Reflections on validation needs
Nov. 17th, 2003 12:23 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jayOr, why I went about dragging myself into an ongoing local social feud, since last spring... but this is not an attempt to reopen those several lines of discussion. This is a note for myself, for future reference when I find myself slipping back into a susceptible state. It is difficult to discuss, and embarrassing.
One comment at the time byfirecat stuck meme-like in my head, through the summer. I've lost the link, but it was posted in a community somewhere... something along the lines of it being common to see people trying to manipulate others for their advantage, but perplexing to see someone so intent on manipulating others for his disadvantage. At the time, I shrugged it off as more snarkiness from the nebulous other side.
About a month ago, I suddenly came to the realization that she had been correct... and with more contemplation, I realized why I'd been motivated towards apparently self-destructive behaviors. When I'm depressed, or overly stressed, I'm highly self-critical. Sometimes that self-criticism comes out in my writing, although I've done better lately about filtering it. I didn't start the local cliqueishness or feuding, the current episode started in mid-2002. What I did was to drag myself into it -- looking for validation of my self-criticism, and hence of my view of reality. A control issue.
In other words, if I think I'm an unworthy schmuck, but friends tell me otherwise, there's a conflict in views of what's real about myself. One way of reassuring myself that I'm still well-grounded and in control is to find corroborating evidence. And there existed a small-c community of individuals who were easily prodded into giving me that evidence... all it took was an outrageous statement or two, or simply taking an unpopular stance in a public forum, and lots of people were happy to tell me what an unworthy schmuck I was. Thereby validating my internal models of myself. Hence there was a gain for me in so doing.
There are perhaps analogues with other power games, or roleplaying... someone volunteering to be punished because they've been a bad boy, say... but out in a public forum, there is no safeword, no way to extract oneself when the piling-on becomes unbearable. So, apart from the ethics involved in nonconsensual manipulation, this is not a practical validation approach, either.
The manipulation is/was still offensive... I can't defend that. But I can remind myself of what my motivations were, in order to intercept those in the future, or be aware of which states of mind are likely to be susceptible. And remind myself to let go of the need to be right, even right about my self-views. So far, it has worked... twice this fall I've pulled back from posting things after questioning my motives. But it will require vigilance, and probably help from friends if it seems like I'm backsliding.
And other actions... first and foremost, personal apologies to those who were nearest-and-dearest at those times, or were caught up as collateral damage.patgreene, dawnd, geekchick immediately come to mind. I have talked to all of them personally. And while it is probably too late to ever be on friendly terms with some of the people on the other side, given their own behaviors, I want to try to bridge-build a bit, and reestablish contact with those folks who weren't particularly nasty to me at the time.
And no, I'm not a worthless schmuck, either, and this isn't an exercise in self-flagellation. Or grovelling, either. I suppose it is another [expletive] growth experience, perhaps. I'm too competent and capable otherwise to keep sabotaging myself in this fashion.
One comment at the time by
firecat stuck meme-like in my head, through the summer. I've lost the link, but it was posted in a community somewhere... something along the lines of it being common to see people trying to manipulate others for their advantage, but perplexing to see someone so intent on manipulating others for his disadvantage. At the time, I shrugged it off as more snarkiness from the nebulous other side. About a month ago, I suddenly came to the realization that she had been correct... and with more contemplation, I realized why I'd been motivated towards apparently self-destructive behaviors. When I'm depressed, or overly stressed, I'm highly self-critical. Sometimes that self-criticism comes out in my writing, although I've done better lately about filtering it. I didn't start the local cliqueishness or feuding, the current episode started in mid-2002. What I did was to drag myself into it -- looking for validation of my self-criticism, and hence of my view of reality. A control issue.
In other words, if I think I'm an unworthy schmuck, but friends tell me otherwise, there's a conflict in views of what's real about myself. One way of reassuring myself that I'm still well-grounded and in control is to find corroborating evidence. And there existed a small-c community of individuals who were easily prodded into giving me that evidence... all it took was an outrageous statement or two, or simply taking an unpopular stance in a public forum, and lots of people were happy to tell me what an unworthy schmuck I was. Thereby validating my internal models of myself. Hence there was a gain for me in so doing.
There are perhaps analogues with other power games, or roleplaying... someone volunteering to be punished because they've been a bad boy, say... but out in a public forum, there is no safeword, no way to extract oneself when the piling-on becomes unbearable. So, apart from the ethics involved in nonconsensual manipulation, this is not a practical validation approach, either.
The manipulation is/was still offensive... I can't defend that. But I can remind myself of what my motivations were, in order to intercept those in the future, or be aware of which states of mind are likely to be susceptible. And remind myself to let go of the need to be right, even right about my self-views. So far, it has worked... twice this fall I've pulled back from posting things after questioning my motives. But it will require vigilance, and probably help from friends if it seems like I'm backsliding.
And other actions... first and foremost, personal apologies to those who were nearest-and-dearest at those times, or were caught up as collateral damage.
patgreene, dawnd, geekchick immediately come to mind. I have talked to all of them personally. And while it is probably too late to ever be on friendly terms with some of the people on the other side, given their own behaviors, I want to try to bridge-build a bit, and reestablish contact with those folks who weren't particularly nasty to me at the time. And no, I'm not a worthless schmuck, either, and this isn't an exercise in self-flagellation. Or grovelling, either. I suppose it is another [expletive] growth experience, perhaps. I'm too competent and capable otherwise to keep sabotaging myself in this fashion.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 06:14 am (UTC)"...and my own"?
??
Date: 2003-11-17 07:22 am (UTC)Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 07:28 am (UTC)(Brian, please do correct me if any of this is misstating things, in your view.)
Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 07:36 am (UTC)Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 08:44 am (UTC)I had felt that "and my own" was a given, since that was the context of the whole entry... I'm certainly not disavowing responsibility for my stuff in this discussion.
Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 08:50 am (UTC)Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 09:13 am (UTC)Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 09:16 am (UTC)Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 08:27 am (UTC)Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 08:45 am (UTC)ROFL
you ROCK, Brian.
:)
Re: ??
Date: 2003-11-17 10:13 am (UTC)-J
no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 07:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 07:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 09:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 09:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 08:54 am (UTC)I read this as indicating a continuing level of discomfort on his part with some people. Of course, I have the benefit of twenty-odd years of experience with him, so it may be the language is unclear and I don't see it.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 08:57 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 09:08 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 09:11 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 09:16 am (UTC)good insights
Date: 2003-11-17 07:34 am (UTC)Oy. *seeble* This one is extremely difficult for some of us. :^/ I'm glad it's working for you. Keep at it!
And thanks for the apology. I certainly shot myself in the foot enough in that whole process, but I'll agree that my initial involvement could probably be labeled "collateral damage." Although I still think it was in extremely bad taste (at the very least) to essentially attack you in your own journal, it seems that the original inflammatory comment to which I responded wasn't so far off the mark after all. :^/ I think I learned a thing or two out of that whole debacle, and it looks like you have too. Hopefully, this is true for all of the involved parties, as I'd hate to think that that much pain and anger was all for naught.
Re: good insights
Date: 2003-11-17 08:55 am (UTC)I still feel guilty feelings sometimes regarding your involvement -- had you not initially tried to separate the combatants, as it were, you likely wouldn't have made the subsequent controversial post on
Re: good insights
Date: 2003-11-17 10:41 am (UTC)It's still not all about you, Brian. ;^)
While I appreciate the sentiment of feeling bad about "dragging me into it," it's probably mostly misplaced. Although I certainly didn't know the full background (seeing as how I haven't read that list for, oh, about 6 years), otherwise I walked into it with my eyes open. My actions in posting that thing in
But I TOTALLY agree that had the original feeback been less inflammatory, it would have been far more likely that you would have "gotten it" sooner. Unvarnished truth, wielded as a weapon, makes a particularly poor learning vehicle. I try to take that into account whenever I feel the urge these days to level some particularly juicy sarcasm at someone--It's more likely to make someone defensive and to close their ears than to educate them.
Re: good insights
Date: 2003-11-17 10:49 am (UTC)Re: good insights
Date: 2003-11-17 09:07 am (UTC)Yes and no. Which inflammatory comment? There was one that was nothing short of quite nasty. There was another which was not nasty but which was attacking in nature (and I think we agree on the propriety of using someone's personal journal to slam them) which may be the one that you responded to. And the follow up to your reply, in essence stating that Brian will never change, he's a hoplessly manipulative schmuck, was off the mark. (It was phrased as "I have never seen any evidence of change..." but implied "....and there is not likely to ever be any, either.") And the continuing insistence of some other parties to refuse to allow Brian any opportunity to demonstrate change -- i.e., with the episode in August -- is not his responsibility.
Re: good insights
Date: 2003-11-17 11:01 am (UTC)I was thinking of the one in Brian's journal that said something more or less like "Oh, so this doesn't have ANYTHING to do with you!" concluding with, IIRC, something like "get a damn clue." Brian DID need to get a clue, and the situation WAS partially of his own making--as he has written here. Although the correctness of that does not excuse the nastiness with which it was delivered.
In the follow-up to my comment, I'll agree that that person seemed to be not allowing for any possibility of change. But they correctly pointed out that nowhere in Brian's original post was there anything that he said about change--it was all about regressing to older, warier behaviors, in fact. What *I* was commenting on was what I'd seen IRL, and I didn't make that sufficiently clear (until a later comment, which was probably seen as backpedalling and "spin" by many, rather than as the true statement that it was).
I will definitely agree that there seems to be a coterie of folk that have formed an opinion about Brian* that does not allow for growth or change. I can only assume that this is some sort of safety making behavior on their parts, since it seems otherwise inexplicable to me. Nevertheless, it makes it an uphill battle at best for Brian to see the necessity for change, and to implement it, given that he must fight a huge tide of resistance at every turn. Frustrating indeed.
* (and apparently they also hold unfavorable opinions about me and about Akien, among others, though I usually only hear this second-or third-hand--very few folk indeed have had the guts/temerity to speak about this to my face or even directly through e-mail or LJ)
no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 08:39 am (UTC)it is really learning about yourself, what makes you tick, what you do unconsciously, discovering more about how to make conscious choices, instead of falling into old patterns. Realizing that there are other ways to feel content and validated in this world, than to confirm old icky beliefs about yourself that were never true,... and are not true now.
(they are called self-fulfilling prophecies.... I think?)
it's a REALLY big lesson, and very empowering.
congratulations!
I enjoyed seeing this post, and learning of your progress.
it's really good stuff!
no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 09:01 am (UTC)(grin) consider yourself lucky. And I'd appreciate it if you'd gently remind me if it looks like I'm being unusually provocative -- not that I expect my friends to be responsible for restraining my impulses, but I could use occasional help in shedding these old patterns.
Realizing that there are other ways to feel content and validated
Different, less-destructive kinds of validation, at least.
no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 08:18 pm (UTC)something I think is kinda funky....
I call you on it right away?
:)
I'm that kind of girl.
sure.. I'll keep it up.....
and.. its not being "responsible" for you. it's being a 'support'.
:)
no subject
Date: 2003-11-17 10:49 pm (UTC)