, co-workers, etc?????
One very important aspect of "collusion" - or even gossip - is secrecy. The duality of "privileged information" vs public information... and the difference between "appearances" and "reality". And the ability to define and control the definition of "truth".
It's an interesting topic, Light. Lots of different angles into it, lots of ways to dissect it. And it gets at a certain aspect of human nature, too... of a desire to be one of the "initiated", top-secret clearance, acceptance in a group... and then there are the socio-political issues: how to preserve individual family's freedom and privacy... while at the same time lowering - or eradicating - the potential for abuse. 'Coz I think we'd all agree it wouldn't be a good thing to have official weekly "inspections" into family matters or private, personal relationships. (nor would it be effective)
I mean, one thing my mom - even now - uses to abuse, is her exhortation to kids to "tell the truth" about what goes on in families. She used this on me and now, on my niece and nephew. But it had better be HER truth, you know? You dare not have your own opinion, or vary from her version of the "facts".
-
I don't know, Amber.... I suppose the biggest telltale sign is a victim running around like their head's cut off, spouting incoherent things about "THEIR RIGHTS!" and the like.
It wouldn't be a guide to "spotting" N's and S's.
It would be a powerful cultural myth, largely replacing current erroneous views on N/Sociopaths.
120 Quentin T moments.....
the audience exchanging places with victims, abusers and colluders, alike.
An improbable, stranger than fiction, up hill, down dell plot of twisting, turning, on the edge of your seat, experiences.
Perhaps providing more than perspective for some audience members.... perhaps epiphany?
I can cast it now......
Dean Winters (Mayhem from Allstate commercials) as the main antagonist/N/sociopath.
The doddering good ol'boy family court Judge, completely ignorant on all matters PD, bandaided forehead from tussle with glass door... who who who?
Uma Thurman, as protagonist, of course. QT likes his leading lady.
Yup yup yup.
An enlightening message delivered with a (difficult to stop watching) QT flourish.
Everyone could purchase the sound track at Starbucks, and play it over dinner parties, while quoting the most memorable lines.
Something dark and dreadful, showing N's and S's for what they really other.
Something other than serial killers, and selfish celebrity brats.
::shrug::
It could happen.
-
So, Lighter.... when does the screenplay hit the streets for bids??? LOL!
I think you SHOULD write it, you know. I think it would do you a world o' good. Post it, serial fashion, over in the members story section (the most private space of all the board). I believe Dr G has said you have to be a member to read over there... and atm, there aren't a lot of new members being added - so it would be safe. Change the names, if you want an even greater layer of safety. Write similar events - ones that don't provide so much identifying detail. Even if you don't finish it - or have to take long breaks to keep from retraumatizing yourself - it will be cathartic. And no one else could write it like you can.
Here's what happened to me, when I started writing it out, story-fashion - my perspective changed... instead of being so damned autobiographical (and therefore painful, etc)... the story began to exist outside of me... i.e., "not me". Course, this was years after I'd gone through each agonizing detail multiple times and claimed each nuance... and it didn't take long either. It was a project that didn't really "get off the drawing board", for me.... which means, personally - it just wasn't that important anymore. (But that was me, not you - whole different situation for you, I think; understandably!!)
The way I'm trying to think about this same problem - that of "outing" the warped, evil ones - is to work from the opposite starting point: how to teach people not to be victims... without walking around under seige in their skin, armored away from all connection & contact with other people, at the same time. Trying to identify what it is, that makes some folk more vulnerable - and others not. If we can make more folk less vulnerable to these zombies... they'll be deprived of their "supply" of victims...
... and then I wonder what will happen to them? Will they resort to picking each other off, one by one?
By the way, Light - maybe instead of Tarantino, the Coen Bros should have a shot... and for me, I've already found the "teaching stories" in Grimm's Fairy Tales - no huggable Disney characters there!
-
Thanks for this, really helpful, and such a good subject. I also am most disturbed by the dynamic of denial and collustion.
I have my own put together theory. That is most of people in society are disordered, in the sense that there has been a failure of separation/ individuation, which means that they dont think for themselves, nor insist on pursuing the truth, nor empathise intelligently, instead they settle for a feeling of 'belonging', and avoiding the experience of standing alone because it brings on feelings of being bad and abandoned. Surely this is how a whole society can fail to oppose extremists coming to power, and the like.
If the 'Real Self', according to one theory has amongst its abilities, the ability to empathise, to take responsibility, to stand for principles, then all this is to do with the development of the Real Self. The real self emerges thro the process of separation/ individuation, as the person grows to autonomy and creativity and being self-motivated. When peopl comply and collude, and hide from truth, then that is a failure of separation individuation, and a failur of the real self.
I used to take a pride in being the 'non-colluder', in any group I'd be the one to speak out, and drop a bombshell into the leader-loving herd hiders, yet, I'd be once again hurt that I was going home alone.
For my recovery I've been trying to maintain links with others whils finding a way to be truthful, tho realising that sometime diplomacy has to rule. ~ at least for the time being.
Great subject, and good inormation.
-
Clear, remarkable post, River.
thank you very much.
Hops
-
Amber, River, Guest:
It would be nice if there was some common and UNIVERSAL word that meant "heads up, this might be a sociopath we're looking at."
We could singsong the word.... "hopscotch."
Or......
even cough the word "psycho!"
::nodding head::
I like the second one.
-
Clear, remarkable post, River.
thank you very much.
Hops
thanks for what you said here, theres a book: 'The Real Self', he goes into the dynamics of Narcissist as well as Borderline disorders, and also what he calls the 'closet narcissist', the one who likes to 'shine in the reflected glow of the powerful other', and by their nature, I guess, are tailor made to be colluders.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Self-Developmental-Relations-Approach/dp/0876304005/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1294488318&sr=1-4
-
Amber, River, Guest:
It would be nice if there was some common and UNIVERSAL word that meant "heads up, this might be a sociopath we're looking at."
We could singsong the word.... "hopscotch."
even cough the word "psycho!"
lighter, what I've found is its been so difficult that others dont notice or even feel anything wrong a lot of the time. It seems to be a work of art to wake people up without alienating myself. But Im working on that too..... and then I question myself, like... 'am I over reacting? exaggerating?'
-
Well, Lighter - yes we need a word... something that "says it all" without out & out making a public accusation... just for our "own kind"...
jerk
dipwad
egomaniac
power-tripping
toad (personal fav)
diva
???
-
It seems that you have to be prepared to walk home alone. That is really not a problem. It's being the target of a lynch mob that would worry me. Or being stitched up by international authorities, having my bank accouts frozen, being held in jail without charge. You have to know who your friends are. Am I over reacting, or exaggerating? - sincerely, who cares. It's fine to make mistakes. It's not fine to let things be in case you might be wrong about that psycho. Better to be embarrassed by a mistake than have someone be hurt. But not easy to do!
Maybe we could have whistleblower t shirts, which carry a warning? :D
What you say is true.
But I'd say that the lynch mob and the 'group culture' even when its only some daft group-think stuff going on, all comes from the same principle, its only one is much more extreme than the other. Thats why I think I feel so triggered and discontent, because these people are acting out on a deadly principle, and not knowing, or caring. ie it has echoes and psychic connections to far worse things than just walking home alone. And I think thats why I can feel disturbed by it.
-
Hi Guest,
I think so. ( liked how you asked)
But the reason I talked about my attempt at increasing 'diplomacy and tact' is in order to be more effective, for one, and the other is its frankly just too painful for me to remain isolated and disconnected from others, as I have been the vast majority of my life.
I dont think this is the same as giving up and giving in, Im not about to do that because Im less confused than I used to be, albeit the vision I have is more bleak, in a way.
I think some people can be big characters and put their finger on whats true that no-one else wanted to say, and everyone loves them for it. It never was that way for me. I tend to go lonesome implode, ~ lonesome balistic I like. If thats what you do, Im gonna follow you around : )
Perhaps soon it'd be good to share a real incident here about what we're talking about and to discuss strategy.
-
I am consistently puzzled by the shaming responses of outsiders who focus on the response of the victim to abusive behavior.
Over and over again, the emphasis is on the response to abuse, not the abuse.
WTH?
-
Lighter:
People just want to try to frame the situation in some logical way... and force logic into a situation that defies logic... therefore, they're going to push some blame to the response to abuse - even if it's only a Monday Morning Quarterback attempt to tell the victim "you should've seen this coming and avoided it like the plague".
Another aspect to it, is that people who do have healthy boundaries don't comprehend how in the world someone in an abusive situation got "hooked" into it... don't comprehend - does not compute - how someone would accept abusive treatment in exchange for an illusion of the benefits of a relationship; they have no concept of "enmeshment", Stockholm Syndrome, or even notice the subtleties of manipulation... because they are not vulnerable or susceptible to it. They miss the part about how desperately a person can crave approval, acceptance and how desperately a person can fear even the appearance of "abandonment" - much less the emotional reality of that kind of isolation.
Is it fair? an accurate understanding? compassionate? NO, probably not. But even people with healthy boundaries have fears... and they fear the "tar baby" of the drama, of 'getting involved", of being responsible in a situation that really isn't about them. Even people who do try to "help" draw lines in the sand about how much they'll do... they are afraid of doing something wrong; making a situation worse; or simply don't have the resources - mental, emotional, time, etc - to do more.
I've come to the conclusion after working to the point where I can see my story from the outside - as if it were happening to someone else - that I can't be angry at the people who could've done more... could've intervened... could've protected me. They really didn't have the whole set of facts; had been fed the public version spin of the delusion; and they really didn't have any responsibility to help, you know? The bits they did do - were useful and helpful and represent the fact that these people DID CARE.
There's no superhero who's devoted to righting these kinds of wrongs; no moral court of justice, either. I'm not sure it wouldn't have some pretty negative unintended consequences, if there were. Spanish Inquisition, anyone? Witch trials?
I've also come to the conclusion that my vulnerability to being enmeshed; opening myself wide up to the abuse... the projections and lack of boundaries... despite being "trained" to be this way and not this way naturally... is still my responsibility to fix. I played a very definite role in my own abuse, in other words. I was the patsy, the fall guy, was setup... sure enough. I walked right into the propeller. And it wasn't stupidity that enabled me to do this - it was that sense of loyalty, sacrificing all for those one loves - unconditionally - the damned dependence on approval, acceptance, and the dangling carrot of reciprocal "love" - that made me vulnerable.
Yes, that's right. It was the fact that I understood what the ideal of unconditional love is that made me the "sucker". That got me hooked into the cycle of abuse. And I was volunteering... because I thought it was the right thing to do. The fact that it got used against me, wasn't returned, and eventually turned into a situation where I became "collateral damage"and had to fight for my own life... really doesn't diminish the value of that ideal for me nor does it somehow cancel out the fact that only I am responsible for making sure that I don't get into one of those situations, again.
No one can do this for me; no one else has any obligation or responsibility to "protect" me from those situations. That's my job.
Am I absolutely safe from falling into that "trap" again? NO, probably not. But I've learned a lot and learned how to listen better to my own inner "radar"; I've learned how to protect myself - as difficult as enforcing a boundary can be at times - without going nuclear at every N-counter I have. (Coz I'm the one who suffers the most from those implosions.)
So the Ns of the world are walking free amongst us... unidentified... unmarked. So are psychos with guns. Only a fool wouldn't be afraid, knowing this. But I can't dwell on that or let it stop me from living my life or shrink my life to the point that I never engage with others.
I would miss all the real fun, the real loving relationships, the challenges & opportunities that cosmically offset the negatives of those kinds of people in life.
So... while I agree with you that people often turn a blind eye to reality, and are reluctant to really help - and yes, even blame the victim unfairly - it is what it is. I can't change that. But I can change myself.
The return on investment for that work is quite a bit "richer" than trying to make reality or the world different than it is.
-
I understood what the ideal of unconditional love is that made me the "sucker". That got me hooked into the cycle of abuse. And I was volunteering... because I thought it was the right thing to do. The fact that it got used against me, wasn't returned, and eventually turned into a situation where I became "collateral damage"and had to fight for my own life... really doesn't diminish the value of that ideal for me nor does it somehow cancel out the fact that only I am responsible for making sure that I don't get into one of those situations, again.
No one can do this for me; no one else has any obligation or responsibility to "protect" me from those situations. That's my job.
Am I absolutely safe from falling into that "trap" again? NO, probably not. But I've learned a lot and learned how to listen better to my own inner "radar"; I've learned how to protect myself - as difficult as enforcing a boundary can be at times - without going nuclear at every N-counter I have. (Coz I'm the one who suffers the most from those implosions.)
This is so eloquent and powerful for me, PR-- thank you. For me, too, it was how deeply I took in the lesson of unconditional and sacrificial love as a child. One of the hardest things for me to resolve, ever. Being a victim had a lot to do with losing faith. I know for other people it works the other way around; they are strengthened in faith by having survived suffering. In my case--and it wasn't even directly resulting from my brother's abuse of me as a child, it was more about just getting to a point where I had experienced too much anguish (likely depression, but also wired in very deeply from heartstruck comprehension of the crucifixion as a child). I was like oversaturated soil, could not absorb more pain, which I felt unconditional love would demand of me.
I have a different kind of faith these days; more reality- and community-based. Kind of faith in noble virtues and love experiences and nature. But no dogma.
Rambling again,
Hops
-
Well, Amber....
thanks for that thoughtful response. As always, you've planted seeds, and described mature plants, grown from amended soil.
It is our responsibility to live, avoid the same old pitfalls, keep calm and carry on. Yup yup yup.
That doesn't help me avoid the knee jerk primal response to collusion, and it's affect, on victims of abuse.
I don't know what kind of distance I'll be able to gain...... it feels so close.
Guest..... you're right. Not everyone shames the victim. It's interesting to see people, who stand up for the victim, get shamed too.
Not interesting in a hmmmm, this is something I want to watch way. Interesting in a sick improbable way.
-
That doesn't help me avoid the knee jerk primal response to collusion, and it's affect, on victims of abuse.
I don't know what kind of distance I'll be able to gain...... it feels so close.
This is tough, Lighter. But I think it is do-able. I think you can do it. It's not a hard as it looks; but it is hard to find what works.
I'd be fibbing, if I said I'd mastered it; didn't fear my own fight/flight response to my perception of the "nutters" of the world or even just people being people and tiptoeing across boundaries - obliviously involved in their own dramas; or very specific kinds of ways some people "try to help". I did get a little bit of distance - enough that I can remember to breathe and not respond immediately; to just let it "sink in" before I respond. That gives me just enough time to decide if I'm facing something that's an unfortunate, unintentional pushing of my "buttons" - but mostly benign ('coz how could that person KNOW that about me??) - or if it's really the "old ugly face of abuse" raising it's head in someone else, again...
I am able to be "present" enough, more often than not these days, to practice this - but it doesn't take a whole lot to push me back into reactionary nuclear fission...
... or it's sneaky cousin: anticipatory anxiety.
The only thing I've found - so far - that gives me an "edge" on that reflex, is to take very good care of myself. (another work in progress, mind you...) Eating a little better, exercise, tai chi, even just in choosing what I wear... working on a new "look" helps. Enough solitude... enough connection... and rewarding myself for even the smallest accomplishment. Instead of being a one on one "solution" to the "problem"; taking it on in a head to head confrontation, it's more indirect; this is more like preventative maintenance... it provides me a stronger foundation, base, or plateau in the first place - maybe equivalent to a sense of inner-self "security"... or at least acceptance... like an immunity...
so that I can step back from hypervigilance & seige-mentality... and cool off the radioactive rods that fuel the nuclear reflexes.
Hope that gives you some ideas, Lighter!
-
That doesn't help me avoid the knee jerk primal response to collusion, and it's affect, on victims of abuse.
I don't know what kind of distance I'll be able to gain...... it feels so close.
Guest..... you're right. Not everyone shames the victim. It's interesting to see people, who stand up for the victim, get shamed too.
At times, I feel as though I was born with a pair of lens that force me to see a reality that seems to escape so many, a hideous joke by a creator. In my youth I was disdainful of people who lived in their own preferred bubble, now I envy them. But I am still left with the agony of seeing a reality that is quite simply too much to bear and driven mad by others' collusion and their utter lack of interest and even shutting the door on this messenger who tries to direct their attention on the unpleasant truth.
It is just one more form of voicelessness and exclusion and isolation to heap on the many others in my life.
Lighter - you are on to something of great significance - so easy nor simple "solution" but one so worthy of microscopic examination. Thanks for picking up this torch - so very thankful to know I am not alone (at least in this regard.)
-
To the extent I've seen any Tarantino films they seem more to celebrate sociopathy than condemn it.
At best the "good" violent sociopath with a heart of gold (oxymorons-r-us), who we're supposed to root for, defeats the "bad" hyper violent sociopath, who we should condemn, and even then we should subtly admire the perfection of the bad guy's viciousness.
And he can't even make them honest, violent-but-banal sociopaths like Jimmy Cagney in White Heat. They have to go around doing clever, ironic things, we wouldn't expect sociopathic murderers to do and spouting high school philisophical claptrap that Quentin apparently thinks is profound.
There isn't an easy division between the abusers and the outside world. Not everyone will shame the victim. Those that do are screwed up too.
I've come to this conclusion also, with the caveat that for some, what constitutes their screwed-upness is merely weakness. This is usually a family member who sees no easy way out of the relationship and so knuckles under. Normal outsiders can always just walk away.
Non N, collusive family members have at the same time less of an excuse for not knowing the truth but perhaps more of one for being unable to escape the bullying and coercion. But no excuse absolves them of the responsibility to fight this kind of lunacy in their own family.
mud
-
My personal favorite word for this kind of thing is "Orwellian" --as in 1984
-
"good" violent sociopath with a heart of gold (oxymorons-r-us), who we're supposed to root for, defeats the "bad" hyper violent sociopath, who we should condemn, and even then we should subtly admire the perfection of the bad guy's viciousness.
BAM!
I am impressed, Mud.
(And so glad to see you.)
Hops
-
I honestly don't think there is a strategy for handling PD's.... particularly the NSOCIOPATHs.
We'll always be somewhat at the mercy of those who're willing to lie and cheat in order to get ahead.
Confusion and doubt are their calling cards.
Drama, emotional turmoil and over the top accusations, (that aren't true but how do bystanders know?) swirl around these people.
They always have reasons and excuses for doing what they do, if they admit anything or get caught.
They're always the victim, even when they're doing the victimizing.
They're always manipulating other people into defending them, fighting for them, attacking their victims for them.
That's awful hard to combat, esp if you're a calm, understated person who tends to tell the truth exactly as it is.
Lighter
-
River
did you want to pursue this? I didn't want this to be lost in the thread.
[/quote]
Oh, thanks guest, Ive been away for a while, doing accounts ugh! I may get back to it. But what lighter has said has a bearing, I'd say its to do with different degrees. Im in touch with some poeple at present who are encountering abuse, but I dont think its of the nature that lighter is talking about in the post above. Although if left to run riot abuse gets worse and worse from what I can see. ~ until someone puts their foot down.
may get back to this....
-
River, okay. Someone putting their foot down is the same as saying 'enough is enough' and doing something to stop the abuse? I hope so.
In my experience, putting one's foot down means you're about to be battling a whole bunch of people, not just the one. Maybe battling the justice system too. Sociopaths will have supporters in every corner..... approaching you, your family, other board members..... telling stories that make a lot of sense. They'll lie about what you do, say and feel. They'll have sabotaged you from the moment you got involved with them, if they're really a sociopath, and you won't even see it coming. How do you combat that?
Lighter
did you mean all you said above, or perhaps feeling jaded and 'to hell with it'? Because I would question some things you've said. (If what you say is always true, how come we send some to jail?)
Always true? I don't think anything I've said is always true. We can manage to send some to jail, but.... for the most part, being a sociopath isn't against the law. Domestic sociopaths don't seem to be committing crimes if they're terrorising their spouse and children. If they do manage to find themselves prosecuted, it's a very difficult thing to prove. They lie so smoothly, it's second nature for them. Is it worth it? To try to send a domestic sociopath to jail for a while? They're going to get out, and their proxies are always going to support them. Maybe even some of your friends and family support them too? If you have children with them, they'll be able to reach out and touch you through them for a very very long time. I can't imagine what it would be like to put one in prison for a while, then wait for their release. How uncomfortable would that wait be? Is that really "winning?"[brown=color]
As for those people who are calm and understated, and who tend to tell the truth exactly as it is - what's the alternative/better?
Well, that question is one I've asked myself. I'm not a person who can tell a lie without squirming all over the place, but......
let's play WHAT IF.
What if the victim of a domestic sociopath started utilizing the sociopath's toolbox? Out and out lying, not just exaggerating, the same as the sociopath. What if, say..... the victim of domestic violence beat their own face on the bedpost, and phoned the police to blame the sociopath? Would it be OK if.... say.... they'd actually been assaulted but no marks were left, so they provided proof of harm that had taken place? No marks means the police would do a HE SAID SHE SAID dance, and most victims don't call the police anyway, so maybe that's just crazy talk. I digress...... Is it ever OK to lie or exaggerate or manipulate or be disrespectful to domestic sociopaths who are terrorising vulnerable victims they should be protecting? Ever? I honestly don't know, but my gut tells me it would backfire horribly. Chaos. Destruction. War of the Roses?
Does that mean we've taken our skin off for our abusers.... if we don't erect the same kinds of "boundaries" a sociopath would erect? What would happen if victims dealt with their abusers in the currency of the sociopath? Would that be appropriate, or effective even? It would certainly be walking on the dark side..... scares me just to think of it if children are involved. I guess victims with brothers, big friends and fathers might send them over to beat the abuser up, deliver a threat, and is that the same thing as dealing in the abuser's currency? I guess it is. I wonder how well it works. Depends on how big the friend and serious the threat, I suppose.
Does it take a sociopath's tactics to defeat a sociopath? To break even? I'm guessing the sociopath's much better at the game, and most victims would be twisted into knots trying to sustain that level of dishonesty, then fail. I don't think we ever win when dealing with domestic sociopaths. The best we can hope for is that they leave us flat and never come back. That sure doesn't seem like a win, but you have to put it in perspective. End rant. [brown=color],
-
You pose a lot of interesting questions, Light-me-dear...
this one in particular seemed to sum it up for me:
Is it ever OK to lie or exaggerate or manipulate or be disrespectful to domestic sociopaths who are terrorising vulnerable victims they should be protecting? Ever?
As a kid who lived in one of those domestic violence situations, I'd say you've just described a survival skill and that the only alternative is total silence and giving up... just taking the abuse day after day... and never ever standing up for yourself. I don't know - to critique my initial response: that may be too simplistic.
I think that the whole reason I had such weak boundaries is precisely because to even HAVE a boundary would've been perceived as manipulation and disrespect, in my house. It took a lot of convincing for me to understand that having a boundary and defending it, wasn't just as bad as what was done to me. My alternative was to simply not be there (when I could); to hide (withdrawal or physically hiding - closets seemed to work for me) when I had to be there. Dissociation, even... at the worst moments in time.
It also occurs to me, that to continue to "live" - such as that kind of life is - in relationship with a sick-o of any stripe... one has to lie, exaggerate, rationalize away and justify a whole of stuff to oneself. So which is worse: doing those things to oneself - or using this kind of deception, to free oneself from the psychos or sociopaths of the world?
-
Hey Lighter... your questions are like a laser beam and seem (to me) to be getting at something extremely important and valuable. That beam is cutting through the confusion, the drama of he said - she said details that usually miss the point; the important bit of conflict at issue... and even through the emotional wishes, hopes, and if only's...
... it feels as if you're staring down all the "ugly", "mean" and "unjust"... and trying to draw some boundary lines in the sand for your own benefit - in new places, based on your core beliefs and values.
So, even if it seemed as though I was "pushing back" at you with my own questions... I'm only trying to show you another side of the same thing and I hope it helps; your comments so far are helping me. I do still struggle with how I participated - cooperated - or for whatever reason let myself be "used" in the kind of situation you're talking about. Even after my T told me that at 12 I couldn't possibly be held responsible for anything except surviving, with some of my self intact.
There are dramatic/traumatic scenes in my story that I profoundly regret; where I acted - as I believed at the time - on my own volition... I played a part in the whole drama - precisely because as far as "parents" there was no one acting in that role, at all. At the time, I didn't fully realize how I was being manipulated, gaslighted, neglected. I was flying by the seat of my pants with only the values, emotional maturity, and experience of a youngster. After the dust settled, of course I was blamed & shamed & gaslighted a lot more about what happened. Both of my parents were (differently) sick-o, wacked out, and so preoccupied with their war with each other that I resorted to desperate means to just to get their damned attention. And so I learned to be "careful for what you wish for" and "no good deed goes unpunished".
I have a tendency to feel that I'm partly responsible for how ugly things got. My T had to point out repeatedly - until I finally heard her through the fog - that at that age, I could hardly be expected to parent my parents... or to make informed, mature, adult-type decisions... and yet, when looking back at the whole horrible episode in it's totality... I really didn't do so badly for my age. She convinced me that there was a way to accept what I did - my actions in the little scripted disaster scene - and yet not beat myself up about the choices that I made at that time. I couldn't reconcile using violence to counter or stop violence; anger & rage to stop the passive-aggressive "cold war" of picking that could erupt into nuclear disaster at any time - and did, finally.
I don't think I'm an aggressive, violent person. But in that situation - to survive - I had to be. And I found out I could be, when pushed that far; who knew? But, just because I can sorta function intelligently and defensively in those kinds of life/death/possibly physically painful situations... still doesn't make me a bad person. And tho' I might have some residual fear about what I might be capable of - I don't fear the control of that "ability" in normal situations.
In my "kid-logic mind"... I had to absolve myself of responsibility in the normal sense of the word; and understand that while I could say, in most life-situations that kind of behavior is "bad"... in the situation I faced ... I a.) had no choice if I wanted to live and b.) there was hardly any time to even rationally "decide"... it was flight/fight time and I was just a 12 yr old trying to do the best I could. In those kinds of situations, people simply react - they don't search for the perfect, or ideal solution. What's not fair, is looking back and telling myself "I shoulda - coulda - woulda" or regretting - i.e. beating myself up over what I did actually do.
Maybe this has absolutely nothing to do, with what brought this topic and these questions up for you Light. But it's what I was led to thinking about... and I think what you're getting at with the question... is the difference between an "absolute" and a "situational" value. An absolute value of "bad" for lying... in every situation; always... would require hurting people's feeling sometimes. An absolute value about never - ever - physically hurting another human being...
... would leave one in a position of not defending oneself. I think it was Carolyn - a long while back - who helped me out with the biblical "turn the other cheek" problem... and said it didn't apply in life-threatening situations. I guess in those situations, the rule about "God helps those who help themselves" might come into play.
The thing is defining "life-threatening". Physical danger is easy to see, fits the definition. But the mental, emotional and psychological damage of living with a mentally ill or abusive person can also be "life-threatening". Especially over extended periods of time. It's just not not as visibly apparent.
-
Thanks guest...
speaking of theory: my theory about part of the way these "monsters" develop is that something doesn't compute for them about situational relativity. Maybe it shorts out their brain to try to determine when it's OK to tell a white lie to avoid hurting someone... and telling a grand whopper or even understanding what a delusion is. Like a computer the brain "locks up" trying to make a choice...
... so they reduce everything to absolutes and see the world only in binary form: black or white - as to whether it's good or bad - or always or never.... "safe" or a "threat".
There is never any point where the "monster" feels comfortable on the continuum in between black or white, etc. And of course, they see that the rest of the world IS comfortable in between... so there's something wrong with those people... or those people are a threat... etc ad violencium.... depending on how threatened the monster feels.
Here's a mild example of the theory... and know, I'm still studying this! I'm not sure there isn't a bit more than I'm seeing right now.
Part of my dad's estate included a condo in FL, in a retirement community - and the house (it's a separate building with a garage) is right on the golf course. We all know what happened to the real estate market in the fall 2008, the year my dad died. Neither my brother or I have any fondness for Florida - though he plays golf. We've been trying to sell the condo for 2 years, through the estate. Why so long? Well, because it wasn't possible for me or the trustee to convince my brother that the "value" of the property isn't absolute. To him, if it's been taken care of and the area is still nice... it should be worth what it used to be worth. So, my brother has insisted on a list price that is 30-50% higher than other house/condos in the very same community. (They're sort of cookie-cutter layouts; some variations. My brother doesn't understand real estate or finance... within the last 10 years, he asked me to explain to him how people got car loans, because he always paid cash for used cars.)
There is no way - and we've tried all kinds of explanations - to get him to understand that with 50-60 other equal properties for sale for less money that the property will not sell, unless he agrees to accept a lower price/offer. He can't grasp the abstract concept of how a "market" works to adjust the value/price of something. If it's worth X 20 years ago... it should be worth X now, at a minimum.
And yeah... I've tried telling him flat out that this is wrong. But to no avail. In his reality, he's right - and it's the rest of the world that's messed up. He'll admit that this is "the way it is" - but according to his perspective, it's wrong and stupid and doesn't make sense. And he refuses to "participate" in what he feels is mass delusion (never mind he's a minority of 1). This mental "tic" frustrates almost everyone who comes in contact with him, at some point or another. But I finally got him to accept a lower price - by a.) telling him I agreed with his wacko idea and b.) "trading" him something else he wanted. OH - and I'd also suggested another alternative that I think locked up his brain with too many choices: I suggested he buy me out of the real estate, so that we can finally close my Dad's estate. He didn't say it in so many words - but I get the sense that he simply doesn't want to release me from this form of "torture" or control... or maybe he thinks it's "relationship", I don't know.
So, yeah I told a lie to get the result I wanted (after doing the patience thing, explaining over & over and dancing around his ego-delusions for 2 years). I told him I agreed with his deficient understanding or delusion about real estate reality. AND THIS IS COLLUSION, no doubt about it - but like paying the "troll" to cross over the bridge - this is the cost of trying to deal with these kinds of people. As is, making a case to the trustee to become an ally because we share a common goal... and because he quickly caught on to what was frustrating me about my brother.
Situational ethics, I guess. In the same way - if someone is shooting live rounds at me; trying to kill me - I'm not going to have an ethical debate with myself about whether killing someone is always wrong; I'm going to shoot back. I don't think that makes me a morally corrupt person or "better" than someone who couldn't. Just different.
-
Wow, Amber. That's eerily similar to what I went through with my brother:
1) he'd only sign the settlement agreement if the price was unrealistically high, reflecting his childhood's mythological remembered glory. Having the house be priced very high made him feel more important. Facing facts, about how shabby it's gotten over the years it was just Mom and me, diminished that.
2) had to be a lot of "giving him other stuff he wanted" to get him to be even that serious -- after 2.5 years of brutal battle (which a sane person would have realized drained the wind out of the windfall
Part of the agreement, thank god, was to follow the realtor's advice on price (and my brother was okay with this local realtor because he remembered his name--it's the high-status firm about her) and I would guess might've thought there'd be some "good old boy" advantage for him with this guy.
What's ironic is that I kept mum, said whichever realtor he wanted was fine with me. Because I knew my brother would never remember (since for 2 years we were at different schools--and he ignored my school life anyway) that this person was someone whom I was friends with (had a crush on, more to the point) in 6th grade. I even have a photo of us co-starring in the class play. So the realtor's been a complete dear to me and supports the "Chinese wall" that prevents my brother's participation in the sale. If that was "collusion" -- in some way --
Brother can just wait for his check. I am trying to fix small things and improve its chances as fast as I can. We've had 7 or 8 showings since Oct. 1st, and since we just dropped the price a mile, maybe this spring will do it.
The mercy is that that final agreement, outlines settlement for everything. The estate's value is all locked up in the house, but once it does sell then the same document takes care of all the disbursements and account settlings. My and his shares will be factored out after the bank is paid. It's not a pretty picture (we just dropped the price by enough to buy about 4 cars) -- but it is at least a path.
I couldn't "collude" with my brother, had to fight him like I was fighting off demons (and with expensive priests to help) -- but in a way, the only way we finally succeeded was due to accepting his craziness. Once my lawyer read up on NPD and specifically followed a suggestion I'd provided from a "the narcissist in court" article (I think I shared that here a couple years back) and got the exact expected reaction -- I knew I was going to be okay. My lawyer got it. So I'd come out with less of a secure future financially, but I'd never have to defend myself against my brother again.
Sorry for the hijack. I guess it was the word "Brother". But maybe collusion fits in here somewhere....kind of "proactive collusion as self defense."
love,
Hops
-
underlying belief that everyone in the world was trying to rip this person off. Everyone was on the make and would steal and cheat you if they could. I'm sure that was a big part of their worldview.
put still another way, ..................
Re: Ns 'the world is their oyster', for some types of Ns its just that its a "negative oyster"
Masterson on the tapes 'The Real Self'
-
Collusion as self-defense and ...mythological remembered glory
both hit home for me. The paranoia that someone will "take the N for a ride" or "get one over on them"... sigh... I'm so used to this in both Bro & BioNic mom that I hardly notice it anymore; just take it for granted that it's part of their relationship-style with everyone who's not themselves. And I think it's a big part of why I second-guess myself ad infinitum while trying to make decisions that involve any risk... 'coz "what if" they were right? I'd never live it down - the "I told you so's... the life-long memory of a mistake... and the complete and total definition of who I am, with an association with that memory of "you ALWAYS...."
This paranoia is a lot of "fun" [sarcasm], when trying to run a business.
Yes, hops... both of them paint rosy, idealistic pictures of the past glory of many things. In addition to that, I think the black/white nature of their thought-patterns doesn't allow for any "relativity of value". By relativity, I mean the scale & intangible value of things - relationships - people. They wouldn't understand the difference in intangible value between a Vera Wang, red silk sheath that fit my particular body perfectly - and one I could get at a discount store... for hundreds less. To them, there is no difference in "absolute" value of the two dresses themselves... and only the price tag matters. That might not be the best example, but my excuse is that this topic is churning up a lot of "stuff" for me, right now.
In some ways, I think this type of thought-pattern is how they manufacture their own unhappiness and justify being such jerks, mostly through a passive-aggressive interaction style. The B&W thought process puts them in direct constant conflict with people and processes that aren't B&W.
The collusion as self-defense or survival skill... is "coping", to me. If you have to interact with these people, it's essential and critical, that you "connect" with them - at whatever level they are at. I go to "their world" - their perspective, world-view, etc - and try to work things out there... hopefully bringing back a result to "this" world that is functional, at least. I try not to (can't help it, a lot of times) force my world-view or reality on them... force them to come to "my world"**, in other words. This is where the conflict is; it's their nuclear-meltdown, trigger-button. Those forays into "enemy territory" leave me feeling like I need a sauna to get the crap out of my pores. Because I have to be devious, deceptive, invisibly manipulative. I hate doing this, even though I have a fair amount of skill now, at it. It is taxing to my patience (maybe that's why I was labelled "always impatient") to spend months and years, trying to get a simple decision, decided. Simple in my world, that is. You'd think their whole self-image was on the line, at risk of blowing up, because of these simple decisions.
It does not compute to them: you're allowed to be wrong, make a mistake, or change your mind later on, about this decision. Because of the "absolute" - once & for all, forever - nature of B & W thought-patterns. Situational value simply doesn't exist, nor a scale - continuum - of importance. A little mistake is equally as devastating as a big one. And just as "forever".
And woe to you, if you express your consternation, irritation, anger, or even tell them that they're making you crazy and not facing facts of reality. Never ever tell them they're wrong... or that their idea or paranoia makes absolutely no sense. They know everything about everything and are "always right". And there's always some horrible disaster waiting, if you don't "do it their way".
The thing is: it's exactly this characteristic that makes them vulnerable to scams, to being taken advantage of, to being used and manipulated. I saw that happen to N-boss, with the man he reported to.... over & over. N-boss got used as a "front" to protect and deflect responsibility/blame from his superior; N-boss deflected also and made sure someone else (who was ordered to do X - or else) paid consequences and was blamed. And with some of us, he wasn't able to order us around without at least an argument; I got immense perverse pleasure out of calmly telling him NO - to one of his more frivolous and insane requests of me.
After observing this and other characteristics for a couple years, it dawned on me. These people are only as powerful as we let them be. They are only as hurtful and frustrating as we let them be. The fact is they have almost NO power - except the delusion of power - because they are non-functional (beyond dysfunctional) in the shared reality of normal people. It is still a very painful (excruciatingly patience taxing) process to venture into their world - decode their crazy-making ideas - and slowly but surely guide them to something close to being a win-win or acceptable decision that allows normal things to happen, somewhat normally.
Lighter:
I made a couple of mostly-conscious decisions as I "graduated" from therapy that might help you come to grips with whatever is connected to your original questions about collusion. One: I'm really bored & tired of trying to find a way to live where I don't run into these kinds of people. It's a time-consuming attempt that restricts me and my life so much... that it can hardly be called "living". There just isn't a rock big enough to hide under, you know? Related to that - it's also exhausting trying to figure out if new people (not my foo) are Ns... or deciding where they fall on the continuum. That bit of information doesn't do me any good, anyway.
I'd decided to stick with my job and "study" my N-boss and learn what I could about defending myself from outrage, crazy-making, insanity. So I kept my job 2 years longer than my T thought I should. Yes, it was a masochistic way to go about it...
but it paid off, because I learned to manage that kind of stress, better than before. There were definitely days I wasn't sure if the benefits outweighted the costs... but now, I'm glad I did that.
In my case - with the family business - I have no choice about being NC. So I have other strategies that help. At the beginnning of the estate process, I made the mistake of thinking that my brother had changed; that he'd learned another way to be himself; that he'd matured. After all, he's past 50 now. I was horrified to find out that I wrong about that. And I decided I couldn't just "run away" from dealing with bro without giving up what was rightfully mine. So I decided to stick it out; fight when I had to and figure out a way to do this without injuring - rewounding - myself over & over. I'm still workin' on that! ;D But, I'm not alone anymore in that struggle - because it's plain as day to other people "how he is" and they are helping me "get things done". I don't need to co-opt them as "allies"... they've already figured it out... and as inhabitants of the same "reality" as myself, we already share some of the same goals. We don't directly discuss this - it would be like discussing someone's mental retardation and rude/unfair - through an implicit agreement.
I decided that "it's a fact of life" - part of my reality - that these people exist and that at times, I'm going to have to interact with them. I decided, that I'd better learn how to do that AND protect myself. It's not worth the time & effort required to try to change the N's in my life. It's understandable that part of me is always going to wish I could - but I've been reminding that part of me that the probability of this happening is close to zero. I'm still very much learning how to do this - and also, when to drop the defenses, the boundary vigilance, the "discretion is the better part of valor" habit of keeping my mouth shut - voicelessness - when the people I'm interacting with are NOT like this.
And this is even harder than "the devil I know". I am so used to that devil... that my skills at developing new friendships, creating and maintaining intimacy within existing relationships... has been neglected. I still intentionally mystify and keep people at arm's length, like I'm totally ashamed of myself. I am still trying to answer the basic questions from the beginning of therapy: what do I want? what do I like? what can I do for "fun"?
** Long story short - I gave up; stopped; maybe even forgot how - to "invite" people into my "world". I let myself be convinced that no one wanted to - or could - share that. I have a hard time believing - accepting - that people do LIKE me. It still scares the crap out of me.... unless they've been through something like what we share here. That was why my MIL was a such a miracle, for me. She'd never experienced anything like this; the bits I told her were like her soap-opera stories - something that she couldn't really understand about why people "are like that". Something not "real". I wish!
At the moment - and I don't know if this state is related to it or not - I'm having a real struggle with "saying things" without feeling like I'm in danger of invoking the N-monster response or like I'm being too blunt, tactless, direct, too personal... there is always a critic sitting on my shoulder; the political correctness cop - or the fear that "I shouldn't say that" because I'm not allowed to. And this isn't the productive kind of "self-consciousness"... so I'll take that discussion somewhere else.
And forgive me for babbling on & on here... why is it, it takes so many words when I'm so worried about how my words will be received???
-
I think we're wild animals, doing what makes us feel good.
Look at other primates.
The males murder infants, have sex with every female they can get their greedy little paws on, and fight to rule the world.
We're not that far removed from our cousins..... perhaps it's our expectations that need to be altered?
::shaking head::
I'm not trying to change the nature of the beast.....
I'm just wondering IF we can do something that would alter DIM thinking, with regard to domestic terrorism.
Or not.
As the majority of violent crimes are perpetrated by recidivists, and we can't control the sexual/violent predators even, I'm guessing we don't have a chance of addressing the gas-lit fog enveloping the N's and S's. Esp if they're only harming family members.
Its really a shame that children, and spouses, seem to lose their citizenship when involved with domestic NSociopaths.
I think that's the core of my frustration.
I don't like it.
-
Actually, Lighter - it's worse than losing your citizenship for some of us. Even if you can stop the cycle, yourself, as you grow up - and do things differently... it's like you've been cursed.
Until you get some help to start healing, that is.
But I hear you - one of the topics that I started to post then self-censored; was on what society could do to address this problem. Then, I realized how "society" would attempt to address it... and realized that even professionals argue over the definition of what constitutes a disorder... and are struggling with finding the point on the continuum where someone shifts from just having a tendency to something - to the full-blown problem... and how quickly we all are to judge... and how some people would simply need a push in the right direction to change -- some need medication; others don't -- and yet others need to be restrained, removed, and constantly monitored - to protect other people from them... (truly, I'm way less worried about protecting them from themselves... no matter how unfair that is from an objective point of view)
... and how many innocents would end up being further mistreated...
... so I just stopped, thought better of posting it... and decided to "let it sit" some more.
-
::sigh::
I'm going to let it sit some more too, Amber, though I have the feeling that there's some bit of alchemy that can be discerned......
some tricksy little puzzle piece missing that would bring clarity to the situation, somehow.
It naggles at me.
I've always felt that educating the little people, who aren't yet lost, was the key, but our education system is having a hard time teaching kids to read: /
It's going to be about educating the more normal people, whoever they are.
It's got to be about education?
Or maybe we are just wild primates, doing what we'll be doing until we're extinct? The legal and family system created by the wild primates, for the enjoyment of the wild primates?
In the meantime, it's very difficult to pretend we live in a civilized society, while the least among us are brutalized by people who're bound to protect them, then ignored or harmed by the system that's supposed to protect them, if they're noticed at all.
No justice there.
::shaking head::
The INFP in me can't seem to let that go...... partly bc of my ongoing situation, but partly bc it's just so wrong in so many ways, and always has been.
DIM thinking seems so wrong, that it's a sin, IMO.
Sloth.
Esp when Judges, Social Workers and people who could lift a finger, SHOULD lift a finger to help, have taken oaths to lift a finger.....
don't.
It's not going to be about changing or healing active NS's.
It's going to be about providing some moral consequence for the sin of Sloth/DIM thinking that touches everyone's lives the way that domestic socipaths touch people.
"Medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas said Sloth is "sluggishness of the mind which neglects to begin good... [it] is evil in its effect, if it so oppresses man as to draw him away entirely from good deeds." I believe I have in mind bitter jaded family court judges, and craapy over paid divorce lawyers.
Oh Great. I just pictured myself in crazy pilgrim oufit, brandishing a bible, and babbling on crazily about sin and going to hell: /
Lighter
ps I still think DIM thinking is related to sloth.
-
Risking visions of myself standing on a soapbox, in my crazy pilgrim suit, I've provided an article written by Rev. Victor Shepherd, March 2006. It was one of the first articles I found while researching Sloth, as I believe it relates to DIM thinking. I'm not familiar with any other beliefs or writings of Rev. Shepherd, but I identified with this article. I've also cut out sections, so that it would fit the page, (and relate what I'm trying to get accross, from my soapbox.)
"The Seven Deadly Sins: Sloth
1st Kings 19:9-18 Acts 14:8-23 John9:1-5
II: -- Then what is sloth, and why did our Christian foreparents regard it as spiritually lethal? Sloth is the persistent state of being “tuned out”; of being unengaged; of relishing indifference. Sloth is the state of remaining uninvolved, uncommitted, uncaring. Sloth is the state of being a spectator in life, even wilfully absent from life. There are many reasons for such sloth.
[a] One is the selfish desire to keep ourselves for ourselves, the “selfist” desire to keep our own life uncomplicated and unperturbed by ignoring people whose lives appear more difficult than ours, even endangered.
Several years ago I was purchasing candy in a variety store in Mississauga when an 18-year old “tough” began harassing the Egyptian storekeeper. The 18-year old had obviously been in the store before since the storekeeper recognized him instantly and became increasingly upset, almost hysterical: “You getta outta my store right now”, over and over. The fellow refused to leave the store. The storekeeper became near-frantic.
There was a customer in the store besides me, a big man who could have assisted the storekeeper in a moment. But as soon as this big man saw trouble brewing he slipped out the door and disappeared, leaving the distraught, middle-aged storekeeper to handle this teenaged tough, with only a skinny preacher to help him. I had a word with the hooligan, and he left. Whereupon the storekeeper fell all over me in gratitude.
The man who sneaked out of the store exemplified sloth. He didn’t care if the storekeeper were robbed or beaten up or terrorized. He wanted only to “avoid trouble”, as he would have put it. In truth, he wanted to keep himself for himself. He was willing to jeopardize a defenceless man whose predicament was obviously difficult and danger-ridden.
Think of the vocabulary we hear every day. “Don’t get involved. Go with the flow. See where the wind’s blowing. Add up the room.” All of which means, “Stand for nothing. Stand up for nothing. Stand up with no one. Protect yourself by abandoning everyone except yourself.” This is sloth.
As enlarged faith and greater faithfulness overturn our sloth we are going to find ourselves viewed as odd. A society bent on ease and drowsiness and self-gratification can’t understand why anyone would ever step out in a commitment that doesn’t promote ease and drowsiness and self-gratification. Still, we who are Christ’s people march to the beat of a different drummer.
There are two aspects to the resolute faith and resilient faith that overcome sloth. One is vision. With the eye of faith we have to see the importance of the work to which God has summoned us. If few others can see it, too bad; we have to see it. We have to see what is right and righteous and why. Even if we're not Christians, we should still see what is right, and righteous and why.
The second aspect to our resilience is courage. Courage is distinguished from foolhardiness by one thing: the importance of what we are doing. The person who walks through fire as a stunt in order to impress onlookers is a fool, while the person who enters a burning house to rescued trapped children we reward for his courage. Any person who came to the assistance of the beleaguered Egyptian storekeeper – would that person have been foolhardy or courageous? Is assisting a defenceless storekeeper something that God deems important?
When we are called to take the stand that will always be unpopular; when we are summoned to make the sacrifice for the person who will never thank us; when we are called to do what’s right in an environment that rewards two-faced palm-greasers – in all these situations others are going to tell us we’re foolhardy. We, however, are going to be sustained by our vision of what’s right, as well as by a courage that rises in proportion to our vision. Vision and courage will reinforce each other. The temptation of sloth will recede.
There are always people we must care for, even as there is evil we must resist, truth we must uphold, and a Lord whom we must obey. He, after all, has promised never to fail us or forsake us.
Rev. Victor Shepherd March 2006"
I realize the words "healthy boundaries" can be substituted for the word "sloth." I don't know what the answer is.
Lighter
-
My God.
How in the world do family court Judges get away with sitting there, making judgements, without any education for dealing with domestic abusers?
Or Personality Disorders?
It's insane that they're expected to make decisions when they don't have the tools.
It's insane that they think they're capable of making informed decisions without information.
If they knew how much damage they're doing, I wonder if most of them would find a way to become more informed?
I've seen some pretty awful assumptions lead to some pretty terrible decisions, and consequences, in Superior Court.
That the Judges can be very snide and condescending, to one party or the other, when they have no idea what's really going on, is mind boggling.
That they carry their own very human prejudices into the courtroom is alarming.
They make assumptions and go with it. Poof!
God help the people trying to shield children from sociopaths, N's and domestic terrorist of all stripes.
Pompous.
Asses.
-
oh lighter...
I just don't know what to say. "This too shall pass" just doesn't feel right, for this.
I see - and know first-hand - the societal issues you're describing... but I don't think it's possible to make laws or rules that would effectively provide the protection, the justice you're seeking. I know, again personal experience, how often the "official helping organizations/people" can and do add insult to injury - or even worse damage. And I think there are inherent dangers in this way of seeking the safety - the civilization - you want. It has to be a mutual agreement... not something that needs to be "enforced".
Twiggy's Tale of Woe - remember that? For years and years and years, I felt I should find a priest and go to confession. I needed to confess something... but I didn't know what it was, but it felt huge and spiritual and even shameful. What it was, was my story... I needed to tell it, period. I had to spit it out. And it was the telling that was the magical part of the process... I told it, I retold it, I pieced together enough of it to write a novel out of events that spanned only a few months. And then I found the "bigger" story underlying those events, the "prequel" that explained how the trauma was even possible.
It was only after I'd finally gotten the story out where other people could see it, read it, touch it, comment on it - here, of course - that I found the answers to questions like your's. I don't know if you can do that; I don't know if it would even be as helpful for you to try, even. So, I'll stop short of suggesting it... in my situation, it was all so "top-secret" - and so long ago - and so completely, thoroughly denied by my mom... I almost HAD to tell it, to see it myself. That's a big difference, between our stories.
-
I think I have a choice.
Distract myself with..................
uh....
distractions.
Or......
not.
Maybe I can find some pretty bandaids, if I'm going to be distracted by bandaids?
-
Sounds like - which means I could be mishearing - that you are thinking about ways to actively make a difference; getting involved in some way. I flirted with the idea of volunteering for a 24 hr domestic violence hotline for awhile. And there are other ways to help, sure.
I had to put the idea of volunteering on hold for awhile, to focus on MIL. Now, I'm kind of glad I didn't put myself in that position back then. I would've felt really badly about having to pull back and focus on me for a bit, again. My "empathy button" was getting overworked... rubbed raw & over-sensitive... the last few months. Would I have been able help? yes, probably... but I'm realizing that helping takes a toll on me, too. Like everything else, some kind of balance needs to be carefully nurtured for those of us who've had direct experiences with abuse, or we risk over-taxing ourselves again.
But I can't imagine trying to get help from people offering it - who have never experienced the kinds of things we've been through, Lighter. I can't imagine that the helping organizations haven't done outreach to try to educate the legal authorities on what this kind of subtle - invisible - abuse is like for the people who are the targets of the abuse, and the people who are simply exposed to it. The kind of instant recognition - and validation - that we continue to marvel over here on the board is what people need - when they need safety, protection, and legal support to even feel like they deserve this protection. And the people who provide that on the front lines... need the understanding in practice - at the very least - from the legal and law enforcement community.
-
NPR ran a blurb about the following story this morning. Apparently, Chicago has cleared it's death row, bc of all the cases Sherrif Jon Burge had his corrupt finger in. That a special prosecutor, was put in place to see this case through, is uplifting.
I don't know enough about Burge to understand what he is, or why he did the things he did.
Is he a sociopath, who enjoyed his position of authority in order to harm for pleasure.....
or is he a survivor of abuse, with misguided ideas about victim advocacy?
Not sure, but..... here's a blip about him, for anyone who hasn't heard the story.
Lighter
AboutAdvertiseLoginSign upProgress Illinois HomeExplore
Browse all Progress Illinois content » PI Originals | Quick Hits | News Category Economy Transportation Taxes Prisons Media Labor Immigration Housing Health care Environment Election 2010 Education Election Coverage U.S. Senate Governor Lt. Governor Treasurer Comptroller Cook Co. Board IL-5 IL-6 IL-7 IL-8 IL-10 IL-11 IL-13 IL-14 IL-16 IL-18 IL-19 Level of Government Federal Government State of Illinois Cook County City of Chicago Hot topics Election 2011| Mayoral Tracker| We're Hiring!| Quick Hit Adam Doster Thursday January 13th, 2011, 3:18pm
Burge And The Death Penalty
With the state's death penalty system hanging in the balance, it's worth remembering the troubled reign of Jon Burge. First documented by legendary Chicago reporter John Conroy, a special prosecutor's probe found that the now-infamous former Chicago Police commander oversaw the systemic torture of dozens of criminal suspects during the 1970s and 1980s. According to research by the Center for Wrongful Convictions (and passed along this week by the Illinois Coalition Against Torture), 12 Chicago torture survivors were eventually sentenced to death and five were later exonerated for delivering coerced confessions. The scandal was one of the major factors that lead former Gov. George Ryan to place a moratorium on capital punishment here. Without the diligent work of criminal justice reformers, those men would have been murdered by the state on false charges.
Burge himself was convicted of obstruction of justice and perjury this past summer, stemming from a 2003 civil case, and will be formally charged for those crimes next Thursday. (The statute of limitations has elapsed on any allegations related to the actual acts of torture.) Prosecutors are seeking roughly 30 years of jail time. The U.S. Probation Department, however, only recommended Burge serve between 15 and 21 months. ICAT finds that leniency intolerable. Today, the group delivered over 1,000 signatures to Judge Joan Lefkow objecting to the department's suggestion. From a release:[/b]“This sentencing recommendation fails to address the devastating harm Burge wrought on individuals and families in the African-American community in Chicago, as well as the lack of remorse he has shown for the horrendous crimes he committed,” said Larry Redmond, an ICAT member and former criminal defense attorney representing death row inmates. “Systematic torture by state actors is not acceptable, but such a minimal punishment would indicate that it is.”
-
LOL Guest!
For me - the extreme cortisol levels and stress are deadly toxic. I pack on pounds around the middle... and go on the attack with everyone and everything that crosses my path. It's the direct path to a form of emotional spontaneous combustion... for my own self. Sure people back off to stay out of the line of fire, or enjoy the firewords, avoid the shrapnel of explosions... but truly, the only person who gets hurt is myself - and I get hurt extremly badly.
-
Sense of humor is a "leading indicator" for me - a sign, that when it goes - I'd better start working on whatever is bothering me. That's also kinda related to my anxiety about communication, too. When things are no longer funny or I don't see the humor in what other people think is funny... I'm turned too far inward; being too obsessive; looking for the source of the "problem" in all the wrong places even...
my weight is connected to how much "stuff" I hang on to, emotionally; I'm almost positive. When I start letting stuff go... the weight automatically (and seemingly without effort or attention) starts to drop. Last year was an intense year, that followed an intense year, that followed... and I'm still in the midst of change. But these are smaller, less significant changes... my current set of changes aren't so emotionally "heavy".