![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 37 to 61 of 63. Go back in thread:
Posted by Susan47 on August 22, 2004, at 19:48:05
In reply to Re: Everthing I wrote last night is best ignored. :( » Dinah, posted by JenStar on August 22, 2004, at 18:34:01
Posted by gardenergirl on August 22, 2004, at 19:59:33
In reply to Re: The real Dinah » gardenergirl, posted by Dinah on August 22, 2004, at 9:34:38
That's very sweet, Dinah. I wish the same for you.
Warmly,
gg
Posted by daisym on August 22, 2004, at 21:30:41
In reply to Re: The real Dinah » Dinah, posted by gardenergirl on August 22, 2004, at 19:59:33
I think being genuine really means knowing yourself and DECIDING when and with whom you "let it all hang out." I don't want most people to see my vulnerabilities or my deep feelings. It is sort of like talking about sex...there are few people I really do that with. It is a difference in depth. There is surface me, and then there is inner me. I think the more I know myself and have accepted all parts of me, the better I can regulate those parts in any given situation.
I think that is the real value in being genuine. It allows you to choose, and to change. It is harder to change (and grow) if you are meeting everyone else's needs. Because who you are is dictated by who you think they want you to be. And if they change their mind, (grow too), you have to "guess" for awhile to become who you think they want again. It is much easier to know yourself but govern your action.
You and I have talked about marital fights. We both choose mostly to walk away. BUT, we know why we choose that and where we draw the line in the sand. That is a genuine choice. It works for the main part of ourselves for private reasons.
I think you are on a path to authenticity that gets painful sometimes. I'm on that same path. The "real" you needs to make the journey. But, you aren't going to ever find the cave that the "real" you is hiding in. Because the journey is what it's about, not the destination.
Hugs from me.
Daisy
Posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 1:57:05
In reply to A slightly different take, posted by daisym on August 22, 2004, at 21:30:41
After a few nights of little sleep, I think I'm going to have to pull an all nighter to get out the work that was supposed to be out last week. :(
I'm not going to think about the stuff due at the end of this week.Right now I'm buzzing like crazy, so I may have to crash tomorrow. But I'll be back soon. I didn't want anyone to think I was purposefully ignoring.
Posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 11:08:30
In reply to Re: Everthing I wrote last night is best ignored. :( » JenStar, posted by Susan47 on August 22, 2004, at 19:44:12
Yes, I do know what you mean. I think that's why I usually try to 'go slow' when meeting someone new (apart from those risky/frisky times!) I know that I personally tend to get overwhelmed and then back away when I learn too much too soon, and see the same from others. But if I go slow, those same things that were overwhelming or off-putting or just down-right scary become easier to handle.
It reminds me of the famous saying about the frog in boiling water: (sorry for the bad paraphrase!) If you put a frog into a pot of boiling water, he will try mightily to leap out. However, if you put a frog into a pot of cool water and heat it up to boiling, he will stay in there and cook.
So I suppose the parallel I'm making is...getting to know me is perhaps like a frog (YOU) getting slowly boiled (getting to know all about me!)
That's a really negative comparison, though. I'm going to have to come up with something that hits the same note but sounds a lot more positive...
JenStar
Posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 11:08:59
In reply to JenStar you're very eloquent (nm), posted by Susan47 on August 22, 2004, at 19:48:05
Posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 11:20:06
In reply to Re: What is the point of being genuine? » tabitha, posted by Dinah on August 22, 2004, at 0:15:41
Dinah,
your emotional color view is very interesting to me! It sounds very thorough.I've read about people who mentally assign color to alphabetic letters or to musical tones from the time they are babies (for some, "A" can be bright blue, etc.)
Do you have color-assignations in other places besides emotion?
JenStar
> I have trouble with middle ground too. Like Linehan's wise mind.
>
> And I wouldn't exactly say Fake Dinah suppresses all feelings or doesn't express any. It's just the relatively limited range of emotions that helped get me labelled schizotypal. Dinah Who Is As She Should Be does righteous indignation superbly. :) And definitely has a better sense of humor than Dinah Who Is As She Is.
>
> Long before I could name my emotions, I used colors to describe them. I did this whole color wheel using a full range of crayola colors, with differing shades and intensities. Then I assigned a name to describe the color. The first few years in therapy, I'd consult the chart to say "I'm feeling brick red... ok that's resentful." Anyway, Fake Dinah has a full range of emotions, but in the bright glittery range. Excitement, amusement, irritation, indignation. Real Dinah has a full range of emotions in the warmer range - and darn it I still can't describe those well. But lavender rather than blue, or crimson rather than fire truck red.
>
> Ohhhh, I'm not making any sense even to myself.
>
> What you said made perfect sense, and when I read it I couldn't figure out why on earth I wouldn't want that for myself. I'm going to have to think about it more.
Posted by Susan47 on August 23, 2004, at 12:00:53
In reply to Re: Everthing I wrote last night is best ignored. :( » Susan47, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 11:08:30
Actually I really thought the analogy worked. Isn't that how we get into bad relationships? Best foot forward, moving too fast, next thing you know you're boiled.
Posted by AuntieMel on August 23, 2004, at 12:39:44
In reply to Re: Everthing I wrote last night is best ignored. :( » Dinah, posted by JenStar on August 22, 2004, at 18:34:01
One thing you wrote caught my attention:
"Sometimes I used to feel despair at work because I felt that the 'real' person was becoming too far buried under the lacquer of the 'socially acceptable' person. I didn't LIKE the lacquer (some people do like it...bully for them, right?) and started feeling suffocated."
In cases like that I LOVE the lacquer. I don't WANT to be up close and personal with people I work with. That part of me is saved for the few. And for the most part workmates aren't part of the few. It would be just too uncomfortable if they found a part of the "real" me that they thought strange. Laugh, joke, get along and do my work.
Imagine their surprise, though, when I had my breakdown, spent a few days in the hospital and took 4 months medical leave.
Posted by Miss Honeychurch on August 23, 2004, at 13:48:11
In reply to What is the point of being genuine?, posted by Dinah on August 21, 2004, at 10:34:18
Dinah,
Do you think you could possibly be thinking TOO much? Be analyzing TOO much?? I simply ask this because one of the first things I blurted out in therpay was that I was the biggest phony on the planet and did such a wonderful snow job on everyone I met whom I exposed to the fake Laurel and never let them see the "real" Laurel. In short, I was genuine with no one.
I think a lot of this had to do with my depression and the more that lifted, and the more I got to like myself better, the more I realized that that the phony Laurel was in fact part of the real Laurel. I was not being disingenuous at all. I think I also stopped analyzing a lot of stuff and just let myself "be."
I have trained my husband to no longer use shoulds - he was a huge proponent of that. It has made life a lot easier for me and our relationship as a result.
So I guess I just want to say to give yourself a break and let yourself be. Make ANY sense?
Posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 18:39:52
In reply to Re: What is the point of being genuine?, posted by Miss Honeychurch on August 23, 2004, at 13:48:11
I'm still processing, but I have a preliminary question.
Does being fake require more energy? It's as easy as falling off a log for me. It's keeping access to my emotions open that is enormously difficult. Give me something to read, or a piece of work to concentrate on, and those emotions are gone and not to be seen again unless I really work at it.
Is the usual experience the other way round?
Posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 18:45:12
In reply to Re: What is the point of being genuine?, posted by Miss Honeychurch on August 23, 2004, at 13:48:11
My husband is the king of the shoulds. And that's not transference on my part. Every mental health professional we've ever seen has picked up on it in a nano second. Even his parents fuss at him to relax a bit.
He's a wonderful man who holds himself to the same high standards he holds others to. He's perhaps a bit too intelligent, he's got willpower exuding from his pores, and I think he assumes that if he can do something (or rather, everything), everyone should be able to. I reap the benefits of his own perfection (smile), so I have to pay the price of him expecting an awful lot from his family.
Posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 19:30:37
In reply to A question please? For any/every one, posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 18:39:52
I think it requires "hidden energy" to be fake.
It's easy to do (for me, anyway!), once I get in the groove, but I think it takes an invisible toll on the mind and the psyche and the spirit.
Kind of like air pollution: You can't really see it (unless you live in Mex. City or LA or similar) but it's there nonetheless, slowly blackening your lungs and irritating your airways and wreaking havoc on the mast cells...until one day you wake up with asthma.
Kind of a slow sapping of the energy, no?
I agree that it takes incredible up-front strength to be genuine and honestly TRUE, especially if it's a risky situation where you face potential rejection of any kind and where it actually matters to you what people think of the 'real you.' It's also hard to do if you've fallen into the habit of agreeing to be agreeable, and yes-ing to be liked, and acquiescing to keep the peace -- breaking out of a comfortable known routine is never easy.
In the end, though, I believe that after you get over the activation energy of being honest, that it's downhill from there in terms of 'ease of use.'
This is -- of course -- largely hpyothetical for me, since I am not usually in the habit of being truly ME in many situations, although I am dying to do it!
Take care.
Write again when you feel up for it!JenStar
Posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 19:59:29
In reply to Re: What is the point of being genuine?, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 11:20:06
No, it's just emotions. :)
It came early in therapy when my therapist would ask me to stop periodically during the day and write down what I was feeling. And I just couldn't do it. I'd come in with entries that read "ok", and he'd say ok wasn't a feeling. I didn't understand why ok wasn't a feeling. I was at a total loss to come up with words, other than obvious ones like nervous or anxious. So he gave me a list of emotion words. And I was still at a loss. My vocabulary was wide enough to understand the meaning of the words, but applying them to myself was totally beyond my abilities.
So I finally came up with the color wheel. It was very detailed and intricate. I used my crayola box, and the list of emotion words, and my memory of feelings. It was a *really* big deal for me in those days. My therapist was *so* excited. I was actually admitting to feelings other than "ok".
I guess the idea came from the way I perceive others, oh.. "auras" or something. Not exactly auras. But I pick up on moods pretty well, and have always tended to assign colors to them in my mind. I don't actually *see* colors, but I... Drat. I can't explain. But like my father often seemed surrounded by a black cloud with bolts of red lightning. Not that I literally saw a cloud, but... And my therapist is usually some shade of blue. Not that I literally *see* blue, but... Oh heck.
Posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 20:10:30
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » Dinah, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 19:30:37
It's hard for me, even when I'm alone. I tend to be sort of schizotypal/Aspergerish unless I really really work at accessing my emotions. It's not just an effort to be myself when with others. It's an effort to be myself when I'm with myself.
OMG! If I'm unemotional and pragmatic at rest, does that mean...?!!! Maybe I should stop trying to be emotional and start trying to be myself. :)
Posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 23:37:29
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » JenStar, posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 20:10:30
Thanks for replying about the colors - I think it's kind of cool that you associate diff. colors with people. (If you ever meet me, I hope to be a pretty green-blue with hints of ocean spray white and deeper green!)
I don't know much about schizoid type personalities or asperger syndrome, although I've heard of them. I know I don't have those tendencies, but sometimes it's hard for me to be ME when alone too. I guess it's just that I don't know exactly who I am, or who I want to be, and when I think about it too much, it starts to creep me out.
It's like when I was a kid, contemplating the meaning of words: Why is a chair called a chair? And I'd look at the chair and say "Chair" over and over and over until "Chair" ceased to have any meaning, and it was kind of cool and interesting and frightening at the same time. I guess that's how I feel about "me" when alone!
Sometimes I have a zen-like attitude towards myself: Just stop thinking about it and BE myself. (I think Daisy said something similar in a previous post.) If I forget to think about it and just ACT, later on I can reflect on it and say, "Oh, yeah, I guess that's who I am."
the concept of self is so strange, really!
Anyway, thanks for sharing your ideas & thoughts.
Hope you're doing well!JenSTar
Posted by Dinah on August 24, 2004, at 20:28:38
In reply to What is the point of being genuine?, posted by Dinah on August 21, 2004, at 10:34:18
And for a few therapies to come, I think. :) Next time I'll print out this thread and discuss some of the concepts with him.
I still think the main problem is I'm looking for a way to effectively kill myself without causing any harm to others, the way an actual suicide would. By going back into deep hiding, and leaving only a superficial shell, I'll be effectively ending the pain of dealing with the world (and its inevitable losses), and I want to convince myself that no one will care. Because no one did last time. I don't mean that in any self pitying way. It's a completely accurate assessment of the situation. I think my therapist was the first person who noticed that anything was missing.
Posted by Larry Hoover on August 26, 2004, at 9:46:54
In reply to A question please? For any/every one, posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 18:39:52
> I'm still processing, but I have a preliminary question.
>
> Does being fake require more energy? It's as easy as falling off a log for me. It's keeping access to my emotions open that is enormously difficult. Give me something to read, or a piece of work to concentrate on, and those emotions are gone and not to be seen again unless I really work at it.
>
> Is the usual experience the other way round?Every way I try to give an answer to that question, I end up thinking about so many different factors that make my answer valid or not.....
The ability to move off into the realm of superficiality is not necessarily overtly an effort. In fact, I think it can be just like a habit, something you just tend to do, having learned it as a coping strategy some time in the past. The cost of doing so still exists....the cost in losing the true self....but it's like dissociation, to move away from feeling because the self is vulnerable.
I've heard it said that such people, those who live in the superficial, are human doings, not human beings.
When people habitually smoke tobacco, they're well aware of the cost of doing so, but it's easier to do it than to try and stop. It seems like a contradiction, but it's not. The cost, in "health units" this time, increases and remains at that increased level, the longer the "easier" path is taken.
So, what I'm trying to suggest is that the effort (in terms of cost, and the work required to undo the cost) is really not evident until one begins the journey back towards self-care. Before that, denial is the blinding force. You can't see the cost, because you don't want to look there.
Once you start to see what the true cost is, you can't unlook at it. You're on the path towards the center, and you can't go back to denial (OK, you can, but I think sanity itself goes away with that diversion). Since you can't go back, it might make sense to move along that path, as you're able.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on August 26, 2004, at 10:01:32
In reply to Re: Emotional colors » JenStar, posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 19:59:29
> No, it's just emotions. :)
>
> It came early in therapy when my therapist would ask me to stop periodically during the day and write down what I was feeling. And I just couldn't do it. I'd come in with entries that read "ok", and he'd say ok wasn't a feeling. I didn't understand why ok wasn't a feeling. I was at a total loss to come up with words, other than obvious ones like nervous or anxious. So he gave me a list of emotion words. And I was still at a loss. My vocabulary was wide enough to understand the meaning of the words, but applying them to myself was totally beyond my abilities.Oh, I understand you perfectly well. I was just the same way, oh, maybe fifteen years back. I had two states. OK. Not OK. I was given a page with very simple line drawings of different emotional states, like "tentative" and so on. I think there were 84 different faces depicted. Without the names, I could identify about 10. And in myself, not even that many.
It's like any other form of learning, I suppose. I needed "Emotional Language 101", plus a number of years of tutoring.
> So I finally came up with the color wheel. It was very detailed and intricate. I used my crayola box, and the list of emotion words, and my memory of feelings. It was a *really* big deal for me in those days. My therapist was *so* excited. I was actually admitting to feelings other than "ok".
Yes, but you were creating your own language for that palette of emotional states. An excellent start, but can you also translate? Are you bilingual?
> I guess the idea came from the way I perceive others, oh.. "auras" or something. Not exactly auras. But I pick up on moods pretty well, and have always tended to assign colors to them in my mind. I don't actually *see* colors, but I... Drat. I can't explain. But like my father often seemed surrounded by a black cloud with bolts of red lightning. Not that I literally saw a cloud, but... And my therapist is usually some shade of blue. Not that I literally *see* blue, but... Oh heck.No, that is very descriptive. My dad was black with red lightning, too. It was his rage that created the family's two-state system. OK was no rage. Not OK was rage present. I get it, totally.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on August 26, 2004, at 10:07:30
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » JenStar, posted by Dinah on August 23, 2004, at 20:10:30
> It's hard for me, even when I'm alone. I tend to be sort of schizotypal/Aspergerish unless I really really work at accessing my emotions. It's not just an effort to be myself when with others. It's an effort to be myself when I'm with myself.
>
> OMG! If I'm unemotional and pragmatic at rest, does that mean...?!!! Maybe I should stop trying to be emotional and start trying to be myself. :)I don't think labels like schizotypy or Asperger's are helpful. How about naive? Ignorant, in the true core sense, of just not knowing? Your husband's characteristic "shoulding" on you has facilitated your own tendency to not feel. There's a whole lot of interaction with your environment on this issue.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on August 26, 2004, at 10:08:02
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » Dinah, posted by JenStar on August 23, 2004, at 19:30:37
> I think it requires "hidden energy" to be fake.
>
> It's easy to do (for me, anyway!), once I get in the groove, but I think it takes an invisible toll on the mind and the psyche and the spirit.
>
> Kind of like air pollution: You can't really see it (unless you live in Mex. City or LA or similar) but it's there nonetheless, slowly blackening your lungs and irritating your airways and wreaking havoc on the mast cells...until one day you wake up with asthma.
>
> Kind of a slow sapping of the energy, no?
>
> I agree that it takes incredible up-front strength to be genuine and honestly TRUE, especially if it's a risky situation where you face potential rejection of any kind and where it actually matters to you what people think of the 'real you.' It's also hard to do if you've fallen into the habit of agreeing to be agreeable, and yes-ing to be liked, and acquiescing to keep the peace -- breaking out of a comfortable known routine is never easy.
>
> In the end, though, I believe that after you get over the activation energy of being honest, that it's downhill from there in terms of 'ease of use.'
>
> This is -- of course -- largely hpyothetical for me, since I am not usually in the habit of being truly ME in many situations, although I am dying to do it!
>
> Take care.
> Write again when you feel up for it!
>
> JenStarI think you nailed it, Jen.
Posted by Dinah on August 31, 2004, at 10:16:38
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » Dinah, posted by Larry Hoover on August 26, 2004, at 10:07:30
Lar, I want to thank you for your thoughtful posts. And they did make me think. :)
I really still can't see the energy involved in being the super-rational surface me. It seems like I'm always fighting and struggling to maintain access to my emotions, not trying to box them away. And sometimes it just doesn't seem worth the fight. You're right about the environment. But I had a big part in some of that. I was born into a family with too many emotional issues to want me to be real, to want me to present any additional trouble to the already precariously balanced family structure. It was my job to reduce stress, not increase it.
But I'm the one who chose my husband and the rest of the environmental factors that push against authenticity. I chose my husband while at my most rational, and it was a great choice for the most rational side of me. He's a lot like the most rational side of me, and we have a great time together. But he has enough trouble accepting my son as a little boy rather than a miniature man. He has less than no desire to accept the real me. He's a great guy in so very many ways. But striving to be authentic for him is a bad idea.
So I'm left wondering why on earth I bother. The people in my real life have no desire that I be other than smart and productive and maybe funny and enjoyable to be around. It feels like I'm expending all this effort in therapy so that I can be myself - but only in therapy. Maybe that's the main reason behind the push/pull at reducing therapy right now. If I don't have therapy to be real in, there's no point in being real. If I go from twice to once a week, my ability to access my emotions will be less and less, but I'll also have less and less reason to access my emotions.
I know that at some level I'm supposed to want to have access to my emotions for *myself*, but I just can't seem to summon up the enthusiasm if there's no real place to enjoy it and no others to enjoy it with me.
Plus, I'm a huge chicken. :) That's been the defining quality of my life. I run and hide. And I'm facing some big losses in the coming years. And some difficult situations and choices with my parents. I want to just burrow deep inside myself and hide till it's all over and it's relatively safe to come out.
Yet I suppose to some extent, I do want to keep the emotional integrity that I've fought so hard to achieve. So I waffle back and forth and am more conflicted than I'd like to be. If I weren't conflicted, I'd just go ahead and do it, wouldn't I?
I wish I weren't such a chicken. :(
And I did become much better with emotion names as I gained more and more access to my emotions. Although I frequently get preoccupied with getting *just* the right name, and get really frustrated when I can't access it, refusing to accept a good enough substitute. But I find I'm like that with words in general, not just emotion words.
Posted by Larry Hoover on September 2, 2004, at 7:14:22
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » Larry Hoover, posted by Dinah on August 31, 2004, at 10:16:38
> Lar, I want to thank you for your thoughtful posts. And they did make me think. :)
Excellent! You're welcome.
> I really still can't see the energy involved in being the super-rational surface me.It was a generalized statement, a projection, if you will. You are free to determine that a particular implication of such a statement does not apply to you.
> It seems like I'm always fighting and struggling to maintain access to my emotions, not trying to box them away.
That's certainly one energy cost. You may be so good at compartmentalizing the emotion that you are unaware of even doing it in real time situations. I well remember the first time I caught myself becoming angry, in real time. It used to so automagically get sucked into my anger pit (my storage area, where I once thought my anger went away....no, it was stored) that I thought I never even got angry. No, I didn't even recognize anger as an emotional state.
> And sometimes it just doesn't seem worth the fight.
That's a reasonable reaction, based on the effort required.
> You're right about the environment. But I had a big part in some of that. I was born into a family with too many emotional issues to want me to be real, to want me to present any additional trouble to the already precariously balanced family structure. It was my job to reduce stress, not increase it.
By that, you mean you were the fixer? Or the emotional punching-bag? I like family dynamic theory, and your own assessment of your role is the key to unlocking your emotions, if you wish to proceed. When I read "Bradshaw on: The Family", it totally unlocked my mind to the role I played in my family dysfunction. As second-born, I was the emotional scapegoat. All the negativity, all the blame, was mine. That's what makes me so conscious of rules. I so desparately needed to figure out the rules, as a child, but there were none.
Aside: One of the things that makes me a really good scientist is this ability. "What's wrong with this picture?" I recognize patterns, and things that don't fit the pattern, like they were fluorescent. A sucky childhood isn't all bad.
> But I'm the one who chose my husband and the rest of the environmental factors that push against authenticity.
It's easy to choose the familiar.
> I chose my husband while at my most rational, and it was a great choice for the most rational side of me. He's a lot like the most rational side of me, and we have a great time together. But he has enough trouble accepting my son as a little boy rather than a miniature man. He has less than no desire to accept the real me. He's a great guy in so very many ways. But striving to be authentic for him is a bad idea.
I gathered that, from your earlier posts. There are always costs when you change your own authenticity. I think he has made very clear how he likes you to be.
> So I'm left wondering why on earth I bother. The people in my real life have no desire that I be other than smart and productive and maybe funny and enjoyable to be around. It feels like I'm expending all this effort in therapy so that I can be myself - but only in therapy.
You have to start somewhere. And I honestly don't think the authentic you must necessarily threaten the ability to be smart, productive, funny, and enjoyable to be around. The dissatisfaction you've felt, all your life, but stored away to be found in these latter years, must be given voice somehow. It does make sense to do that in therapy. You'd quickly destroy any friendship if you burdened a friend with this outpouring. Think of your counsellor as a professional friend. You hire them to get mired in your muck with you, so that you can leave it there with them.
> Maybe that's the main reason behind the push/pull at reducing therapy right now. If I don't have therapy to be real in, there's no point in being real. If I go from twice to once a week, my ability to access my emotions will be less and less, but I'll also have less and less reason to access my emotions.
That begs the question: Why did you start therapy in the first place? Remember what that was about, and I'll bet you can answer your own question.
> I know that at some level I'm supposed to want to have access to my emotions for *myself*, but I just can't seem to summon up the enthusiasm if there's no real place to enjoy it and no others to enjoy it with me.
That can seem like it's an oxymoron, but it isn't really. Here's a simile to consider.
What if locking away your adverse emotions is like sweeping dirt under the rug? The first time you do it, you realize that you found a coping strategy with greater benefits than costs, so you repeat it later. Pretty soon, though, there's enough stuff swept under the rug that it starts to form a bulge. It's unsightly, so you try to put it out of your mind, and maybe you succeed. But then you find youself stumbling over the bulge, and maybe other people do as well. The coping strategy is starting to show its real costs, but you continue on as before. Cleaning up the bulge would require that you face the real mess under the rug, and that seems like a huge job. But the bulge grows more and more, and you find you can't ignore it, no matter how much you try to. You can't even walk near the bulge, as it is ugly and produces guilty thoughts. You can't even enjoy the beauty of the rug, or the room it once set off so nicely....
To me, therapy is like cleaning that pile out from under the rug. All that mess and dirt....Yucko!!! But you can't enjoy the beauty of the rug until after the yuck is taken care of. You face the yuck so you can get back to the carefree beauty of life.
> Plus, I'm a huge chicken. :) That's been the defining quality of my life. I run and hide. And I'm facing some big losses in the coming years.You used to run and hide. That is immutable history. Today, you have the opportunity to choose anew, to show yourself that you are not presently bound by past decisions. Losses come to everyone. Might as well pick some of them, from amongst the lot. Proactive living, rather than reactive "victim".
> And some difficult situations and choices with my parents. I want to just burrow deep inside myself and hide till it's all over and it's relatively safe to come out.
You will be hiding under that messy rug, I bet. ;-)
> Yet I suppose to some extent, I do want to keep the emotional integrity that I've fought so hard to achieve. So I waffle back and forth and am more conflicted than I'd like to be.You haven't met your unburdened self before. She's strange and scared and emotive. Ask her in for a cup of tea, and get to know her a bit. You'll find yourself becoming friends, and suprise of all surprises, her clothes fit you like a glove! Yay! A new emotional wardrobe!
> If I weren't conflicted, I'd just go ahead and do it, wouldn't I?
I think the real decision is to just go ahead, despite the conflict. FEAR is False Expectations Appearing Real. You only have one way to prove they're false. You act your way through fear. Fear is a thinking disease.
> I wish I weren't such a chicken. :(
You aren't. You just need a little coaching. Every Olympian has a coach. Every single one.
> And I did become much better with emotion names as I gained more and more access to my emotions.Of course you did. You really want to figure this all out. You're quite bright. What you had was a childhood that lacked suitable education.
> Although I frequently get preoccupied with getting *just* the right name, and get really frustrated when I can't access it, refusing to accept a good enough substitute.
That's a decision you can change. I grew up with "The Myth of the Perfect Person". It didn't matter how well I did something, there was always a flaw. Well, I *am so* good enough!
> But I find I'm like that with words in general, not just emotion words.
Habit, honey. Habits are broken by doing differently, not by thinking differently. "You act your way into a new way of thinking. You cannot think your way into a new way of acting."
Best,
Lar
Posted by gardenergirl on September 2, 2004, at 8:21:35
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » Dinah, posted by Larry Hoover on September 2, 2004, at 7:14:22
Wow, Lar. I think we are twins. So much of what you talk about regarding childhood and its effect really rang true for me. Thanks for additional insights.
> By that, you mean you were the fixer? Or the emotional punching-bag? I like family dynamic theory, and your own assessment of your role is the key to unlocking your emotions, if you wish to proceed. When I read "Bradshaw on: The Family", it totally unlocked my mind to the role I played in my family dysfunction. As second-born, I was the emotional scapegoat. All the negativity, all the blame, was mine. That's what makes me so conscious of rules. I so desparately needed to figure out the rules, as a child, but there were none.I was the second born, too, although these days, most people assume I am the oldest because my older brother is 40 going on 16. But I was the emotional scapegoad, too, probably because of my sensitivity. And rules...don't get me started. Rules set by an alcoholic and enforced by a narcissist...crazy-making! I'm such a rules-follower--except for parking :).
>
> Aside: One of the things that makes me a really good scientist is this ability. "What's wrong with this picture?" I recognize patterns, and things that don't fit the pattern, like they were fluorescent. A sucky childhood isn't all bad.Wow, I have this ability, too, but others see it as a negative. I'm great at pointing out what doesn't fit a pattern or anticipating problems. Doesn't necessarily make me negative, I don't think. I think it pays to think ahead about consequences and avoid disasters. Hmmm, childhood disasters???
>
>
> To me, therapy is like cleaning that pile out from under the rug. All that mess and dirt....Yucko!!! But you can't enjoy the beauty of the rug until after the yuck is taken care of. You face the yuck so you can get back to the carefree beauty of life.What a great metaphor! I tend to sweep projects under the rug, too, when they get overwhelming. Dissertations make huge bulges!
>
> That's a decision you can change. I grew up with "The Myth of the Perfect Person". It didn't matter how well I did something, there was always a flaw. Well, I *am so* good enough!Oh I know this myth well. Even into my 30's when I went back to school, my father asked about my grades and chastised me for getting one B. That was a real eye-opener.
Thanks, Lar. Great words!
gg
Posted by Larry Hoover on September 2, 2004, at 9:00:37
In reply to Re: A question please? For any/every one » Larry Hoover, posted by gardenergirl on September 2, 2004, at 8:21:35
> Oh I know this myth well. Even into my 30's when I went back to school, my father asked about my grades and chastised me for getting one B. That was a real eye-opener.
I internalized that same attitude. I won an academic award for being first in my class. My lowest grades were two A- scores (but each also won an academic award, as first in that program), yet there I was, getting the award in front of all my peers, my family, at convocation, and all I could think about was how my average grade was *only* 91.2.....where had those other marks gone? How could I have done better? Geez.
> Thanks, Lar. Great words!
>
> ggYou're oh so welcome.
Lar
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Psychology | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.