difficult phone call
astri
clothes. she doesn't have enough clothes. most of the shirts she
bought recently (in the last month, we've spend over $500 on clothes
for her) are dress code violations at school because they're spaghetti
straps. told her we wouldn't purchase any new clothes for her right
now becaue we just bought her a bunch.
told her she needs to live with the choices she made. it's too hard to
do laundry at her tpeutic foster home (not least because they charge
her $1 a load). she can't do laundry all the time. it's too hot to
wear a sweater over her shirts. she *needs* clothes because she lost
weight. suggested she wear to school some of her tshirts that are big
on her right now and change into her new clothes after school. that was
like suggesting she strip naked and stroll downtown.
she talked with her tpist about this and her tpist understands and
knows she needs clothes. told her could talk to her tpist to clarify
the reality of what has gone on. wails that we always do this, talk to
her counselors and ruin things. told her that if she's going to talk
to her tpist and then use what her tpist says in conversations then
will tell her therapist our position so her tpist can counsel regarding
reality (maybe too strong, but was 40 minutes into being berated).
wants an accounting of how we are spending *her* money. it's only fair
because it's her money from her dead parent. no, it's the state's
money and we don't owe her an accounting.
we're treating her like she hasn't changed. we always do this.
round and round and round, cycling through the same stuff. tried to
get off phone for 10 minutes. she wouldn't let. finally had to tell
her was bedtime and time to hang up and then do so. phone rang again.
unplugged all the phones. cell phone range. turned off cell phones.
feel like under siege.
-- astri
======================
to email send to astri
======================
at volcano dot org
======================
Nahanton
I don't think 'it feels like".....I think you _are_ under siege. Is it
possible to speak or write to her therapist explaining the clothes
situation? Is it possible for you to loan her money for new clothes
and have her pay you back? Is there a way for her to get a part-time
job? I so wish you could extricate yourself from this. :-(
Nahanton
Juniper
astri <inv...@example.com> wrote:
I concur with Nahanton and Tess. Your feelings are accurately naming
reality. You are under siege.
Betcha dollars to donuts she's freaking out locally as well as over the
phone. I suspect her tantrum may have repercussions in her living
situation.
Juniper
astri
she wails that we don't understand
we tell her we do understand
but we disagree
argument redux
got tired of it long ago
everything gets dragged back
we always say no to her
we're going to say no forever we wouldn't buy her a hair brush
we won't buy her makeup and the makeup she has is *stale*
it's a whole year old!
we won't buy her toiletries (yes we did)
we won't buy her accessories
we won't buy her glasses and she *needs* glasses (more redux)
we're getting her money and we won't tell her what we're spending it on
we say we're saving it for her but how does she know?
>> tried to get off phone for 10 minutes. she wouldn't let. finally
>> had to tell her was bedtime and time to hang up and then do so.
>> phone rang again. unplugged all the phones. cell phone range.
>> turned off cell phones.
>>
>> feel like under siege.
>
> you are. sorry :-(.
phone rang
hung it up without answering
phone rang again
unplugged it
kept ringing thru fax
had to turn off printer
kept ringing in other room
unplugged other room
went to start turning off cell phones
cell phone rang
had to press ignore and then turn off
turned off work cell phone too
turned them back on after about 40 minutes
kept worrying she'd call in middle of night
she didn't
and then not able to be ready for bed until way after usual
too keyed up
sigh
astri
> it possible to speak or write to her therapist explaining the clothes
> situation?
yes
is one of the things she was wailing about
when we suggested it
when she first called she told us to talk to tpist
so we can know we're treating her badly
once we told her we would talk to tpist and tell her our position
it was suddenly a violation for us to call
> Is it possible for you to loan her money for new clothes
> and have her pay you back?
if we lend her money
we will never see it again
> Is there a way for her to get a part-time
> job?
she's been applying for jobs
is surprised it's not easy
is now wailing that it's too hard
and we shouldn't expect her to have to earn the money
in order to get stuff
that's just not fair
she needs it *now*
and besides, she needs clothes for work
clothes are how she presents herself
and she's not asking for a thousand dollars worth of clothes
she's just asking for more clothes
there are *sales*!!!
> I so wish you could extricate yourself from this. :-(
sigh
-- astri
astri
:(
> Betcha dollars to donuts she's freaking out locally as well as over
> the phone. I suspect her tantrum may have repercussions in her
> living situation.
she said she had given her tpist an even harder time than she was
giving us
dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
they certainly won't kick her out for it
cometz
ugh ugh. she is harassing you. it is being under siege. it is a bit
scary. i know it. had a person in rl do that for a while. made scared.
made angry. made feel very crazy. kept asking how do you get from
positive actions to irrational out of control actions? you are doing
right to protect yourself.
not that this is really a good solution but we do buy all our top
clothes at thrift stores. get very good stuff. lots of ppl shop there,
including teens looking for "cool" stuff. maybe if there is good
thrift somewhere you can tell her you will take her there to get some
appropriate shirts and that is all. don't know. understand that she
seems to be in state of complete rejection and acting out. not a
reasonable person to approach.
i think it is a good idea to talk to thpst. tell what is reality and
ask her to suggest to you and aa what is a reasonable response. then
it takes onus off you. aa prolly didn't know shirts were going to be
disallowed. but not a million dollars to spend on this stuff. so what
is a reasonable middle.
don't know. hope you could sleep. sorry she is hurting you. you are
good person. she is flailing child. can be very painful to be around,
even if she can't help it. especially since she is making you target.
very very unfair. very much. sorry.
b.
Juniper
No degrees of freedom kind of thing where she's at now?
Juniper
astri
> scary. i know it. had a person in rl do that for a while. made scared.
> made angry. made feel very crazy. kept asking how do you get from
> positive actions to irrational out of control actions? you are doing
> right to protect yourself.
hated having to go to that length
just wasn't willing to pick up phone again
> not that this is really a good solution but we do buy all our top
> clothes at thrift stores. get very good stuff. lots of ppl shop there,
> including teens looking for "cool" stuff. maybe if there is good
> thrift somewhere you can tell her you will take her there to get some
> appropriate shirts and that is all. don't know. understand that she
> seems to be in state of complete rejection and acting out. not a
> reasonable person to approach.
she won't shop in thrift stores
is last year's clothes at best
last year is passe
we offered that
> i think it is a good idea to talk to thpst. tell what is reality and
> ask her to suggest to you and aa what is a reasonable response. then
> it takes onus off you. aa prolly didn't know shirts were going to be
> disallowed. but not a million dollars to spend on this stuff. so what
> is a reasonable middle.
aa knew dress code
every time she chose a shirt we asked if it was ok for school
she said she can wear a sweater over it
now she doesn't want to wear a sweater
and she was also banking on being able to get away with violations
because sometimes they don't bother with them
so now she needs to live with her choices
after suggesting she wear some of her old, bigger clothes
(won't wear anything not skin tight)
and having that soundly rejected
she slipped in that she was going to throw away her old clothes
we said would be a mistake
she said they will never fit
(is recent weight loss of about 35 pounds)
she said she won't gain wait
she's eating so much junk food and her weight is stable
we told her if she throws away old clothes and then does gain weight
she won't have anything to wear
because we won't buy another replacement wardrobe
we are, of course, unreasonable
> don't know. hope you could sleep. sorry she is hurting you. you are
> good person. she is flailing child. can be very painful to be around,
> even if she can't help it. especially since she is making you target.
> very very unfair. very much. sorry.
oh well
couldn't settle down until much later than usual
but did sleep
-- astri
astri
> In article <Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net>,
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Juniper wrote:
>>> Betcha dollars to donuts she's freaking out locally as well as over
>>> the phone. I suspect her tantrum may have repercussions in her
>>> living situation.
>>
>> she said she had given her tpist an even harder time than she was
>> giving us
>>
>> dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
>> they certainly won't kick her out for it
>
> No degrees of freedom kind of thing where she's at now?
what do you mean?
cometz
am so sorry. have to say the first response from most inside is
"spoiled brat." i know that isn't fair or even really applicable, but
was the reaction we had. even as adult we have never spent hundreds of
dollars on clothes. it sounds like riches, which i know isn't so, but
it is sad that she doesn't understand how privileged she is on this
account. it's like she's using clothing to represent the real losses
in her life. dunno. is sad and ugly. mostly we are sorry that she is
using you to act out her anger and confusion. it is not fair. big big
not fair, says Kat.
betsy
trill
again & again.
can you possibly just ignore her... let her whine & moan & carry on
her various shenanigans, but dont respond @ all? practice that old b-mod
tactic of extinction?
$500.!!!
dang! i consider $60. to be my limit of "seasonal" wardrobe
adjustments. cant remember the amt., but do recall that i placed limits
such as that on my son during his adolescence.
i realize that she triggers you. i dont suggest that you cease describing
her performances to us & other ppl from whom you get support, but why not
treat that kinda stuff the same way that one might handle less dramatically
expressed versions of the same thing in less troubled teen offspring or
othrs under one's care?
my nieces were way good at being young divas, or "britney"
(brittany? sp) imitations as teens. since they spent summers living w/their
grandmothr & aunts (me included), the entire extended family cooperated on
the limits while the girls tried to play us against each other on top of
burdening us w/their performances. i was just talking w/someone the other
day about a time when they tried to convince me to buy a dress for myself
that had spaghetti straps. they encouraged me to get it & wear it over a
bra & let my bra show. it made me laugh coz my bras needa be pieces of
armor, while theirs were, @ least then, unnecessary but pretty fashion
accessories.
trill
"astri" <inv...@example.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net...
Juniper
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Juniper wrote:
> > In article <Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net>,
> > astri <inv...@example.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Juniper wrote:
> >>> Betcha dollars to donuts she's freaking out locally as well as over
> >>> the phone. I suspect her tantrum may have repercussions in her
> >>> living situation.
> >>
> >> she said she had given her tpist an even harder time than she was
> >> giving us
> >>
> >> dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
> >> they certainly won't kick her out for it
> >
> > No degrees of freedom kind of thing where she's at now?
>
> what do you mean?
I mean at the previous place she lost privileges when she acted out and
had to move up through degrees of what she was allowed, conforming her
behavior to expectations in order to attain more freedom. None of that
in the foster home?
I guess I was hoping she'd be receiving negative feedback on her
behavior from more than you being unwilling to fork over for unnecessary
clothes. I was hoping that she'd find more of the universe telling her
that what she's doing in unacceptable.
*sigh*
Juniper
astri
> "spoiled brat." i know that isn't fair or even really applicable, but
> was the reaction we had. even as adult we have never spent hundreds of
> dollars on clothes. it sounds like riches, which i know isn't so, but
> it is sad that she doesn't understand how privileged she is on this
> account. it's like she's using clothing to represent the real losses
very likely so
> in her life. dunno. is sad and ugly. mostly we are sorry that she is
> using you to act out her anger and confusion. it is not fair. big big
> not fair, says Kat.
> betsy
thank you
ji...@tuells.org
only talk on the phone with her for 10 minutes if it's negative
type call. Then you can easily hang up at that point by saying 'this
is a negative call' and she will have already been told by her t'pist
what this phrase means. Not ideal but maybe will help you know you
only have to put up with it for x amount of time.
Rainbow Colors (Jill)
In article <Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net>,
astri <inv...@example.com> wrote:
--
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The colors blend, the edges soften. Swirling and mixing
we are becoming white light.
ji...@tuells.org
astri
> oy!
>
> again & again.
>
> can you possibly just ignore her... let her whine & moan &
> carry on her various shenanigans, but dont respond @ all? practice
> that old b-mod tactic of extinction?
actually did that for much of the phone call. hard not to respond at
all to the person, tho.
> $500.!!!
> dang! i consider $60. to be my limit of "seasonal" wardrobe
> adjustments. cant remember the amt., but do recall that i placed limits
> such as that on my son during his adolescence.
that's the amount the state will reimburse per year for clothing. we
had set a lower threshold knowing that she is good a manipulating to
stretch beyond the limits. but we finally just said stop.
> i realize that she triggers you. i dont suggest that you cease
> describing her performances to us & other ppl from whom you get
> support, but why not treat that kinda stuff the same way that one
> might handle less dramatically expressed versions of the same thing
> in less troubled teen offspring or othrs under one's care?
did treat it so in direct conversation with her. whined afterwards.
astri
> In article <Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net>,
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Juniper wrote:
>>> In article <Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net>,
>>> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Juniper wrote:
>>>>> Betcha dollars to donuts she's freaking out locally as well as
>>>>> over the phone. I suspect her tantrum may have repercussions in
>>>>> her living situation.
>>>>
>>>> she said she had given her tpist an even harder time than she was
>>>> giving us
>>>>
>>>> dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
>>>> they certainly won't kick her out for it
>>>
>>> No degrees of freedom kind of thing where she's at now?
>>
>> what do you mean?
>
> I mean at the previous place she lost privileges when she acted out
> and had to move up through degrees of what she was allowed,
> conforming her behavior to expectations in order to attain more
> freedom. None of that in the foster home?
ah
there is a level system. don't know if her wailing at us impacted her
behavior at home. if it did, would hope that there would be some
impact.
> I guess I was hoping she'd be receiving negative feedback on her
> behavior from more than you being unwilling to fork over for
> unnecessary clothes. I was hoping that she'd find more of the
> universe telling her that what she's doing in unacceptable.
that's why we thought of calling her tpist. if everyone else must
depend on the aa's telling of her version of reality in order to
provide feedback, then they're going to get a slanted view.
tried phoning her tpist a few times today. the cell phone is going
straight to voicemail. didn't feel like leaving a message.
> *sigh*
yes
astri
> the middle of the night. if i answered, he'd hang up. if i didn't
> answer, he'd let the phone ring and ring and ring and ring. forever.
yuck
>> and then not able to be ready for bed until way after usual
>> too keyed up
>
> :-(
>
> how long 'til she turns 18?
end of february
don't know if that is end of relationship or not
Emerging Butterfly
> the aa called to whine and yell and wail because she *needs* more
> clothes. she doesn't have enough clothes.
always a new crisis for her, eh?
most of the shirts she
> bought recently (in the last month, we've spend over $500 on clothes
> for her) are dress code violations at school because they're spaghetti
> straps. told her we wouldn't purchase any new clothes for her right
> now becaue we just bought her a bunch.
>
> told her she needs to live with the choices she made. it's too hard to
> do laundry at her tpeutic foster home (not least because they charge
> her $1 a load). she can't do laundry all the time. it's too hot to
> wear a sweater over her shirts. she *needs* clothes because she lost
> weight. suggested she wear to school some of her tshirts that are big
> on her right now and change into her new clothes after school. that was
> like suggesting she strip naked and stroll downtown.
*smiles at humor here*
she really has no sense of perspective, does she?
everything is tragic. everything is immediate. everything is about
her. sounds quite histrionic. this behavior will not work in the real
world.
it is good that it doesn't work with you either. this is inappropriate
for someone on the brink of turning 18. this behavior should be
starting to be extinguished by 12.
>
> she talked with her tpist about this and her tpist understands and
> knows she needs clothes.
therapist was making classic therapist empathic and mirroring
statements. it's what therapists do. therapist's words probably didn't
stop at that. this girl is very capable of distorting people's words
to suit her own needs.
therapist, if hasn't learned this yet, will soon, because in this
teen's struggle, triangulating seems key. the therapist will be the
enemy at a later time and you the proposed savior, i'm guessing. sound
accurate?
told her could talk to her tpist to clarify
> the reality of what has gone on. wails that we always do this, talk to
> her counselors and ruin things.
yes. socks when reality interjects.
told her that if she's going to talk
> to her tpist and then use what her tpist says in conversations then
> will tell her therapist our position so her tpist can counsel regarding
> reality (maybe too strong, but was 40 minutes into being berated).
yes. understand.
>
> wants an accounting of how we are spending *her* money. it's only fair
> because it's her money from her dead parent. no, it's the state's
> money and we don't owe her an accounting.
>
> we're treating her like she hasn't changed. we always do this.
untrue, and you know it. hold onto this. you have acknowledged her
change. you have been generous with her. this is a symptom she is
acting out. a symptom. you have seen more of the composed "real" her
recently. remember that this is not the person you are talking to
now.
>
> round and round and round, cycling through the same stuff. tried to
> get off phone for 10 minutes.
tried? like jill said, it might be good to institute enforced hang-up
time.
she wouldn't let.
she shouldn't have that power.
finally had to tell
> her was bedtime and time to hang up and then do so. phone rang again.
> unplugged all the phones. cell phone range. turned off cell phones.
>
> feel like under siege.
understandably so. is not okay.
Emerging Butterfly
> In article <Pine.BSI.4.64.0710250724110.8...@malasada.lava.net>,> > > In article <Pine.BSI.4.64.0710250622490.8...@malasada.lava.net>,
> > > astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Juniper wrote:
> > >>> Betcha dollars to donuts she's freaking out locally as well as over
> > >>> the phone. I suspect her tantrum may have repercussions in her
> > >>> living situation.
>
> > >> she said she had given her tpist an even harder time than she was
> > >> giving us
>
> > >> dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
> > >> they certainly won't kick her out for it
>
> > > No degrees of freedom kind of thing where she's at now?
>
> > what do you mean?
>
> I mean at the previous place she lost privileges when she acted out and
> had to move up through degrees of what she was allowed, conforming her
> behavior to expectations in order to attain more freedom. None of that
> in the foster home?
>
> I guess I was hoping she'd be receiving negative feedback on her
> behavior from more than you being unwilling to fork over for unnecessary
> clothes. I was hoping that she'd find more of the universe telling her
> that what she's doing in unacceptable.
that would be good. if current place is allowing all kinds of
behaviors with no consequences, that is bad teaching for her.
>
> *sigh*
>
> Juniper- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Emerging Butterfly
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:16:28 -1000, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> >On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, the valerians wrote:
>
> the middle of the night. if i answered, he'd hang up. if i didn't
> answer, he'd let the phone ring and ring and ring and ring. forever.
sounds awful.
>
> >and then not able to be ready for bed until way after usual
> >too keyed up
>
> :-(
>
> how long 'til she turns 18?
>
> tess
>
>
>
> >sigh
>
> >-- astri
>
> > ======================
> > to email send to astri
> > ======================
> > at volcano dot org
> > ======================- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
astri
> Maybe set up with her t'pist (and yours) that in the future you will
> only talk on the phone with her for 10 minutes if it's negative type
> call. Then you can easily hang up at that point by saying 'this is a
> negative call' and she will have already been told by her t'pist what
> this phrase means. Not ideal but maybe will help you know you only
> have to put up with it for x amount of time.
some sort of plan needs to be in place. this is prolly something we
need to work out in family tpy (which is supposed to actually start
next week).
astri
> On Oct 25, 1:50 am, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
>> the aa called to whine and yell and wail because she *needs* more
>> clothes. she doesn't have enough clothes.
>
> always a new crisis for her, eh?
oh, yes
> most of the shirts she bought recently (in the last month, we've
>> spend over $500 on clothes for her) are dress code violations at
>> school because they're spaghetti straps. told her we wouldn't
>> purchase any new clothes for her right now becaue we just bought her
>> a bunch.
>>
>> told her she needs to live with the choices she made. it's too hard
>> to do laundry at her tpeutic foster home (not least because they
>> charge her $1 a load). she can't do laundry all the time. it's too
>> hot to wear a sweater over her shirts. she *needs* clothes because
>> she lost weight. suggested she wear to school some of her tshirts
>> that are big on her right now and change into her new clothes after
>> school. that was like suggesting she strip naked and stroll
>> downtown.
> *smiles at humor here*
> she really has no sense of perspective, does she?
no. 3 going on 18.
> everything is tragic. everything is immediate. everything is about
> her. sounds quite histrionic. this behavior will not work in the real
> world.
not really, no. but it's apparently worked for her until now (or at
least until she got into the system last year).
> it is good that it doesn't work with you either. this is inappropriate
> for someone on the brink of turning 18. this behavior should be
> starting to be extinguished by 12.
>
>> she talked with her tpist about this and her tpist understands and
>> knows she needs clothes.
>
> therapist was making classic therapist empathic and mirroring
> statements. it's what therapists do. therapist's words probably didn't
oh, quite likely.
> stop at that. this girl is very capable of distorting people's words
> to suit her own needs.
definitely. she does it time and again.
> therapist, if hasn't learned this yet, will soon, because in this
> teen's struggle, triangulating seems key. the therapist will be the
> enemy at a later time and you the proposed savior, i'm guessing. sound
> accurate?
quite possibly
>> told her could talk to her tpist to clarify the reality of what has
>> gone on. wails that we always do this, talk to her counselors and
>> ruin things.
>
> yes. socks when reality interjects.
truly
>> told her that if she's going to talk to her tpist and then use what
>> her tpist says in conversations then will tell her therapist our
>> position so her tpist can counsel regarding reality (maybe too
>> strong, but was 40 minutes into being berated).
>
> yes. understand.
>
>> wants an accounting of how we are spending *her* money. it's only
>> fair because it's her money from her dead parent. no, it's the
>> state's money and we don't owe her an accounting.
>>
>> we're treating her like she hasn't changed. we always do this.
>
> untrue, and you know it. hold onto this. you have acknowledged her
> change. you have been generous with her. this is a symptom she is
> acting out. a symptom. you have seen more of the composed "real" her
> recently. remember that this is not the person you are talking to
> now.
not really convinced the calmer her is the "real" her. she slides so
easily to this stuff.
>> round and round and round, cycling through the same stuff. tried to
>> get off phone for 10 minutes.
>
> tried? like jill said, it might be good to institute enforced hang-up
> time.
said had to hang up. she kept using all her tricks to keep us on.
finally just did it.
> she wouldn't let.
>
>> she shouldn't have that power.
no, she shouldn't.
>> finally had to tell her was bedtime and time to hang up and then do
>> so. phone rang again. unplugged all the phones. cell phone range.
>> turned off cell phones.
>>
>> feel like under siege.
>
> understandably so. is not okay.
isn't
emerging butterfly
idealistically hoping there is a *real* her in there that has some
reason. Don't like to think the *real* anyone is histrionic like this.
>
> >> round and round and round, cycling through the same stuff. tried to
> >> get off phone for 10 minutes.
>
> > tried? like jill said, it might be good to institute enforced hang-up
> > time.
>
> said had to hang up. she kept using all her tricks to keep us on.
> finally just did it.
>
> > she wouldn't let.
>
> >> she shouldn't have that power.
>
> no, she shouldn't.
>
> >> finally had to tell her was bedtime and time to hang up and then do
> >> so. phone rang again. unplugged all the phones. cell phone range.
> >> turned off cell phones.
>
> >> feel like under siege.
>
> > understandably so. is not okay.
>
> isn't
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
astri
> On Oct 25, 8:08 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
>>
>>> untrue, and you know it. hold onto this. you have acknowledged her
>>> change. you have been generous with her. this is a symptom she is
>>> acting out. a symptom. you have seen more of the composed "real"
>>> her recently. remember that this is not the person you are talking
>>> to now.
>>
>> not really convinced the calmer her is the "real" her. she slides
>> so easily to this stuff.
>
> idealistically hoping there is a *real* her in there that has some
> reason. Don't like to think the *real* anyone is histrionic like
> this.
no, don't like to think it. but the force is powerful in that one, it
is.
astri
> toward her and therefore the stress you feel?
might. at that point, if she rejects what we say we need, we can let
her know we don't have to put up with it any longer.
astri
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007 14:49:40 -1000, astri <inv...@example.com> wrote:
>
>>>> she won't shop in thrift stores
>>>> is last year's clothes at best
>>>> last year is passe
>>>> we offered that
>
> there are some who wear second-hand clothes. nellie mckay shops only
> in thrift stores. angelina jolie (i think it was her) wore a
> thrift-store find to the oscars or some such a-list bash.
>
> tess
dunno. only once has she ever found anything to purchase at a thrift
store. we have no clue about celebrities, tho.
Emerging Butterfly
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, emerging butterfly wrote:
> > On Oct 25, 8:08 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
>
> >>> untrue, and you know it. hold onto this. you have acknowledged her
> >>> change. you have been generous with her. this is a symptom she is
> >>> acting out. a symptom. you have seen more of the composed "real"
> >>> her recently. remember that this is not the person you are talking
> >>> to now.
>
> >> not really convinced the calmer her is the "real" her. she slides
> >> so easily to this stuff.
>
> > idealistically hoping there is a *real* her in there that has some
> > reason. Don't like to think the *real* anyone is histrionic like
> > this.
>
> no, don't like to think it. but the force is powerful in that one, it
> is.
in that one...sorry, missed what you're referring to. the force is
powerful in that one the aa?
i was thinking about this today, and it brought up one of those
questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
astri
> On Oct 25, 8:41 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, emerging butterfly wrote:
>>> On Oct 25, 8:08 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
>>
>>>>> untrue, and you know it. hold onto this. you have acknowledged her
>>>>> change. you have been generous with her. this is a symptom she is
>>>>> acting out. a symptom. you have seen more of the composed "real"
>>>>> her recently. remember that this is not the person you are talking
>>>>> to now.
>>
>>>> not really convinced the calmer her is the "real" her. she slides
>>>> so easily to this stuff.
>>
>>> idealistically hoping there is a *real* her in there that has some
>>> reason. Don't like to think the *real* anyone is histrionic like
>>> this.
>>
>> no, don't like to think it. but the force is powerful in that one, it
>> is.
>
> in that one...sorry, missed what you're referring to. the force is
> powerful in that one the aa?
yes. sorry. it was a star wars reference (yoda).
> i was thinking about this today, and it brought up one of those
> questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
> underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
begs the question as to what is self.
but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always goodness.
think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that humans are all
born with the capacity to do both great good and great evil. we think
that any self that develops along the way would be a reflection of the
sum of impact of experiences in combination with innate temperament.
cometz
> the world than bad. why is that, if there is no inner urging toward
> goodness?
>
> tv
>
> >-- astri
>
> > ======================
> > to email send to astri
> > ======================
> > at volcano dot org
> > ======================
i don't think it is exactly an inner urging towards goodness. i think,
from seeing it around me, that living things are driven to live as
peacefully as possible, simply for their own well being. the drives
that cause them to become violent (in these cases violence is a
natural response, not an evil) are natural. territory, mating, group
leadership (which is about healthiest strongest leading the group, not
an ego driven thing like it often is in humans). animals avoid
confrontation. they avoid danger. they really do spend an enormous
amount of time talking to one another, running around in play,
gathering food, sleeping... all the regular stuff. so i think that the
natural inherent urging in all animals is towards peaceful
coexistence, beyond the obvious natural survival needs. i know there
are abberations. jane goodall wrote about a group of chimps who were
violent and preyed on other chimp groups for no apparent natural
reason. i think humans have assigned words to what are, by and large,
natural behaviors. squirrels don't think they are good if they don't
beat up other squirrels. they just are being squirrels doing their
squirrel things. i also think that it is the human capacity for self
awareness that opens the doors to the stuff that becomes good or evil.
i think we are pretty much born perfect animals. but i also think that
our self awareness adds a huge wrinkle to what we choose to do and the
reasons we come up with for why we choose those things.
i saw my son as a newborn and i am here to say that there is nothing
quite so perfect as a new life. babies are all desire. desire for
food, comfort, caring. but there is nothing evil in a newborn. you
mentioned once that your rlgs upbringing believed that humans are born
inherently bad or something along those lines. it struck me that this
was a human thought reaction to the open, natural desires that babies
exhibit. they want the breast.they grab everything. they are curious
about everything, including body functions. they don't know from
shame. but if a bunch of messed up adult humans have decided that
these natural behaviors are icky or bad then they could assign humans
with the burden of being born s*nful. babies don't know from s*n.
when i tutor these little second graders i watch them. they have
problems. but there is nothing bad about them. many of them are
terribly needy. and this may end up with them becoming angry and
hurtful adults. but i have not met a single child who i thought was
bad or wanted to be bad. i think that is an assignment that comes
after humans have failed to care for and nurture their own. i don't
mean to imply that humans aren't capable of great evil. but i also
think that there is always a reason and that the evil we see is a
symptom of broken children who become broken adults. alice miller
wrote a book about a variety of famous ppl and connected their
childhoods to their later lives. i don't remember everyone she wrote
about but picasso, buster keaton and hitler were some of them. it was
a very very good book.
anyway, the whole blah blah i am saying is that i really believe that,
minus possible genetic flukes (which is an area in which i know
absolutely nothing), i think humans desire to be positive and whole
and loving. i think that is the natural order. unfortunately we also
have the capacity for using our unique abilities to do great evil.
betsy
astri
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>
>> the aa called to whine and yell and wail because she *needs* more
>> clothes. she doesn't have enough clothes. most of the shirts she
>> bought recently (in the last month, we've spend over $500 on clothes
>> for her) are dress code violations at school because they're
>> spaghetti straps. told her we wouldn't purchase any new clothes for
>> her right now becaue we just bought her a bunch.
>>
>> told her she needs to live with the choices she made. it's too hard
>> to do laundry at her tpeutic foster home (not least because they
>> charge her $1 a load). she can't do laundry all the time. it's too
>> hot to wear a sweater over her shirts. she *needs* clothes because
>> she lost weight. suggested she wear to school some of her tshirts
>> that are big on her right now and change into her new clothes after
>> school. that was like suggesting she strip naked and stroll
>> downtown.
>
no
wails: but i'm a teeeennnaaaaaaaaaagerrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!
as if that excuses living with choices
> [....]
>> round and round and round, cycling through the same stuff. tried to
>> get off phone for 10 minutes. she wouldn't let. finally had to
>> tell her was bedtime and time to hang up and then do so. phone rang
>> again.
>
> Was well done.
>
>> unplugged all the phones. cell phone range. turned off cell phones.
>>
>> feel like under siege.
>
> Don't wonder. 8-((
she hasn't called again, yet
found out family tpy scheduled for tuesday is just with c and us
tpist wants to meet separately with the aa
before bringing us together
fine
eventually we're going to need to deal with this stuff, tho
astri
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>
>> dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
>> they certainly won't kick her out for it
>
> find some way of evening the score.
if it happened in the presence of the foster mthr
astri
> the world than bad. why is that, if there is no inner urging toward
> goodness?
that's a good point.
maybe part of the issue is that humans are social animals. we run in
packs. that's pretty powerfully ingrained. maybe the need to maintain
the role in the pack does have the impact of leading us frequently to
choose the altruistic action? maybe it's when folks are on the fringes
of the pack (including the bottom and *top* levels of the social
hierarchy) that this role-maintenance thing doesn't work as well to
push to altruism.
in individuals, there's always a balance of self-interest and
group-interest. that balance plays out differently in different people
at different times.
but there's also the group phenomenon that has been seen over and over
that shows that individuals may do something completely out of
character if they're acting in the context of group action.
this is being written before coffee is fully consumed. it's not fully
and coherently formed, but, oh well.
(and, hey, sentences came back! thought we lost them for a bit this
morning)
astri
> the valerians <tess-v...@juno.com> wrote, in
> alt.support.dissociation:
>
> [astri]
>>> but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always
>>> goodness. think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that
>>> humans are all born with the capacity to do both great good and
>>> great evil. we think that any self that develops along the way
>>> would be a reflection of the sum of impact of experiences in
>>> combination with innate temperament.
>>
>> the world than bad. why is that, if there is no inner urging toward
>> goodness?
>
>
> However, there's also an inner urging towards darkness.
>
> There's also just urging towards the things which make life
> comfortable for a social animal - love and co-operation and and
> comradeship.
swear we didn't read this before writing our own response!
-- astri
======================
to email send to astri
======================
at volcano dot org
======================
> We're also biased to see the good in one another, and excuse the bad.
>
> If one looks, the ages have been littered with the tolerance of great
> evil, by people living lives which on the local scale are good.
> Take...
>
> spoiler for graphic instances of man's inhumanity to man
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
>
> the popularity of Roman circuses, public hangings and heretic burnings
> as public entertainment; the blitheness with which 'decent' people
> wish rape on those in prison; the willingness to believe that
> 'trhosepeople' belong in institutions, and the preferential belief in
> authority over its victims; the inquisition; housewives complaining
> that the smoke from the death camp chimneys dirtied their washing;
> genocide in Rwanda, the casualness with which we overlook 'forced
> labour' and slavery in producing our toys ...
>
> People are capable of great good, and most prefer active good to
> active evil (which does not prevent them from doing active evil *in
> the name of* good). But passive evil, the neglect of active good
> which doesn't happen to bring reward with it (I may give Amnesty their
> couple of quid a month, but I'm not writing the letters which really
> make the difference), the corrupting of goodness to ill ...
>
> Yes, it's a craphoot. In times of stability, the dice are a little
> loaded in favour of good, but that's all.
>
> Baba Yaga
> --
> To learn which questions are unanswerable, and /not to answer them/:
> this skill is most needful in times of stress and darkness.
> - Ursula LeGuin
>
astri
> On Oct 27, 8:40 am, the valerians <tess-valer...@juno.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:28:12 -1000, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
>>
>>>> i was thinking about this today, and it brought up one of those
>>>> questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
>>>> underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
>>
>>> begs the question as to what is self.
>>
>>> but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always
>>> goodness. think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that
>>> humans are all born with the capacity to do both great good and
>>> great evil. we think that any self that develops along the way
>>> would be a reflection of the sum of impact of experiences in
>>> combination with innate temperament.
>>
>> then it sounds like a crap shoot. there are far more good people in
>> the world than bad. why is that, if there is no inner urging toward
>> goodness?
>>
>> tv
>>
>>> -- astri
>
well said
cometz
thank you. i seem to be capable of either long barrages of words, or
no words at all. balance. balance. striving and searching. balance.
sigh.
betsy
astri
>
> thank you. i seem to be capable of either long barrages of words, or
> no words at all. balance. balance. striving and searching. balance.
> sigh.
> betsy
you do what you can
we all do what we can
doesn't always (often?) feel like enough
trill
glad to hear that.
trill
"astri" <inv...@example.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net...
> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, trill wrote:
>
>> oy!
>>
>> again & again.
>>
>> can you possibly just ignore her... let her whine & moan &
>> carry on her various shenanigans, but dont respond @ all? practice
>> that old b-mod tactic of extinction?
>
> actually did that for much of the phone call. hard not to respond at
> all to the person, tho.
>
>> $500.!!!
>> dang! i consider $60. to be my limit of "seasonal" wardrobe
>> adjustments. cant remember the amt., but do recall that i placed limits
>> such as that on my son during his adolescence.
>
> that's the amount the state will reimburse per year for clothing. we
> had set a lower threshold knowing that she is good a manipulating to
> stretch beyond the limits. but we finally just said stop.
>
>> i realize that she triggers you. i dont suggest that you cease
>> describing her performances to us & other ppl from whom you get
>> support, but why not treat that kinda stuff the same way that one
>> might handle less dramatically expressed versions of the same thing
>> in less troubled teen offspring or othrs under one's care?
>
> did treat it so in direct conversation with her. whined afterwards.
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
> ======================
>
>> my nieces were way good at being young divas, or "britney"
>> (brittany? sp) imitations as teens. since they spent summers living
>> w/their grandmothr & aunts (me included), the entire extended family
>> cooperated on the limits while the girls tried to play us against
>> each other on top of burdening us w/their performances. i was just
>> talking w/someone the other day about a time when they tried to
>> convince me to buy a dress for myself that had spaghetti straps. they
>> encouraged me to get it & wear it over a bra & let my bra show. it made
>> me laugh coz my bras needa be pieces of armor, while theirs
>> were, @ least then, unnecessary but pretty fashion accessories.
>>
>> trill
>> "astri" <inv...@example.com> wrote in message
>> news:Pine.BSI.4.64.07...@malasada.lava.net...
>>> the aa called to whine and yell and wail because she *needs* more
>>> clothes. she doesn't have enough clothes. most of the shirts she
>>> bought recently (in the last month, we've spend over $500 on clothes
>>> for her) are dress code violations at school because they're spaghetti
>>> straps. told her we wouldn't purchase any new clothes for her right
>>> now becaue we just bought her a bunch.
>>>
>>> told her she needs to live with the choices she made. it's too hard to
>>> do laundry at her tpeutic foster home (not least because they charge
>>> her $1 a load). she can't do laundry all the time. it's too hot to
>>> wear a sweater over her shirts. she *needs* clothes because she lost
>>> weight. suggested she wear to school some of her tshirts that are big
>>> on her right now and change into her new clothes after school. that was
>>> like suggesting she strip naked and stroll downtown.
>>>
>>> she talked with her tpist about this and her tpist understands and
>>> knows she needs clothes. told her could talk to her tpist to clarify
>>> the reality of what has gone on. wails that we always do this, talk to
>>> her counselors and ruin things. told her that if she's going to talk
>>> to her tpist and then use what her tpist says in conversations then
>>> will tell her therapist our position so her tpist can counsel regarding
>>> reality (maybe too strong, but was 40 minutes into being berated).
>>>
>>> wants an accounting of how we are spending *her* money. it's only fair
>>> because it's her money from her dead parent. no, it's the state's
>>> money and we don't owe her an accounting.
>>>
>>> we're treating her like she hasn't changed. we always do this.
>>>
>>> round and round and round, cycling through the same stuff. tried to
>>> get off phone for 10 minutes. she wouldn't let. finally had to tell
>>> her was bedtime and time to hang up and then do so. phone rang again.
>>> unplugged all the phones. cell phone range. turned off cell phones.
>>>
>>> feel like under siege.
>>>
astri
> whew!
>
> glad to hear that.
>
> trill
thank you
luthe
I hope you don't have to take her back ever. I know that sounds callous (sp?)
but she's not treating you like family. I don't think she's ever going to *get*
what family is.
> (
nicky
--
For more information about this posting service, contact:
he...@asarian-host.net -- for all info about our server.
If you want an anonymous account, visit our sign-up page:
astri
> That sounds so rotten, astri :( I am sorry you;re having to deal
> with this.
thank you
> I hope you don't have to take her back ever. I know that sounds
> callous (sp?) but she's not treating you like family. I don't think
> she's ever going to *get* what family is.
oh, she's prolly treating us like *her* family
:P~
>> (
>
> nicky
Baba Yaga
>On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Baba Yaga wrote:
>> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>>
>> [...]
>>> dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
>>> they certainly won't kick her out for it
>>
>> No. But from what you've said of the foster mthr, I suspect she'll
>> find some way of evening the score.
>
>if it happened in the presence of the foster mthr
<<sigh>>
us.
Baba Yaga
>swear we didn't read this before writing our own response!
Seems three of us thunk somewhat similarly.
Baba Yaga et al.
Baba Yaga
>wails: but i'm a teeeennnaaaaaaaaaagerrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!
Very apparently.
>as if that excuses living with choices
<<sigh>> And if it was not that, it would be some other excuse.
>found out family tpy scheduled for tuesday is just with c and us
>tpist wants to meet separately with the aa
>before bringing us together
>fine
>eventually we're going to need to deal with this stuff, tho
Yes. Socks.
Baba Yaga
Baba Yaga
>maybe part of the issue is that humans are social animals. we run in
>packs. that's pretty powerfully ingrained. maybe the need to maintain
>the role in the pack does have the impact of leading us frequently to
>choose the altruistic action? maybe it's when folks are on the fringes
>of the pack (including the bottom and *top* levels of the social
>hierarchy) that this role-maintenance thing doesn't work as well to
>push to altruism.
Yes. And hierarchies are local. Not just one big one.
Us.
astri
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007, Baba Yaga wrote:
>>> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>> dunno what impact it will have on her living situation
>>>> they certainly won't kick her out for it
>>>
>>> No. But from what you've said of the foster mthr, I suspect she'll
>>> find some way of evening the score.
>>
>> if it happened in the presence of the foster mthr
>
> <<sigh>>
>
> us.
yes
astri
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>
>> swear we didn't read this before writing our own response!
>
> Seems three of us thunk somewhat similarly.
>
> Baba Yaga et al.
heh
astri
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>
>> wails: but i'm a teeeennnaaaaaaaaaagerrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!
>
> Very apparently.
>
>> as if that excuses living with choices
>
> <<sigh>> And if it was not that, it would be some other excuse.
yes
>> found out family tpy scheduled for tuesday is just with c and us
>> tpist wants to meet separately with the aa
>> before bringing us together
>> fine
>> eventually we're going to need to deal with this stuff, tho
>
> Yes. Socks.
gotta be done, tho
astri
>
>> maybe part of the issue is that humans are social animals. we run
>> in packs. that's pretty powerfully ingrained. maybe the need to
>> maintain the role in the pack does have the impact of leading us
>> frequently to choose the altruistic action? maybe it's when folks
>> are on the fringes of the pack (including the bottom and *top*
>> levels of the social hierarchy) that this role-maintenance thing
>> doesn't work as well to push to altruism.
>
> Yes. And hierarchies are local. Not just one big one.
>
> Us.
yes
emerging butterfly
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
> >> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, emerging butterfly wrote:
> >>> On Oct 25, 8:08 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
>
> >>>>> untrue, and you know it. hold onto this. you have acknowledged her
> >>>>> change. you have been generous with her. this is a symptom she is
> >>>>> acting out. a symptom. you have seen more of the composed "real"
> >>>>> her recently. remember that this is not the person you are talking
> >>>>> to now.
>
> >>>> not really convinced the calmer her is the "real" her. she slides
> >>>> so easily to this stuff.
>
> >>> idealistically hoping there is a *real* her in there that has some
> >>> reason. Don't like to think the *real* anyone is histrionic like
> >>> this.
>
> >> no, don't like to think it. but the force is powerful in that one, it
> >> is.
>
> > in that one...sorry, missed what you're referring to. the force is
> > powerful in that one the aa?
>
> yes. sorry. it was a star wars reference (yoda).
>
> > i was thinking about this today, and it brought up one of those
> > questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
> > underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
>
> begs the question as to what is self.
>
> but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always goodness.
> think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that humans are all
> born with the capacity to do both great good and great evil. we think
> that any self that develops along the way would be a reflection of the
> sum of impact of experiences in combination with innate temperament.
If it's always purely the sum of impact of experience and innate
temperament, then free will doesn't really exist.
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
> ======================- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
emerging butterfly
> Emerging Butterfly <emerging.butter...@hotmail.com> wrote, in
> alt.support.dissociation:
>
> >i was thinking about this today, and it brought up one of those
> >questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
> >underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
>
>
> Frankl told the story of a doctor at Steinhof hospital, in Vienna, who
> helped (enthusiastically helped - Frankl describes him as having been
> the "epitome of evil") to start off the h***c**st, and later - in a
> Stalinist prison - "lived up to the highest conceivable moral
> standard".
>
> My bet is that much the same traits - solidarity with the group is an
> obvious candidate - interacted with environment to create first evil,
> and then good.
Hmm. So conformity with the group was the biggest decider of behavior?
>
> Baba Yaga
emerging butterfly
> the valerians <tess-valer...@juno.com> wrote, in
> alt.support.dissociation:
>
> [astri]
>
> >>but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always goodness.
> >>think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that humans are all
> >>born with the capacity to do both great good and great evil. we think
> >>that any self that develops along the way would be a reflection of the
> >>sum of impact of experiences in combination with innate temperament.
>
> >the world than bad. why is that, if there is no inner urging toward
> >goodness?
>
> There undoubtedly is! and it shines through the ages.
>
> However, there's also an inner urging towards darkness.
>
> There's also just urging towards the things which make life
> comfortable for a social animal - love and co-operation and and
> comradeship.
>
> We're also biased to see the good in one another, and excuse the bad.
>
> If one looks, the ages have been littered with the tolerance of great
> evil, by people living lives which on the local scale are good.
> Take...
>
> spoiler for graphic instances of man's inhumanity to man
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
> '
>
> the popularity of Roman circuses, public hangings and heretic burnings
> as public entertainment; the blitheness with which 'decent' people
> wish rape on those in prison; the willingness to believe that
> 'trhosepeople' belong in institutions, and the preferential belief in
> authority over its victims; the inquisition; housewives complaining
> that the smoke from the death camp chimneys dirtied their washing;
> genocide in Rwanda, the casualness with which we overlook 'forced
> labour' and slavery in producing our toys ...
yes. it's troubling. I like to drink Coke Zero lately. Someone told me
of her boycott of all Coke products, because workers are treated very
unethically who work for Coke companies.
But....I like the taste!
But....Everyone buys coke; who am I to stop it?
But....everyone does this; it must be okay.
But....if I boycotted every company that does unethical things, I'd
have to probly sew my own clothes and such, and I don't know how to
sew, nor do I wish to learn!
but....
So I bought the coke.
And....I wish I wasn't this person who is addicted to "stuff", who is
so embedded in a culture that has such distance from the practices
that create our goods and services.
I realize I can't deal with it all right now, which feels like a
justification, but it's also...true.
I don't know how to change my whole lifestyle, how to respond to all
the ethical outrage about me.
Ideally, I would not buy any product that I would not wish our
society, at large, to condone.
I can't seem to do that yet.
So, here I am, someone who, on a local scale, tries very hard to do
good, do right. And I am plagued with questions of the ethics of
things I honor on a larger scale. But the ev*l I condone is as close
as my refrigerator, in a beverage I drink mindlessly most of the time.
>
> People are capable of great good, and most prefer active good to
> active evil (which does not prevent them from doing active evil *in
> the name of* good). But passive evil, the neglect of active good
> which doesn't happen to bring reward with it (I may give Amnesty their
> couple of quid a month, but I'm not writing the letters which really
> make the difference), the corrupting of goodness to ill ...
yup.
>
> Yes, it's a craphoot. In times of stability, the dice are a little
> loaded in favour of good, but that's all.
astri
don't think it's as black and white as that.
for one thing, "reflection of sum" does not necessarily equal "purely
the sum."
for another, people exist (from birth) in a dynamic, ongoing interplay
of self and other. people act to create their environments as much as
their environments create them (no, this is absolutely not a statement
that should be read as children make people ab*se them).
besides, at the level that we think matters (the level of the
individual's beliefs about experience), free choice certainly does
exist, and is not trivial.
that being said, certainly not *all* choice is free.
emerging butterfly
> On Oct 27, 8:40 am, the valerians <tess-valer...@juno.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 19:28:12 -1000, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> > >On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
> > >> On Oct 25, 8:41 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> > >>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, emerging butterfly wrote:
> > >>>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
>
> > >>>>>> untrue, and you know it. hold onto this. you have acknowledged her
> > >>>>>> change. you have been generous with her. this is a symptom she is
> > >>>>>> acting out. a symptom. you have seen more of the composed "real"
> > >>>>>> her recently. remember that this is not the person you are talking
> > >>>>>> to now.
>
> > >>>>> not really convinced the calmer her is the "real" her. she slides
> > >>>>> so easily to this stuff.
>
> > >>>> idealistically hoping there is a *real* her in there that has some
> > >>>> reason. Don't like to think the *real* anyone is histrionic like
> > >>>> this.
>
> > >>> no, don't like to think it. but the force is powerful in that one, it
> > >>> is.
>
> > >> in that one...sorry, missed what you're referring to. the force is
> > >> powerful in that one the aa?
>
> > >yes. sorry. it was a star wars reference (yoda).
>
> > >> questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
> > >> underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
>
> > >begs the question as to what is self.
>
> > >but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always goodness.
> > >think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that humans are all
> > >born with the capacity to do both great good and great evil. we think
> > >that any self that develops along the way would be a reflection of the
> > >sum of impact of experiences in combination with innate temperament.
>
> > the world than bad. why is that, if there is no inner urging toward
> > goodness?
>
>
> > >-- astri
>
> > > ======================
> > > to email send to astri
> > > ======================
> > > at volcano dot org
> > > ======================
>
> from seeing it around me, that living things are driven to live as
> peacefully as possible, simply for their own well being. the drives
> that cause them to become violent (in these cases violence is a
> natural response, not an evil) are natural. territory, mating, group
> leadership (which is about healthiest strongest leading the group, not
> an ego driven thing like it often is in humans). animals avoid
> confrontation. they avoid danger. they really do spend an enormous
> amount of time talking to one another, running around in play,
> gathering food, sleeping... all the regular stuff. so i think that the
> natural inherent urging in all animals is towards peaceful
> coexistence, beyond the obvious natural survival needs. i know there
> are abberations. jane goodall wrote about a group of chimps who were
> violent and preyed on other chimp groups for no apparent natural
> reason. i think humans have assigned words to what are, by and large,
> natural behaviors. squirrels don't think they are good if they don't
> beat up other squirrels. they just are being squirrels doing their
> squirrel things. i also think that it is the human capacity for self
> awareness that opens the doors to the stuff that becomes good or evil.
> i think we are pretty much born perfect animals. but i also think that
> our self awareness adds a huge wrinkle to what we choose to do and the
> reasons we come up with for why we choose those things.
>
> i saw my son as a newborn and i am here to say that there is nothing
> quite so perfect as a new life. babies are all desire. desire for
> food, comfort, caring. but there is nothing evil in a newborn. you
> mentioned once that your rlgs upbringing believed that humans are born
> inherently bad or something along those lines. it struck me that this
> was a human thought reaction to the open, natural desires that babies
> exhibit. they want the breast.they grab everything. they are curious
> about everything, including body functions. they don't know from
> shame. but if a bunch of messed up adult humans have decided that
> these natural behaviors are icky or bad then they could assign humans
> with the burden of being born s*nful. babies don't know from s*n.
>
> when i tutor these little second graders i watch them. they have
> problems. but there is nothing bad about them. many of them are
> terribly needy. and this may end up with them becoming angry and
> hurtful adults. but i have not met a single child who i thought was
> bad or wanted to be bad. i think that is an assignment that comes
> after humans have failed to care for and nurture their own. i don't
> mean to imply that humans aren't capable of great evil. but i also
> think that there is always a reason and that the evil we see is a
> symptom of broken children who become broken adults. alice miller
> wrote a book about a variety of famous ppl and connected their
> childhoods to their later lives. i don't remember everyone she wrote
> about but picasso, buster keaton and hitler were some of them. it was
> a very very good book.
Okay. So I worked with kids with the school district out here for
awhile. And there were these two kids I worked with, a brother and
sister, who both seemed to be growing into ev*l to me. I know this is
not a politically correct assessment. I know that, as they were
brother and sister in a troubled family, the connection to their
background is *very* apparent.
But these kids....I worry about them. Worried about them. This little
girl, a fifth grader, perfectly emulated my m*ther's intonations in so
many ways...the intonations she used when being calculating, choosing
ev*l. It was evident in little things and big.
The brother, a sixth grader...Very calculating, vindictive. Both of
them regularly bullied others, deceived, took control of their
surroundings.
I cared much about this brother and sister. I talked with their mom
about behaviors and things I could do to help. The girl and I talked
and devised a system where she could write to me in a notebook when
she was having a hard day and didn't feel like talking, and I could
write back. I had good times with both of them. But there was this
pervasive sense of....bad to what they did. It appeared to be for the
purpose of control of their environment and obtaining what they
wanted. But some of it was...it appeared that they took a certain joy
and delight in humiliating others.
This little "case study"....really makes me wonder.
Any thoughts?
>
> anyway, the whole blah blah i am saying is that i really believe that,
> minus possible genetic flukes (which is an area in which i know
> absolutely nothing), i think humans desire to be positive and whole
> and loving. i think that is the natural order. unfortunately we also
> have the capacity for using our unique abilities to do great evil.
>
> betsy- Hide quoted text -
astri
> yes. it's troubling. I like to drink Coke Zero lately. Someone told me
> of her boycott of all Coke products, because workers are treated very
> unethically who work for Coke companies.
> But....I like the taste!
> But....Everyone buys coke; who am I to stop it?
> But....everyone does this; it must be okay.
> But....if I boycotted every company that does unethical things, I'd
> have to probly sew my own clothes and such, and I don't know how to
> sew, nor do I wish to learn!
> but....
> So I bought the coke.
>
> And....I wish I wasn't this person who is addicted to "stuff", who is
> so embedded in a culture that has such distance from the practices
> that create our goods and services.
it's hard to move from the culture in which one is born and raised.
> I realize I can't deal with it all right now, which feels like a
> justification, but it's also...true.
it is true.
we have to choose our battles. and those of us who are engaged in a
life and d*ath struggle on a highly personal level just do not have
sufficient energy to engage in similarly difficult battles on a larger
level.
> I don't know how to change my whole lifestyle, how to respond to all
> the ethical outrage about me.
small changes are the only thing one can do successfully. and,
eventually, successive small changes actually do end up making a
difference.
> Ideally, I would not buy any product that I would not wish our
> society, at large, to condone.
> I can't seem to do that yet.
you're not in any position to refrain from purchasing most products in
existence.
> So, here I am, someone who, on a local scale, tries very hard to do
> good, do right.
and that is a good thing, not to be dismissed.
> And I am plagued with questions of the ethics of things I honor on a
> larger scale. But the ev*l I condone is as close as my refrigerator,
> in a beverage I drink mindlessly most of the time.
but you think of it sometimes, which is more than most do. conscious
action must be preceded by thought. sometimes action follows slowly,
when it follows. this is not wrong.
astri
> Okay. So I worked with kids with the school district out here for
> awhile. And there were these two kids I worked with, a brother and
> sister, who both seemed to be growing into ev*l to me. I know this is
> not a politically correct assessment. I know that, as they were
> brother and sister in a troubled family, the connection to their
> background is *very* apparent.
if there are insufficient counter-influences, such an environment
eventually does impact the core of the child. some children do grow
into evil.
> But these kids....I worry about them. Worried about them. This little
> girl, a fifth grader, perfectly emulated my m*ther's intonations in so
> many ways...the intonations she used when being calculating, choosing
> ev*l. It was evident in little things and big.
> The brother, a sixth grader...Very calculating, vindictive. Both of
> them regularly bullied others, deceived, took control of their
> surroundings.
these are not good signs.
> I cared much about this brother and sister. I talked with their mom
> about behaviors and things I could do to help. The girl and I talked
> and devised a system where she could write to me in a notebook when
> she was having a hard day and didn't feel like talking, and I could
> write back. I had good times with both of them. But there was this
> pervasive sense of....bad to what they did. It appeared to be for the
> purpose of control of their environment and obtaining what they
> wanted. But some of it was...it appeared that they took a certain joy
> and delight in humiliating others.
perhaps in later years, they will be able to reach back to your
influence and change their course. perhaps at some point they will
lose the joy of humiliation. perhaps not. you will likely never know.
but it is true that sometimes a single person can help to change the
course of a life for the better.
> This little "case study"....really makes me wonder.
> Any thoughts?
-- astri
emerging butterfly
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, emerging butterfly wrote:
> > On Oct 26, 11:28 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> >> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007, Emerging Butterfly wrote:
> >>> On Oct 25, 8:41 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, emerging butterfly wrote:
>
> >>> i was thinking about this today, and it brought up one of those
> >>> questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
> >>> underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
>
> >> begs the question as to what is self.
>
> >> but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always
> >> goodness. think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that
> >> humans are all born with the capacity to do both great good and
> >> great evil. we think that any self that develops along the way
> >> would be a reflection of the sum of impact of experiences in
> >> combination with innate temperament.
>
> > If it's always purely the sum of impact of experience and innate
> > temperament, then free will doesn't really exist.
>
> don't think it's as black and white as that.
>
> for one thing, "reflection of sum" does not necessarily equal "purely
> the sum."
ahh. i thought you meant purely the sum, since in saying reflection of
sum, you did not say it is reflection of anything else.
>
> for another, people exist (from birth) in a dynamic, ongoing interplay
> of self and other.
Yes.
people act to create their environments as much as
> their environments create them (no, this is absolutely not a statement
> that should be read as children make people ab*se them).
Right. But if people create environments through the sum of innate
temperament and how other experiences affected them...see what I mean?
>
> besides, at the level that we think matters (the level of the
> individual's beliefs about experience), free choice certainly does
> exist, and is not trivial.
>
> that being said, certainly not *all* choice is free.
Agreed. I believe that different people have different sets of choices
they can make, based on circumstances and internal resources available
to them at that time. So not every person has the same degree of free
choice.
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
emerging butterfly
> On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, emerging butterfly wrote:
> > yes. it's troubling. I like to drink Coke Zero lately. Someone told me
> > of her boycott of all Coke products, because workers are treated very
> > unethically who work for Coke companies.
> > But....I like the taste!
> > But....Everyone buys coke; who am I to stop it?
> > But....everyone does this; it must be okay.
> > But....if I boycotted every company that does unethical things, I'd
> > have to probly sew my own clothes and such, and I don't know how to
> > sew, nor do I wish to learn!
> > but....
> > So I bought the coke.
>
> > And....I wish I wasn't this person who is addicted to "stuff", who is
> > so embedded in a culture that has such distance from the practices
> > that create our goods and services.
>
> it's hard to move from the culture in which one is born and raised.
Yes. Very true.
>
> > I realize I can't deal with it all right now, which feels like a
> > justification, but it's also...true.
>
> it is true.
Yes. Choosing battles. Can't do them all at once, or would
disintegrate. Little pleasures, like Coke, are *very* important to the
inside kids, who used to have things ripped away from them.
>
> we have to choose our battles. and those of us who are engaged in a
> life and d*ath struggle on a highly personal level just do not have
> sufficient energy to engage in similarly difficult battles on a larger
> level.
Okay.
>
> > I don't know how to change my whole lifestyle, how to respond to all
> > the ethical outrage about me.
>
> small changes are the only thing one can do successfully.
Yes.
and,
> eventually, successive small changes actually do end up making a
> difference.
Okay. This helps.
>
> > Ideally, I would not buy any product that I would not wish our
> > society, at large, to condone.
> > I can't seem to do that yet.
>
> you're not in any position to refrain from purchasing most products in
> existence.
Doesn't seem I am!
>
> > So, here I am, someone who, on a local scale, tries very hard to do
> > good, do right.
>
> and that is a good thing, not to be dismissed.
Thank you. We try to be good girl. I really like coke!!! is special
treat. nobody can take away. i get mad when people tell me i can't
drink soda, or eat what i want. the coke is coke-zero, so no calories,
but we still like. N nobody can tell me not to drink it!! But I don't
want drinking it to mean I'm selfish.
But my treats are very important to me. Sometimes, when mickey or
lauren or someone else inside offers me a coke or ice cream or
something? it actually makes me not want to d*e at right that moment.
it means they're taking care of me.
>
> > And I am plagued with questions of the ethics of things I honor on a
> > larger scale. But the ev*l I condone is as close as my refrigerator,
> > in a beverage I drink mindlessly most of the time.
>
> but you think of it sometimes, which is more than most do. conscious
> action must be preceded by thought. sometimes action follows slowly,
> when it follows. this is not wrong.
Yes. Thank you.
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
emerging butterfly
i hope. sometimes, they successfully manipulated me too. Often, they
did. I wanted to believe in good, to believe they were telling the
truth. Too often, I was simply another object in their enviornment to
be manipulated. I hope I made some person-to-person connection. It was
hard, because it was almost constant manipulation. Even my efforts at
connecting elicited so much manipulation in return, that it was hard.
Sometimes it became hard to be kind.
astri
the corner you're painting depends on the equation
innate temperament + experiences = universe
think that equation needs to read something more like
innate temperament + experiences + x = universe
x right now is undefined
>> besides, at the level that we think matters (the level of the
>> individual's beliefs about experience), free choice certainly does
>> exist, and is not trivial.
>>
>> that being said, certainly not *all* choice is free.
>
> Agreed. I believe that different people have different sets of
> choices they can make, based on circumstances and internal resources
> available to them at that time. So not every person has the same
> degree of free choice.
and degrees of freedom of choice for future action are narrowed by the
taking of choices in the present.
astri
this is important
astri
yes, it would be.
unfortunately, if the family doesn't change then the children
frequently don't change.
(btw, if we disappear, we've gone off with c and sir lala watching a
video)
Emerging Butterfly
Yes. I actually wasn't personally advocating this viewpoint, but
clarifying what I thought yours was before you gave the clarification
you gave.
>
> think that equation needs to read something more like
> innate temperament + experiences + x = universe
>
> x right now is undefined
Yes.
>
> >> besides, at the level that we think matters (the level of the
> >> individual's beliefs about experience), free choice certainly does
> >> exist, and is not trivial.
>
> >> that being said, certainly not *all* choice is free.
>
> > Agreed. I believe that different people have different sets of
> > choices they can make, based on circumstances and internal resources
> > available to them at that time. So not every person has the same
> > degree of free choice.
>
> and degrees of freedom of choice for future action are narrowed by the
> taking of choices in the present.
Ahh. Good point. Every time I choose an unhealthy action in the
present, I increase the likelihood that I will make the wrong choice
in the future. And the choices I make now impact my environment in the
future.
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
Emerging Butterfly
I appreciate you telling me! Sometimes we look for you when we've been
talking, n we don't know if you left or what happened. Thanks.
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
> ======================- Hide quoted text -
astri
yes
astri
well, we're back again for a little
then it's time for calvin and hobbes
and then we'll prolly be back again
Emerging Butterfly
okay
>
> -- astri
>
> ======================
> to email send to astri
> ======================
> at volcano dot org
Baba Yaga
alt.support.dissociation:
>yes. it's troubling. I like to drink Coke Zero lately. Someone told me
>of her boycott of all Coke products, because workers are treated very
>unethically who work for Coke companies.
>But....I like the taste!
<<g>> I don't. But I wouldn't drink it if I did.
It's even one of the things I won't get the children, even if they
ask. (The only other time that's come up so far has been w.r.t.
sweets made by Nestlé. I don't *approve of /Disney Princess/, but one
can't be rigid with children.)
>But....Everyone buys coke; who am I to stop it?
>But....everyone does this; it must be okay.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!
[Political side-note: That's one very good reason for boycotts. *Not
everyone does it.]
[Another side-note: Better is actively to choose the ethical
alternative, of course, but we all do what we can.]
>But....if I boycotted every company that does unethical things, I'd
>have to probly sew my own clothes and such, and I don't know how to
>sew, nor do I wish to learn!
Well, one can't boycott every company which does unethical things. Too
many do! But one can buy one's clothing from charity/thrift shops, or
from fair trade companies, and one can at least ensure that one's
luxuries are ethically produced - or at least, ensure that one doesn't
*knowingly collude with immorality in the production of one's
luxuries.
>but....
>So I bought the coke.
>
>And....I wish I wasn't this person who is addicted to "stuff", who is
>so embedded in a culture that has such distance from the practices
>that create our goods and services.
Moi aussi. But here we are.
>I realize I can't deal with it all right now, which feels like a
>justification, but it's also...true.
One can't always. And it's important to know when one can't.
On the plus side, awareness is a beginnning. The seed which lies
dormant until the right conditions exist.
>I don't know how to change my whole lifestyle, how to respond to all
>the ethical outrage about me.
Good god! One can't. One changes one thing a month, or one thing
however often one finds a manageable way to do it, and gradually the
revolution happens.
We can't realistically live lives free of exploitation. "The rich are
pensioners of the poor".
We can strive to diminish that exploitation. We can refuse to collude
in exploitation by the biggest companies (who drive the markets, and
lead the way in business practice).
And we can do it at our own pace. Do one thing rather than none, but
*not burden ourselves with the whole world's misery, which we
>Ideally, I would not buy any product that I would not wish our
>society, at large, to condone.
>I can't seem to do that yet.
I can't live up to that yet, and I've been into the old ethical
consumption for *years. The ideal is a boundary condition; like the
pole star, one navigates by it, progresses towards it, but doesn't
expect to reach it.
>So, here I am, someone who, on a local scale, tries very hard to do
>good, do right. And I am plagued with questions of the ethics of
>things I honor on a larger scale. But the ev*l I condone is as close
>as my refrigerator, in a beverage I drink mindlessly most of the time.
And when you're ready, you'll stop doing. Or find a better
substitute. You're aware and awake - thats a seed. Give it the right
conditions, it'll grow.
Baba Yaga
>
>>> found out family tpy scheduled for tuesday is just with c and us
>>> tpist wants to meet separately with the aa
>>> before bringing us together
>>> fine
>>> eventually we're going to need to deal with this stuff, tho
>>
>> Yes. Socks.
>
>gotta be done, tho
True. 8-|
Baba Yaga
alt.support.dissociation:
>On Oct 26, 11:28 pm, astri <inva...@example.com> wrote:
[.....]
>> but i kind of doubt the idea that underneath it all is always goodness.
>> think (somewhat along the lines of what baba wrote) that humans are all
>> born with the capacity to do both great good and great evil. we think
>> that any self that develops along the way would be a reflection of the
>> sum of impact of experiences in combination with innate temperament.
>
>If it's always purely the sum of impact of experience and innate
>temperament, then free will doesn't really exist.
It may not!
OTOH, it may, and it's practically (i.e., in practice) pretty close to
impossible to do without the concept. Either way, what we *call 'free
will' is actually constrained will - highly constrained. (It's even
constrained by how much we believe we have free will.)
One may also argue a distinction between 'self' and actions (albeit a
very fine distinction). Temperament/ physiology/ experience may
conspire to make one a bad-tempered drunk, but one can at least be a
bad-tempered drunk who doesn't drink, and therefore doesn't pick
fights. That's free will, so far as matters.
Baba Yaga
alt.support.dissociation:
>On Oct 27, 6:38 am, Baba Yaga <spamd...@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
>> Emerging Butterfly <emerging.butter...@hotmail.com> wrote, in
>> alt.support.dissociation:
>>
>> >i was thinking about this today, and it brought up one of those
>> >questions that fascinates me: Does everyone have a valid "Self"
>> >underneath it all that is good, true, authentic, kind?
>>
>> I doubt it.
>>
>> Frankl told the story of a doctor at Steinhof hospital, in Vienna, who
>> helped (enthusiastically helped - Frankl describes him as having been
>> the "epitome of evil") to start off the h***c**st, and later - in a
>> Stalinist prison - "lived up to the highest conceivable moral
>> standard".
>>
>> My bet is that much the same traits - solidarity with the group is an
>> obvious candidate - interacted with environment to create first evil,
>> and then good.
>
>Hmm. So conformity with the group was the biggest decider of behavior?
<pedant>Solidarity /= conformity (although there's a close
relationship).</pedant> I also don't know about *biggest decider -
only that it's fairly clear that that was a dominant cultural
influence at the time and place, and it's easily apparent how that
would play both into the evil of extinguishing those identified as
*not of the group, and the good of being a great support to those
identified as being part of the group.
Baba Yaga
alt.support.dissociation:
>x-no-archive: yes
>x-no-archive: yes
>
>
>On Oct 27, 6:42 am, Baba Yaga <spamd...@phonecoop.coop> wrote:
>> emerging butterfly <michaela...@hotmail.com> wrote, in
>> alt.support.dissociation:
>>
>> >idealistically hoping there is a *real* her in there that has some
>> >reason. Don't like to think the *real* anyone is histrionic like this.
>>
>> Dunno about *the real, because real changes with circumstance and time
>> and suchlike, but a real (someone) - whyever not??
>
>Well...CS Lewis writes about how we deduce knowledge of how others
>work. N he says it's like deducing what other people get in their
>envelopes in the mail. (Not a perfect analogy, but stay with me here!)
>N he says, one can only see into one's own envelope. (analogy for
And that *highly* imperfectly.
>one's own mind and inner workings versus the mind and inner workings
>of others)
>So...in my personal envelope, if I am acting histrionic, or really
>selfish, or whatever....there seems to be a pull toward good, toward
>something in me that is satisfied only when I feel like I'm "real", at
>peace somehow....And in these times, I'm quieter. Softer. More in
>touch with myself and able to see others without reacting out of my
>own needs. It's a soft self. It feels more genuine than all the other
>versions of me, because the other versions are acting so much on fear
>and past pr*gramming.
Understood.
Must be said, that speaks a lot to your own decency.
>And...I wonder if others, too, have a centered self they can, in
>varying degrees throughout their life, come back to.
>Does that make any sense?
Yes! There's truth in that. That which comes of training *against
one's nature, or conformity to demands running across one's grain,
does seem significantly less real than that which comes of
'authenticity (to coin a phrase 8-|). [1]
And to be sure, a person 'at peace' is unlikely to behave in vile
ways. But one's not-peace, one's demands and clamour, one's
programming, one's fear may reasonably be part of one's real self. Not
those glued on by vileness, necessarily, so much as those intrinsic to
the basic demands of living.
Looking inside my envelope, my monstrous side is as essential to me as
cumin is to a good curry. And not all for ill! It is because I have
the deep awarenes of my capacity to be a monster that I strive so hard
to be otherwise - rather than blowing where I list, with vague and
unspecific good intentions. I can't claim that only my 'centred',
peaceful self is real, without denying the reality of the past 24
years, by which I've arrived at having such a self!
Additionally, one can see the *seeds of AA-type behaviour in the
focussed, 'centred', wholesome pursuit by a toddler of its needs. That
brand of selfitude is real, and instinct in us, given suc envronments
as encourage it.
>And....when I reply to you, would you like me to x-no-archive the
>replies? (Both deeply philosophical questions!)
Heh. No. Thanks for asking!
Baba Yaga
alt.support.dissociation:
>Okay. So I worked with kids with the school district out here for
>awhile. And there were these two kids I worked with, a brother and
>sister, who both seemed to be growing into ev*l to me. I know this is
>not a politically correct assessment. I know that, as they were
>brother and sister in a troubled family, the connection to their
>background is *very* apparent.
Evil begets evil.
>But these kids....I worry about them. Worried about them. This little
>girl, a fifth grader, perfectly emulated my m*ther's intonations in so
>many ways...the intonations she used when being calculating, choosing
>ev*l. It was evident in little things and big.
>The brother, a sixth grader...Very calculating, vindictive. Both of
>them regularly bullied others, deceived, took control of their
>surroundings.
>I cared much about this brother and sister. I talked with their mom
>about behaviors and things I could do to help. The girl and I talked
>and devised a system where she could write to me in a notebook when
>she was having a hard day and didn't feel like talking, and I could
>write back. I had good times with both of them. But there was this
That may yet stand them in excellent stead, when they're older and
somewhast removed from the home environment.
>pervasive sense of....bad to what they did. It appeared to be for the
>purpose of control of their environment and obtaining what they
>wanted. But some of it was...it appeared that they took a certain joy
>and delight in humiliating others.
Children very often do, particularly if they have not been taught to
understand others' humanity as like in kind to their own.
>This little "case study"....really makes me wonder.
>Any thoughts?
Besides "poor little bleeders", none.
Baba Yaga
alt.support.dissociation:
[...]
>Thank you. We try to be good girl. I really like coke!!! is special
>treat. nobody can take away. i get mad when people tell me i can't
>drink soda, or eat what i want. the coke is coke-zero, so no calories,
>but we still like. N nobody can tell me not to drink it!! But I don't
>want drinking it to mean I'm selfish.
Perhaps Michaela could write to the company and protest their lack of
ethics?
>But my treats are very important to me. Sometimes, when mickey or
>lauren or someone else inside offers me a coke or ice cream or
>something? it actually makes me not want to d*e at right that moment.
>it means they're taking care of me.
This is important. Until you can find a substitute which does the
same for you, that may be a battle better not fought.
astri
> astri <inv...@example.com> wrote, in alt.support.dissociation:
>
>>>> found out family tpy scheduled for tuesday is just with c and us
>>>> tpist wants to meet separately with the aa
>>>> before bringing us together
>>>> fine
>>>> eventually we're going to need to deal with this stuff, tho
>>>
>>> Yes. Socks.
>>
>> gotta be done, tho
>
> True. 8-|
hope we can handle it without melting again.