Lilith was the good one.

The Garden of Eden? A 'Just So' story invented by the rich and powerful to keep the masses in check.

sleeping in Sunday school

Johnny was not the best student in Sunday school - he usually slept through class.

One day the teacher called on him while he was napping,
"Tell me, Johnny, who created the universe?"

When Johnny didn't stir, Mary, an altruistic girl seated in the chair behind him, took a pin and jabbed him in the butt.

"God Almighty!" shouted Johnny.
The teacher said, "Very good,” and Johnny fell back to sleep.

A while later the teacher asked Johnny, "Who is our Lord and Savior?"
Johnny didn't wake.

Once again, Mary came to the rescue and stuck him with the pin.
"Jesus Christ!" shouted Johnny.
The teacher said, "Very good.”
Johnny fell back to sleep.

Then the teacher asked Johnny a third question, "What did Eve say to Adam after she had her twenty-third child?"
Again, Mary jabbed him with the pin.

This time Johnny jumped up and shouted,
"If you stick that damn thing in me one more time, I'll break it in half!"

:-)

Why men began the power and dominance thing

Because they *could* - why else? Usual answer, for nearly *any* damn question. Kind of like the chicken crossing the road – duh! Nobody ever actually *thought* about it – humans are practically *legendary* for *not* thinking (“People would rather die than think – in fact, they often do.” ~Bertrand Russell)

So the Lilith story is more of the same – all about power and domination.

Litith called bullshit on their game and wouldn’t submit, so they ‘cast her out’ and found a more complacent, compliant one to take her place. What they *didn’t* know was what the long-term ramifications of this (really fucking *stupid*) ‘choice’ would be... (‘choice’ implying that there was actual ‘thinking’ involved, as opposed to, say, just yet another pissing contest - JESUS h CHRIST on a toothpick, but men have managed to totally fuck up this here once-gorgeous ball of mud.

YES I’m pissed, what the hell do you *think*???

PISSED.

pissed off

pissing contest.

Hm.

Lilith: more word origins

Name 'Lily' = purity.

So does 'Lilith'.

Yet Lilith is cast as the 'evil' one, the 'fallen' one.

But - why, then, does she retain the name of purity?
Hm. Maybe the story *means* to convey that she was *once* pure, and to point up the - besmirchment? of her 'good name'.


From http://lilithproject.blogspot.com/

***
In the spirit of 'know thy enemy', looooong quote from http://meta-religion.com/World_Religions/Ancient_religions/Mesopotamia/lilith_unveiled.htm:

While Lilith has origins within the Kabbalah, the Talmud, and loose associations with the Bible, she undoubtedly makes her initial appearance as the Sumerian goddess of dark winds, Lil, and the Babylonian demoness Lilitu. The Lilitu was a handmaiden to the savior goddess Inana, known to stand at the gateway of Inana’s temple and invite worshipers to enter the inner sanctum for blessings and sexual delights. (Temple prostitution was common-place in ancient Mesopotamia and Egypt, as well as to the Hindus.)

Eventually, in her role as handmaiden, Lilitu becomes obsessed with abducting infant children and drinking their blood in order to steal away their precious life force. It was believed that by the Jewish practice of circumcision, Lilith would not harm infants in their crib. In this role she is mentioned as a negative entity in the Sumerian ‘Epic of Gilgamesh’. In the ancient tale of Gilgamesh and the Huluppu Tree, Lilith takes up residence in the sacred tree of Inana on the banks of the Euphrates. The hero Gilgamesh sees this deception and makes her retreat into the desert wastelands.

Lilah is also the Hebrew word for ‘night’, her name related to lilim, literally meaning ‘demon’. Lilit is the Hebrew word designated for a nocturnal screech owl. In the Canaanite rituals she was also known as Baalat, or the ‘divine lady,’ who was a female version to the Egyptian/Babylonian Baal, Bel, Apis, and Osiris. Another role is that of the god Ashtoreth, who could take on the duel position of being both male and female entities depending on the time period and region of worship.

Lilith is still worshiped in the modern era in the form of Beltane/Mayday rituals which take place from May 1st-5th. The midnight hour on April 30th starts the ‘pagan’ festivities known as ‘Lilith’s Eve’, in dedication to this demoness. There is a Greek version of Lilith as the goddess Lamia, who bore children to Zeus; after which, the children were murdered by Hera in a fit of jealousy. To exact revenge, Lamia becomes a mass murderer of children and joins forces with the demon daughters of Hecate known as the Empusae. These beings were known to tempt men with erotic dreams during sleep and steal away their life force, not only through metaphysical means, but also by stealing their semen during orgasm.

In the Zohar, the principle text of the mystical Kabbalah, it suggests that Lilith’s powers are at their peak during the waning of the moon. She is often depicted as a dark, yet radiant vixen of the night, with luxuriously flowing black hair, a milky and fair complexion, and eyes which shine as the moon doth shine. Another Hebrew name of Lilith is that of Agrat bat Mahalat, who was said to be the governess over 180,000 different races of demons.

She would often tempt Talmudic scholars with erotic dreams, driving them insane and stealing their souls. Lilith, while being a goddess of fertility and sexuality, was also connected with being the bringer of bareness and desert wastelands. Her sacred flowers were that of the rose, and the poppy, used for making opium. In classic occult tradition the red rose represents female sexuality, while the white rose is the metaphor of the pure, or virgin goddess. In this relation it should be noted that in the ancient Canaanite ritual sacrifices to Ashtoreth and Baal, red rose petals were sprinkled on the consecrated altar before blood was shed. After the sacrifice had taken place, white petals were scattered in order to represent the new found purity believed to have been born from human or animal sacrifice.

When Lilith was banished from Eden, she was reported to have fled into a hidden cave along the banks of the Red Sea, after which she breeds a multitude of demonic races and curses upon the earth. In fact, Lilith is known as the mother of all shape-shifting creatures and forms of demonic entity, including Vampires, Fairies, Elves, Trolls, Ogres, and a vast variety of other blood-drinking beasts and supernatural forms throughout mythology. Tradition even holds that once Cain was cast from the Garden for sacrificing his brother, Abel, to the supreme god Yahweh, he met Lilith in her cave, and thus according to some researchers, Cain is the father of all Vampire races.

While Lilith was known for having sexual exploits with a variety of demons to create her ‘Satanic’ offspring (in Muslim legend Lilith is even said to have mated with Satan in order to produce the mysterious race of Djinn, or ‘Genies’ of the magic lamp), she was also believed to have the ability to give birth to one-hundred beastly children each day with her main consort, the demon-god Samael, or alternatively, Asmodeus. In the folklore of witchcraft Lilith is one of the figures associated with ‘drawing down the moon’, and she was said to meet with other witches and succubi at the “Mountains of Darkness.” Astute researcher of witchcraft, Rosemary Ellen Guiley, states in her book ‘Encyclopedia of Witches and Witchcraft’:

“In addition to Jewish folklore, the Lilith demon appears in Iranian, Babylonian, Mexican, Greek, Arab, English, German, Oriental and north American Indian legends. She is sometimes associated with other characters in legend and myth, including the Queen of Sheba and Helen of Troy. In medieval Europe she was often portrayed as the wife, concubine or grandmother of Satan. In the late 17th Century she was described as a screech owl, blind by day, who sucked the breasts or navels of young children or the dugs of goats.”

In Hebrew the name Asmodeus literally means ‘evil spirit’. He was the king of demons noted for having three heads that faced in three different directions, and in this sense he is a physical form of the Luciferian Trinity. One head is depicted as a bull, one as a ram, and the third head was that of a hideous ogre. His legs and feet were that of a rooster, and he often rode on a fire breathing lion.

The feet of the cock represents ritual sacrifice and signifies high stature for demonic entities. Asmodeus is primarily the god of unsatiable lust, but is also associated with wrath and revenge. He usually appears as a apparitional spirit in bedrooms, almost always materializing in hybrid form. He is also said to be, in actuality, the fallen angel Samael. There are many tales in which this demon king is recognized as one of the main enemies of King Solomon.

In one instance, Solomon and Asmodeus are having a philosophical discussion about the nature of good and evil, when Asmodeus tricks the usually wise Solomon into removing his magical ring. The demon king laughs in triumph and throws the magical ring into the sea, after which Solomon immediately finds himself in another life as a lowly beggar. One night, while Solomon is preparing dinner for his new king, he cuts into a fish and out pops the magical ring from the fish’s stomach. Once Solomon puts the ring back on, he resumes his previous life as the King of the Israelites, awakening in his bed to find it had all only been a dream. Despite the fact that Asmodeus sought to destroy Solomon, the Hebrew king learned a valuable lesson from the demon lord in this instance.

Just as Asmodeus is often interchangeable with Satan himself in some traditions, and is a representative of the deadly sin of lust, so too are the other entities of the seven deadly sins sometimes interconnected with the being known as ‘Satan’. The seven deadly sins were first classified by St. Gregory in the 6th Century. Aside from Asmodeus, the deadly sins are as follows: Pride-Lucifer, Avarice-Mammon, Envy-Leviathan, Gluttony-Beelzelbub, Anger-Satan, and Sloth-Belphegor. Opposing these negative characteristics are Pride-Humility, Avarice-Sufficiency, Lust-Chastity, Envy-Charity, Gluttony-Sobriety, Anger-Patience, and Sloth-Diligence. It is apparent that many of these demons are merely different names for Lucifer, and Beelzebub, lord of the flies, and Belphegor, are variations of the Babylonian sun god Bel. Beelzebub comes from the Semitic Zebub which means “a fly”, and the figure of Baal-Sebul became the “Lord of the Flies”.

Lilith too is a noted adversary of King Solomon, as she appears to him one night in order to tempt him while he is studying the holy texts. She appears in a voluptuous sexual form to try and persuade Solomon to lay with her, but upon Solomon dragging the demoness before a mirror, she cast no reflection and quickly retreated at the realization that she had no form. As punishment for her unnatural crimes against humanity, the children of Lilith were scattered across all the planes of space and time; some even bound to their own dimension in order to keep them from dwelling in the earthly realms. A quick note about the Hebrew Solomon- the root of Sol equates with the meaning of the word ‘Sun’, as does the holy capital city of Sion. In this sense we have the ‘wisdom’ and light of the sun which scatters out the forces of ‘darkness’ represented by Lilith and her demonic husband Asmodeus.

As already mentioned, along with Lilith there is a long line of females and figures that take on a very Lilithinian role in their respective cultures and religions. The Hebrew-Babylonian Ashtoreth is one example, as are the Greek Gorgon-Medusa, Venus, Aphrodite and Artemis. They all take on specific characteristics of Lilith, and vice-verse. Medusa, an opposing composite of the goddess Athena, and possibly the most well known of the Lilithinian counterparts, was said to have the horrible face of a gorgon, long flowing hair made of serpents, and could turn men to stone if they gazed upon her hideous features.

However, Medusa was not always a hideous demon, but was once a beautiful woman who claimed to be even more gorgeous than the goddess Athena herself. One day, at the temple of Athena, Medusa was raped by the god Neptune. Out of bitter anger at this defilement of her sacred altar, Athena cursed Medusa to be a disgusting beast with hair made from a serpent’s nest. Medusa became a feared and powerful enemy to many of the lesser Greek gods, but was eventually defeated by Perseus when he battled her with a mirrored shield (created by the Olympian god of the black-smiths, Hephaistos), in which Medusa saw her own reflection and was turned to stone. This ties in heavily with the myth of Solomon besting Lilith with a mirror that made her flee his presence. While some goddesses such as Inana, Isis, Artemis, Semiramis, Aphrodite, Diana and Venus might be more fluently recognized and worshiped through a mass variety of cults in ancient cultures, it is Lilith who holds the distinct classification of being the mother of all demons.

The ancient Semitic goddess Astarte, or Ashtoreth, is another figure connected with the rituals to Lilith and the burning of effigies on the full moon, and the birth of spring time. Ashtoreth is the goddess of fertility, war, love, and the keeper of ancient secrets and is typically shown as wearing a horned headdress. She was the Babylonian counterpart to Ishtar; Solomon even built a temple in honor of her near Jerusalem.

To the Amorites, and Phoenicians, this figure was known as the mother goddess Aserah, or ‘Lady Aserah of the sea’; much as Isis and the Virgin Mary are known as the ‘Star of the Sea’. Her name literally translates as ‘grove’. She is directly related to the god Baal (The Lord), and even puts one of her own offspring on the throne of this god as his representative (similar to the Isis/Osiris/Horus triad in Egyptian mythology). Aserah is the prime Canaanite and Phoenician goddess of fertility, ritual, and human sacrifice. Enormous horned, wooden statues were erected in her honor. She is seen as the main competition, along with Baal worship, to the monotheistic Hebrew god Yahweh.

Baal, or Bel, himself is the earth bound offspring of the supreme god El, or Chronos to the Greeks, and Saturn to the Romans. Other titles attributed to this god are Dagon and Molech. His name meant “Time”, and to many different cultures he represented the superior deity of worship. Much as the Egyptian Amon-Re, the Indian Brahma, or Hebrew Yahweh were the epitome of the GOD of ‘Light’ and solar energies, the figure of Molech (worshiped in the modern era by the Elite Bohemian Grove society out of Sonoma County, California) would seem to be a marriage between the lunar elements of Ashtoreth (Lilith), and the solar aspects of Baal/El (the ‘negative’ or lunar characteristics connected with the Owl, and the solar elements being related to the Bull).

The horns were depicted upon both male and female gods dating back into Egypt and Sumeria and are seen as very sacred icons, at least symbolically, as they represent not only the annual regeneration, but also the phases of the moon and celestial cycles. Like Athena, Artemis, and Lilith, the sacred animal of Ashtoreth is that of the owl. This would make sense in the fact that lilit is the Hebrew word designated for a nocturnal screech owl. In many ways, the rituals dedicated to Ashtoreth are similar to those held in the honor of Ishtar, Aphrodite, or even the early worship of the Virgin Mary. We can also witness the parallels between the ‘fall’ of Lilith, and Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Guiley describes her in ‘The Encyclopedia of Witches and Witchcraft’ as:

“....One of the oldest Middle Eastern aspects of the Goddess, dating to the Neolithic and Bronze ages. Tammuz is identified as her son/consort, as he is with Ishtar. According to myth, Astarte descended to earth as a fiery star, landing near Byblos in a lake at Alphaca, the site where the original Tammuz was said to have died.”

One of the first known temples of worship to the name of Astarte comes from 1478BC. She is intimately connected with child sacrifice rituals, much in the way Lilith is noted as being akin to the “old hag” who steals children away from their parents, or smothers them to death in their cribs.

The demonic entity known as Belial (Bel/Baal), was one of the most powerful and important Generals in Satan’s army. He controlled 80 legions of demons consisting of 6,666 demons per legion. Belial was especially important to the priests and magicians of Turkey who would set up burnt offerings to this entity. Similar to Asmodeus, he is responsible for creating pain and suffering in the hearts of humanity through lust, sexual perversion, and guilt. Though, unlike Asmodeus who was generally hideous in appearance, Belial was said to have been a beautiful angel with a soft and trust-worthy voice. Belial’s name is often used as a synonym for the Antichrist, Satan, or the ‘Sons of Belial’.

Huh. Same ol' same ol, same as it ever was. It's all about power and domination.

How did 'love' = 'desire' devolve into - something horrible? something bad, to be *ashamed* of? Fix this. NOW. It's BROKEN and DOES NOT WORK.

Stupid. Human beings are STUPID.

Like putting !@#%$#@ing *square* wheels on your car and still expecting the damn thing to *drive* smoothly - morons.

Very difficult for women to get needs met in this culture

*except* through the confines ('auspices'?? BLECH.) of the
typical het relationship with a
(male?)

so. Even then? It’s pretty much about him ‘keeping’ her, as in, “Peter, Peter, pumpkin eater...” etc. GAG.

Women only do it? Because they have no other way to survive.

And *emotional* needs????

It is to *laugh*. With despair – because, what else ya gonna do? *cry*??!? *That’s* for ‘sissies’, at least according to the so-called ‘men’.

The ‘coldness’ thing

reminds me of a poem I wrote
when I first began this journey.

I was staying
in a very
small
place
(that felt a bit
like *I* felt –
*small*,
that is.

so anyway.

A coldness lives in the shower stall
that can’t be seen, at all, at all.

But I can *feel* it, through the wall –
it reaches out to me.

shades of Grimm and Poe? early – fabulous! (sarcasm) childhood influences.

*what* were my parents *thinking*???????!!!!????

answer: they weren’t...

Love - possible origins of word?

"Love is from the sanskirit word lubhyati meaning desire."

Interesting page on word roots, etymology - 'libido' and 'libidinous' share same root with 'love'?

http://www.pandorawordbox.com/wordidea.php?id=555

Also, *more* interesting page:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/love

I will no longer ‘take care’ of people who

don’t recognize that they

HAVE NEEDS.

It’s bullshit.

I will not EAT them, Sam I am,
I do not LIKE
Green eggs and ham.

***
People I WILL help:

Those who OFFER
freely
without expectation
of anything in return.

so:
two-way street

but – what –
without a ‘sign’
saying
“you MUST give me something back.”

more like:

after having *interacted* with this person for a while (long enough for *me* to see)
I DECIDE.

MY choice.

No guilt.

:-)

People who give you a space to grow

and who accept you

EXACTLY AS YOU ARE

not like some weed growing in the back lot, a ‘passive’ kind of uninvolved, NON love, that’s mostly about

IGNORING

(that’s what *my* parents did).

***
No, THIS love

is very

ACTIVE

and

OPEN

for

ALL TO SEE.

Not secret
or hidden
implying shame,
or something to be ashamed *of*.

Nope.

*These* people?

They really KNOW
how to LOVE.

- and APPRECIATION! :-)

all rolled together

in one

big
messy

tangle of human-ness :-)

Sadness, and *fear*

that i
cannot be loved
am
un loveable.

that I have been
too damaged.

Ah – look at that!

My language shifts in *spite* of the old
hurtful
voices

take THAT
you !@#$#@!$ ers!

and THAT!!!!!

:-)

The training is beginning to take hold.

YAY!!!!

And yay for people like Michael
who help me.

Taking in, *absorbing*, the love I *have* received :-)

he said to me,
‘well, I’ve never known you to take a short shower’

as if it were a simple fact,
no judgment involved.

as if he’d known me all my life,
and this was something he just *knew* about me
and judged not,
neither good, nor bad

but simply as an ASPECT of me

like green eyes
blonde hair
or what have you.

NEED external warmth.

a hug
a kind glance
kind words that
ask for nothing in return.
like the WORLD is my mother.

"Help me, please?"

she says, in a very small voice.

I am ashamed of asking
of wanting
of needing.

the shame curdles my belly,
makes food sour
and rot
in my mouth.

because I cannot DIGEST it,
you see,
I was taught,
was told

that *I*
didn’t matter.

maybe never
in so many WORDS
but in
EVERY
OTHER
WAY

possible.

‘Chicken soup for the soul.’ (from a book title.)

Need to make some SOUP, chicken soup, for my SOUL :-)

FEED me, universe. BRING ME what I need.

Do I have to say ‘please’? Does a plant have to *ask* for water, sun, soil?

Or is it ok if I
just take it for granted

that my needs are
NORMAL
OK
and
TOTALLY AND COMPLETELY RIGHT?

can’t find the right words. guilt and shame still have their hooks in me. need the ‘EXTERNAL VALIDATION’.

can’t do this one solo, grasshopper.

need *somebody* to come along and water me, just because.

just because I NEED it,
for no other reason
whatsoever.

Getting cold

all of a sudden – on the left side of my body – goose bumps – as if there’s a draft, or even

a ghost?

huh.

re-tracing mental steps.

poem

started to be ‘creative’

internal ‘judge’

laughed
mocked
made fun of

said, ‘how stupid’ - *you’re* no artist, why *fool* yourself?

my father gave away some of my mother’s paintings, for free, at random, when they moved from one house to another – as they were moving into the new house, the new neighbor saw him carrying a painting

this is third hand, my recollection of a story my mom told – I was too young to remember the incident, or perhaps wouldn’t have understood it if I’d witnessed it? or, perhaps, would have understood the *emotional* content of my mother’s shame. Though I think she – suppressed it? Or, she tells it as a story that happened to someone else.

which is why she’s able to ‘distance’ so easily from *my* emotions – she can’t feel her own.

But this is about ME.

***
My father’s voice is the one that tells me my feelings and needs are stupid.

With my *mother*, it’s her FACE – her scowls, her frowns, the look of constant disapproval, that little fold in between her eyes that tells me she doesn’t like what I’m saying.

***
I am cold, I am shaking. I am unable to get warm without an external heat source.

I have no *internal* heat source because I

was never LOVED
in the ways I NEEDED to be LOVED

by my parents.

Why is it considered a BURDEN

to be kind?

Next time someone says that they feel like they have to be ‘careful’ with me, I’m going to ask them (hopefully calmly!), “Why is that a problem? What’s wrong with being ‘careful’ with me? I’m ‘careful’ with *you*, fair’s fair. Or maybe you never *notice* that I’m careful with you? You take it for granted.”

I’m wondering *why* I’m feeling this right now – someone must have said or done something or given me a ‘look’ that made me feel that way.

Last night – it feels like it’s important that I not pin down the exact event, so that I won’t ‘focus’ on it – but rather that I recognize the general *pattern* and ALLOW myself to feel

WHATEVER i feel. Unconditionally. Without judgment or criticism. Let it flow, freely and openly,

like a river,

like the clouds in the sky,

passing by,
passing by.

It’s OKAY for me to be ANGRY.

Now I must find someone *else* who *agrees* with this, and who will say so in a way that feels true, honest, genuine, and ‘right’ to *me*.

Learning how to express my needs without feeling guilty or ashamed

To some extent I can get those needs met vicariously, by watching movies or reading books. I don’t feel jealousy in *these* cases because – why? Or, maybe I did – but now I’ve done enough work to recognize *why* I’m jealous, and to acknowledge my own needs inside myself, even though I’m *still* waiting for my mother to meet my needs the way I – needed them? to be met?

Well, it feels like I’m *beginning* to get those needs met from outside myself – a trickle, growing larger.

It’s like I described way back at the very beginning of this blog, now buried under a million, billion, bajillion peeled and re-peeled layers (sometimes I fling them away and they stick right back, kind of like static cling – blarg!)

When a person goes long enough without what they need, it’s like a plant that never gets quite enough water: Its roots actually *shrink* a little bit, and become a little less permeable, to *conserve* what little water it’s able to *get*.

But the ‘negative’, *flip* side of this ‘protection’ is that it also prevents one from getting what one needs.

(Comes to mind here that a friend once said, “every form of refuge is a prison – a song quote from – where?)

So, the thing that started out as a ‘defense’ against a dangerous, ‘toxic’ (sorry, overused, trite, self-help word) emotional environment *also* prevents me from ‘soaking up’ the good stuff when it comes along.

I’m getting better at it, but it’s *work*. And I’m not always sure how to *do* the work. Fits and starts, forward and back, sometimes spinning in place in small circles. And sometimes collapsed in a completely boneless, protoplasmic, quivering heap on the floor, waiting for someone to come along and help me re-assemble myself.

needs that need meeting:

I am trying to learn how to ask for what I need without feeling

guilty
ashamed
angry.

I think this will *only* happen when I can find people who do not

guilt
shame or
reject me

when I ask for what I *need*.

***
Comment I made on Michael’s blog, cut and pasted and dragged here:

When I saw that your therapist is sad when she sees you suffering, I felt - I don't know - jealous? resentful? angry?

Because I've never experienced this feeling of care and concern from a woman.

My mother, it seems, has always looked on it from a distance, as if my feelings have nothing to do with her. It actually *hurts* just to be in her physical presence, as if there is this giant *bruise* on my *soul*. It *aches* when I'm near her. Which is why I spend as little time with her as humanly possible.

It took me a long time to get this, but when I lived with her as an adult (?) for five years, I became more and more aggressive, more demanding, began feeling like I was some kind of emotional poltergeist - very volatile, on edge all the time, never able to relax.

I realize, looking back on it, that I *needed* her to *respond* to me, in some obvious, visible, tangible way that I could actually *feel*, instead of this cold, unresponsive demeanor she always seemed to wear.

When she *was* moved by something I was experiencing, she'd hug me, but never say anything, and I always felt like it was *me* comforting *her* - as if my needs and feelings were so frightening and troublesome to her that it was *her8 that needed the hug, not me. So I actually found her hugs repulsive - I would push her away and feel angry, because *my* needs were not being met - only hers.

Yikes. Wonder why I can only express some of this stuff *here*, and not in my own space (blog)? I guess I need the 'witnessing' provided by knowing you'll read this.

I wonder if it's harder for women to get our emotional needs met? Because we're so often cast in the role of 'caretaker', and so rarely allowed to *have* needs of our own, except the ones that prevent us from being 'of service' to other people?

So women tend to be harder on their daughters than on their sons, (though there is a myth to the contrary - that somehow mothers and daughters have this 'special bond' just because we're both women. But the fact is that women are pitted against one another almost from birth - the 'divide and conquer' thing that keeps our attention focused on the *men* in our lives instead of each other. Though I think there are *some* women who don't experience this, who have *good* bonds with at least a few other women. Maybe these are women who grew up with sisters instead of brothers? I can imagine either situation being true.

In any case, that kind of 'bonding' is something I've never experienced with a woman, and most *certainly* not my mother.

In the past this whole thing has made it very difficult for me to get my needs met *at all*, and often only from *men*, which make it feel a bit like 'consorting with the enemy', given what I wrote about 'divide and conquer', and how it often feels like men see us (women) as only *tools* to get *their* needs met, instead of as people in our own right.

As if men are always and eterally allowed to be 'babies' (in compensation? for having to 'cut off' their emotional needs to 'function' in patriarchal culture? yeah, but who made *that* rule, and who *benefits* from it the most? Hm. 'Men', and 'men'. Yes, I'm *still* angry.)

So: Don't take care of them.

Hold fast to grasshopper's rule Nos. 1 and 2:

1. Meet me half way
2. Two way street.

And: Open the way, as often as possible, to *women* in your life.

I need to be treated gently and kindly.

A friend who had cancer gets treated with kid gloves; my mom, always the ‘sensitive’ one, got the same treatment, and still expects it at the age of 74.

I expect the same.

But I don’t call it ‘kid gloves’; I call it ‘normal’.

Let’s see, what’s the opposite of ‘gently and kindly’ – ‘harshly and cruelly’, perhaps?

So, how did ‘harsh and cruel’ get to be the ‘norm’, the standard for human behavior?

And how did the desire for kindness and to be treated gently get to be considered some kind of weakness, an aberration, possibly even an abnormality? Something to be reserved for children, old people and invalids – the ‘weak’, in other words.

Warrior mentality has poisoned this culture, and many others.

Warrior of the spirit is good, as in, fighting for what is right, and true, and good.

But warrior *against* the spirit? the soul? This seems to me the essence of – Calvinism? Puritanism? and other harsh and critical ways of thinking.

I wish to see the world as a place that feels *safe*, not the ‘jungle’ that my father always said it was.

We’ve killed off most of the truly nasty beasties, or put them in zoos, as relics of a harsher past.

Maybe if we hadn’t, we’d be kinder to each other? Because then we’d really *know* what *true* danger was, instead of this concocted, play-fighting, ‘fantasy’ danger that so-called ‘heroes’ fight against in movies and stories.

Maybe having a *real* danger, outside ourselves, to fight against, would help us see how precious our connections with other humans are, and we might begin to treat those connections accordingly?

How about if, instead of raining on each other’s parades,

we offer to share our umbrellas*?



*particularly apropos for *me*, given my geographical location...although, at this moment? the sun, she is *shining* upon grasshopper's happy, upturned chitinous visage :-)

People who think you’re being a ‘know it all’

When you’re just being yourself :-(

It makes me SAD

because
well,
I can’t just be my*self* very easily
or often

I have to be constantly
PROTECTING
*other people*

from *me*.

How STUPID!

as if

BEING SMART

was something to be ASHAMED of.

BULLshit.

FUCK that.

I *yam* what I yam. That’s all there is *to* it, there *ain’t* no more.

The idea that there’s something wrong with a person’s ‘personality’ because they

FAIL TO CONFORM

to the
bullshit
pain-in-the-ass
STUPID
‘rules’ of so-called ‘culture’ and ‘society’ –

my ASS.

If *this* is CULTURE????

I’ll frickin’
EAT MY HAT

no salt, even.

buggers. :-(

Your PARADE? I RAIN upon her! Unabashedly! With full intent to SOAK YOU TO THE SKIN

and make you @#$$#@#$!ers just as *miserable* as you try to make *me*

with your STIFLE-y SQUELCH-y, OPPRESSIVE BULLSHIT ways.

Fucking PURITANS.

I wonder if I can manage to make ‘puritan’ into a swear word?

“God, you’re such a fucking PURITAN! You STINK!”

Hm. Doesn’t have quite the ring I’m looking for. But I *feel* better now :-)

***
I just realized this actually has a *physical* effect on my body (and, hence, *me*): When I *need* or *want* something, I *immediately*, almost reflexively, feel *guilty*.

I feel my diaphragm tighten up, as if my 'needs' - wait - the shame? blocks me getting my needs met? and I literally *feel* it as a tightening, where I can't get enough air?

I've noticed this when I was was eating recently, in the last few days - I kept accidentally getting stuff down my windpipe.

Now, *part* of that is because I'm doing other things, such as reading, and typing, while I'm eating. So, one thing that helps is to simply be *mindful*, as in, *stop* reading and typing while I'm eating, maybe even just close my eyes? and focus *solely* on EATING.

What I notice, when I do this?

I was sort of, 'gulping'? my food down? like, a starving animal?

So I *consciously* focused on separating the breathing and the swallowing, and, guess what?

The fucking GUILT went away.

Just like that!

"Wonder of wonders, miracle of miracles..."

Well, the rest of the song doesn't really fit. But you get the idea :-)

You scratch my back

I scratch yours :-)

The Star

What has traditionally been known as the Star card is about reconnecting one's Soul with the Divine -- the transcending of personality, family, community and reputation. It has to do ultimately with the freedom to be one's Self. The Soul is responding to celestial influences -- forces that can provide the personality with a stronger sense of purpose. The Star card helps us to remember our exalted origins and our attraction to a Higher Union.

This card could also be called the "Celestial Mandate" -- that which refers us back to our reason for being, our mission in this lifetime. The Star reminds us that, in a sense, we are agents of Divine Will in our day-to-day lives. If we let go of the idea that we are supposed to be in control, we can more easily notice and appreciate the synchronicities that are nudging us along. In this way, we become more conscious of the invisible Helping Hand, and we better understand our place within -- and value to -- the larger Cosmos.

Theme: You are consciously on the way home in a spiritual sense.
Astro Association: Aquarius
Element: Air
Number: 17
Alias: Grace

Image and text from Tarot.com.

I wish everyone would speak their wants and needs openly

because I’m a *terrible* guesser.

“Is it kind, is it true, is it necessary,

does it improve upon the silence?”

~Shirdi Sai Baba
(source uncertain? Quote found on MetaFilter:
http://ask.metafilter.com/162159/You-know-what-they-say-about-loose-lips-right.)

From that same thread:

There's a psychological phenomenon called "spontaneous trait transference" which causes people to assign to you, the traits you gossip about in others.

So if you say "I heard that X has never once showed up to a meeting on time," the person you're gossiping to will now subconsciously believe that you are chronically late.

On the other hand if you say "Y is doing some great work at the animal shelter on the weekends," the person you're gossiping to will subconsciously believe that you're a generous and charitable person.

Whenever you're about to tell someone something about a 3rd party ask yourself, "What will be the results if what I say gets applied to me?"

Cite: "59 Seconds: Think a Little, Change a Lot" by Richard Wiseman, better known as "the guy who did that experiment with the basketball game and the person in a gorilla suit."

Another comment I liked:

Eventually, you will disclose something that either completely humiliates you or will very adversely effect someone's life. The trauma you experience from this will be such that you will be cured of gossiping forever.

Cognitive dissonance clanging in my head

Yet another comment inspired by Michael:

Well, ok, at the risk of seeming to be 'contrary', here -

Along the lines of - what's it called again - 'defensive self-reliance'?

Let's say we all need several things simultaneously:

To be needed
To be appreciated
To belong
To be important to somebody
To matter
To be valued.

AND

at the same time

our culture claims that we must all be self-sufficient.

Now, can you *hear* the cognitive dissonance clanging around in the head of person who tries to contain *all* those things in their head at once? *I* can, in my *own* head, that is.

The needs are *essential*, not negotiable. Hence the term 'needs' and not 'wants'.

And yet, *not* being cast out by one's clan, one's tribe, one's culture? Is *also*, *not* negotiable.

So when a *need*, and the expectations of the 'tribe' seem to be in direct conflict?

Well, as I see it, that's pretty much the 'how and why' of how *all* splits, of *all* kinds, happen.

Mine is, I think I tried to describe before, like this literal 'line' down the middle of my vision, where I'm often *quite* conscious of my left and right brains holding two separate, and irreconcible (at least, not reconcilable by *me*, at *this time*) sets of ideas or thoughts.

We’ll get there when we *get* there! (Mr. Incredible)

I hear this little, tiny voice *way* down in my – what – subconscious? screaming at me to STOP! Rest! Slow down.

But I am *obsessed*. I *must* finish this current run, this growth spurt. I *must* ride this wave to its end. Because, who *knows* when the ‘right’ circumstances for growth will come round again? Just like everything, I will *trust* that it’s ‘there’ for me – the Universe, that is – when it’s *shown* me enough times that I can, by basic *experience*, trust that – it’s there for me. The opposite of ‘once bitten twice shy’, whatever that would be. Can’t think of a clever inverse saying just now, maybe later :-) This feels good!

Actually, ‘obsessed’ is the wrong word. Too judgmental, harsh, critical. Need different word. Thinking.

Ok: Focused. Determined. As in, “I’m *bound* and determined to figure this SOB the heck out!”

Better :-)

Lather, rinse, repeat. :-)

In fact, maybe this business of being driven by the expectations of others is – what – an inextricable? part of – who we are? as humans? or, how we come to see ourselves?

It’s like, the *role* we’re *cast* in, and fall into most easily? is the one that sticks.

And when we find out, later in life, after the mold is already cast, after the pattern is already *pretty dang deeply ingrained*, that, all of a sudden (or so it often seems – sudden, that is) – what’s ‘worked’ for us our whole lives isn’t working any more.

It’s like you’re driving along, and all of a sudden one of the wheels falls off your car.

It’s not really an *option* to just keep driving – the thing kind of grinds to a halt, and sits there, waiting, patiently, for you to *fix* the damn thing. Otherwise, it ain’t goin’ *no*where.

Taking people for granted?

Another comment by Michael prompts yet another post-length response.

Michael wrote:

"There is a dynamic where a person who is talented is seen as things being easy."

Yes. I think people *do* take advantage. In fact, I know *I* have taken advantage - I've assumed that, for example, because my little brother was big and strong and more able to do tasks requiring muscles and stamina than I am, that he actually *liked* doing those things.

But at some point he pointed out that *everybody* asks him for help *all the time* because he's such a big guy. He gets tired of being taken for granted.

In fact, I just heard a while back that he'd had back surgery - had a disk fused, ack! Noooo, little brother! Bad surgery, bad surgery! But - if to 'save face' and feel useful and valuable in the family and live up to everybody's - seeming? - expectations, you have to sacrifice your*self* in the process - well, maybe the body finally screams out in some way that a person simply *can't* ignore, so that they don't have to feel actively 'responsible' for letting others down? And so they save face. Dang, *this* one shouldbe a post of its own, too.

Thinking out loud, what I’m saying is, it was *easier* for him to basically destroy his back than to admit that he couldn’t bear (or carry) the burden that people were trying to lay on him.

Perhaps it’s a shame thing, as in, “If I don’t do what they expect, they won’t like me”?

Or maybe it’s a ‘need to be needed’ thing.

Or possibly a little of both. Who knows.

In any case, there seems to be a pretty direct connection.

The sad thing, and the thing that *angers* me about this stuff, is that, well, in my *brother’s* case – I suspect he *still* doesn’t know why his back went out. And he doesn’t know that he needs to learn to say ‘no’, and that it’s *ok* to say no. Jeez, this comes back to the whole Ask/Guess conundrum! Hm. How did I get to be the only ‘Asker’ in my family? Or, maybe my dad was, too. Or maybe it’s situational as much as a temperament thing. Or maybe it ties in with power and a person’s innate, natural levels of aggression?

Gah. Got to just pin this one up and move on for now. Layers, baby, cycles, lather, rinse, repeat. :-)

Recognizing my *own* shame

and its sources?

is really helping me be able to see, I *think*? and, possibly, accept? and even *work with*, to some degree, *other* people’s shame. As in, this whole ‘face saving’ business, and why it’s so important, and why we pretty much *all* do it, even me, the so-called ‘truth teller’.

My attachment to ‘truth’ is – what – going to have to pin this much up, look at it, come back. Don’t know what the next step is yet.

Saving face

I was writing a response to Michael in the previous post and it got so long-winded I decided to make it a post of its own. So, thanks, Michael, for your comments! They really help me think about things.

(And, yes, the first part of this post repeats what I said in comments.)

***
One thing that keeps coming up in my reading is this idea of 'saving face'. I keep forgetting that this is really important to most people, including *me*. When I *remember* it, I sometimes wonder if maybe it isn’t actually the *main* motivator driving nearly *all* human behavior?

I've just spent the last several days reading MetaFilter (I find it a really useful place to get insightful ideas from a broad range of viewpoints, with generally fairly intelligent and respectful comments), and this idea of ‘saving face’ keeps coming up over and over again, in various guises.

What occurs to me is that what shrinks call ‘dysfunction’ might simply be some outmoded human behaviors that we *all* practice to varying degrees, driven by this very real and important need to keep our self-respect.

*** Bolded to remind myself that this is the *meat* of this particular writing, I *think*:

Nobody likes to be ‘wrong’, or feel stupid. It actually floods our whole body with shame chemicals, which is a situation to be avoided at all costs – if I’ve understood some of the things I’ve read properly, there’s an idea out there that we experience *shame* as a very basic, lizard brain ‘survival threat’, as in, “If you don’t chill out, your tribe is going to leave you out there alone in the jungle/desert/whatever and you’ll freeze to death/starve/get eaten by lions.” Being ‘shamed’ is *terrifying*, because it signals that, somehow, we’ve violated some basic tribal rule or ‘taboo’, and are, quite literally, in danger. As I understand it, anything coming from that level is pretty ancient and has nothing to do with modern ideas of ‘logic’ – it *seems* to operate almost entirely independent of any so-called ‘rational’ ‘thought’ process – far below that, at the level of pure, raw, gut survival instinct.

***
I think shame, and avoidance thereof, is such a *basic* motivator for *everybody*, that it’s hard to wrap the mind around it.

Partly because we *don’t* talk about this openly – it’s sort of like fish talking about the water they swim in: I think they really have *no conscious awareness of it whatsoever*, and yet it is utterly inescapable, it permeates *absolutely everything* we think or say or do.

Mind you, this is still a theory in process of building! And subject to change without notice as new ‘info’ becomes available.

But, it’s what I’m going with at the moment.

***
I'm beginning to question the whole idea of 'dysfunction' - it's starting to feel a little like yet another capitalistic scam wherein somebody creates a 'problem' that never existed before and suddenly there's this big hype and everybody needs to go out and buy some big 'product' in order to 'fix' the problem.

Maybe I'm just getting really cynical, but after nearly fifteen years of reading self help books and thinking there was something *to* the whole 'fixing' ourselves idea - well, I'm beginning to want to build a huge bonfire of all the 'self help' BS.

Being a fairly direct person myself (an ‘Asker’?) and disliking 'bullshit', I've always thought kind of like you said - that people just didn't *care*, and that *I* care 'too much'. A friend even said to me one time that he didn't think most people were (or liked to be?) as 'honest' as me. I wasn't sure how to take it - he didn't seem to be judging me, so much as just conveying his perception, which was really helpful to have reflected back to me.

***
I've scratched my head on this one a lot, and tried to look at it from as many angles as I can.

I think people are rarely aware of their underlying 'motives', and often really aren't even aware of their *behavior*, for crying out loud.

They just do what they do, kind of like brainless little mechanical wind-up toys (yeah, that wasn't very nice, but I'm pretty sure it's just us chickens here - hope you know that old joke punch line! If not I'll explain...)

...people just keep on keeping on, like the proverbial wind-up, until they bash into some immovable object, such as a person or situation they can't deal with in their usual ways. Note: I include myself in this category of, "People who do stupid,annoying shit because nothing has *forced* me to find a better way. Yet."

*That's* when change happens, when people can't get what they need *any other way* than by changing what they're doing or thinking.

This is equally true of me. I've spent the last 15 years *thinking* about how I think and what I do, because how I thought and what I did in the past just wasn't working for me. I just wasn't able to get what I wanted, or particularly, what I *needed* with my old ways.

So in *that* sense, dysfunctional *is* a useful term.

But, really, if *everybody's* dysfunctional, how useful an idea is *that*? It's like the whole God/guilt trip thing, that we're all 'sinners' or whatever.

I mean, who wants to be shamed and preached at like some little kid all their lives?

Not me, thanks. I do *much better* with a recognition that, on any given day, I'm usually doing my very best with the tools that were given to me - to survive, and function, and be a good person.

I think this is the tricky bit: I'm not sure I totally *believe* it yet, but for the moment, as an experiment, I'm *trying* to give people the benefit of the doubt and not *immediately* assume that they're just being thoughtless, clueless jerks. (though my rants here might suggest the opposite - it's more because I *have* to have someplace to blow off the steam that I don't feel comfortable with letting out in real life. Although, I think I'm actually getting better at it - finding the 'balance point' between not being a doormat and not having a 'chip on my shoulder'. Sigh, I *hate* that phrase. I only use for communication at this present moment, because I'm pretty sure you'll know what I mean - but that phrase's days are *numbered* in *my* personal universe :-)

Temperance

What is traditionally known as the Temperance card is a reference to the Soul. Classically female, she is mixing up a blend of subtle energies for the evolution of the personality. One key to interpreting this card can be found in its title, a play on the process of tempering metals in a forge.

Metals must undergo extremes of temperature, folding and pounding, but the end product is infinitely superior to impure ore mined from the earth. In this image, the soul volunteers the ego for a cleansing and healing experience which may turn the personality inside-out, but which brings out the gold hidden within the heart. (This card is entitled "Art" in the Crowley deck.)

Theme: The time is now for self-healing.
Astro Association: Sagittarius
Element: Fire
Number: 14
Alias: Alchemy, Art, Balance

Text and image from Tarot.com.

Object constancy?

if a person lacked object constancy as a child, how does this affect their *parenting*?

And how is the *child* so parented affected?

Does she, the parent, try to make her *child* into the ‘object’ that she lacked?

And if said child happens to be female, and *already* held to cultural constraints and expectations about her ‘caretaking’ abilities, does she get sucked in, by her very nature, her ‘empathy’, to being the *mother’s* caretaker?

Does the child so parented get her *own* needs met?

No – except where she is able to meet them her*self*, which is, of course, an insane thing to expect from *any* child, but particularly an infant.

And yet? This is *exactly* what was expected.

And taken for granted,
year after year,
throughout this child’s lifetime.

Until one day
she
GOT WISE

to the game

and said

STOP.

i WILL NOT DO THIS any more.

I do not LIKE green eggs and ham,

I will not EAT them,
Sam I am.

:-)

Just because I *can* help someone

Doesn’t mean I’m *obligated* to.

Ask vs Guess culture

I think I’m an ‘ask’ person, who likes to ask things directly, straight-forwardly.

I think I was born to a father who was Ask and a Guess mother.

Guess which one I’m having the most trouble communicating with? Of course, any ‘communicating’ with my father is strictly in my head, seeing as how he’s been gone for many, many years. :-) No, I don’t believe in ouija boards and such – I think they just tell you things you already ‘know’. As *all* such ‘media’ (nyuk nyuk) do. I crack myself up... :-)

Links:

MetaFilter, "Did he ask or did he guess?":
http://metatalk.metafilter.com/19253/Did-he-ask-or-did-he-guess

UK Guard:ian, "This column will change your life: Are you an Asker or a Guesser?":
http://metatalk.metafilter.com/19253/Did-he-ask-or-did-he-guess

More puzzle pieces?

Reading this thread on MetaFilter, “Help! I may be an asshole” (http://ask.metafilter.com/172103/Help-I-may-be-an-asshole) – quote from a commenter:

This is just a hunch, but do you consider yourself to be more honest than most people? Like most people are just hiding what they think because they're afraid of conflict, but you aren't, and so you face the world with what you think is a kind of bracing honesty?

I ask because almost every terminal asshole I've ever met has been like that. After all, nobody walks around trying to make people feel bad and alienate them (or at least very few people do). But the most unpleasant people I've ever met have been of the "I'm just saying what everyone else is afraid to say" variety.

Your comment, "the converse seems to be gliding through life nodding my head just to be liked" raises a red flag for me in this regard. You seem to be describing the normal concessions that most people make toward other people in order to make those people feel comfortable and make their social interactions go smoothly. It looks like you interpret this behavior as a sign of weakness or passivity. This attitude is, again, often a source of assholery. I'd suggest to you that there's something to be said for making people around you feel good, and that people who do it routinely might have motivations other than fear.

posted by Ragged Richard at 7:00 AM on December 3

What matters most.

Reading MetaFilter posts on relationships, currently one about the importance of relationships.

I decided, some years ago, that relationships are the very most important thing to me, above all else. The way I *used* to put it was, “Say you’re on your death bed, what are you thinking about?

“Are you thinking about all the work you wish you’d done? The big house you built, the boat, the car, the money, the possessions?

“No. What you’re thinking is: Why am I alone here? Why is there nobody to hold my hand?”

The answer is: They hold your hand because you held *their* hand. They’re there for you because you were there for them.. Period. End of story.

Now, this doesn’t mean that you should try to be this bottomless well of generosity – I’ve tried that, and found myself feeling angry and resentful.

So use the ‘angry and resentful’ as a clue, an indicator, as to whether that *particular* relationship is one you really want to be in: Is it mutually beneficial? Is it equal? Is it mutually respectful?

I know all this stuff is obvious, but I’ve had to learn it the hard way, and, like anything learned late in life, it takes a *lot* of reinforcement to not fall back into the same old patterns learned in childhood. To have someone who loves me, and who I love in return, who *understands* the idea of mutuality and practices it on a regular basis... this is what I seek! :-)

One of my favorite comments from the referenced thread (http://ask.metafilter.com/172302/Are-meaningful-relationships-the-meaning-of-life):

Are meaningful relationships the meaning of life?

Yes.

But they are few and far between, and for some people, they never happen. That's not a reason to stop looking and hoping, but pestering people about it is not really the answer.

What to do about that void in the meantime? Everyone will have a different answer. For some, its religious, as mentioned above; for others, it's the intense discipline and self-expression of the arts.

As for me, I got a dog.

posted by philokalia at 1:04 PM on December 5

Also read the comments by grumblebee.

Another comment from that thread that I really like (bolds mine):

Wow, it's bizarre to me that this is even a question someone would ask or that anyone would say that no, meaningful relationships are not a key part of the meaning of life. Humans are a social species — the idea that "you can't be loved until you can love yourself" or that you don't need other people to be fulfilled is basically complete nonsense. You can be OK without a romantic relationship but there are virtually no people who can be OK without *any* rich relationships. And you can't love until you've been loved, is the reality.

Health is linked to the number and quality of your relationships as is happiness and recovery from virtually any mental illness or addiction. Mental illness and physical illness are worse in isolated, lonely people. Solitary confinement is devastating to mental health and to long term physical health. The key to managing stress—and managing stress is essential to health— is social connection.

Imagine being rich beyond belief, successful at curing cancer— and having no one close to you and no one who you can share your joy and pain with. Unless you are the type of autistic person (and by no means are all people on the spectrum like this) who genuinely doesn't take pleasure in human connections, you would not be happy. The idea of codependence is ludicrous American nonsense that has no science behind it (no one can create a test that reliably distinguishes between someone who is codependent and someone who isn't) and that pathologizes altruism.

American individualism has pathologized the fundamental interdependence of human nature. And we are all suffering for it.

posted by Maias at 4:05 PM on December 17

Leaping in to fill the ‘responsibility’ gap?

Is it a compulsion to rush in with an apology when you see that someone’s been hurt and nobody’s stepping up to take responsibility for hurting them?

What is the source of this? I believe that everything *is* about me, or you, or whoever the ‘actor’ is in a situation – I think we’re only *capable* of seeing things from our own point of view, so, in the end, it really *is* ‘all about me’ in terms of our base motives for what we say and do.

So given that base assumption, what would be the motive for stepping in and *taking* responsibility?

I see this habit in myself in *lots* of ways – ooh, what’s coming to mind is that it was the only role I was permitted in my family?

Everybody was fighting for (what was seen as) a limited amount of ‘power’ in the family – there was only so much to go around, and we snapped at it like hungry little birds.

But the runt – me? or, at least, one of the less aggressive ones? found myself letting the whole madness pass me by, stepping off to the side to stay away from all the turmoil and emotional flailing around.

Between my father competing with me, and my brother, and my mother? I didn’t have any energy for it.

So I would just escape – go to my room, read, whatever – disengage.

Funny, I think this was my mom’s pattern, too – most of my images from childhood don’t have her in them, as if she simply was never in the room. And I remember her saying, many, many times, how much she hated the ‘competition’ that was such a hallmark of my father’s family. They *prided* themselves on their ability to compete, and shamed (or attempted to, anyway) anyone who didn’t ‘play by their rules’.

I opted out early on, not being a game player, except for word games – I never liked cards, and the pirahna-like feeding frenzy that would go on – well, it was ugly. At least to *me*, and I think, to mom, too. My middle brother was the worst – he was the ultimate ‘bad loser’, and an equally bad winner – he’d go out of his way to rub your nose in it, gloating and leering and taunting. I don’t know *why* he needed to win so bad – maybe it was the only thing my father rewarded? Because it was the only thing *his* family rewarded? And on and on, back through the generations? Who knows. Yet another form of generational poison, unconsidered, handed down through the children like some kind of demented recessive gene or something. Blech.

Is loneliness a habit?

There’s this idea of ‘rewards’, that we tend to do things that are reinforced by the various ‘pleasure’ chemicals that our body puts out in response to various external (and internal?*) events.

What would the ‘reward’ be for isolation? Absence of pain caused by other people? What’s coming to mind is that statement I read somewhere that “People will do more to avoid pain than to seek pleasure.”

Don’t know if it’s true, that statement, but seems like a *possible* explanation.

If you spend your whole life avoiding pain, then – well, where does the pleasure come from? Because we *need* pleasure as much as we *need* food, air, water, etc. It’s a basic human need, I bet it’s even on Maslow’s hierarchy somewhere.

I think the ‘pain’ part for me, that I really have to honor and not ignore or ride roughshod over, is that as a ‘sensitive’? person? I was often odd (wo)man out in my family, felt like no one ever ‘got’ me. Which is a particularly isolating feeling.

Now as an adult, having greater ability (though not complete) to *choose* the company I keep, I more often *try* to choose people who ‘get’ me.


*My question on ‘internal’ is that, at some level, *all* events are external, at least initially. It is how they get *stored* as body memory or actual memory that affects whether they’re something that recurs in the absence of an actual stimulus – such as PTSD, for example.

Ambiguity.

Uncertainty. Mixed message; double bind.

How to choose? Who – or *what* – to trust?

I’ve read that some people have an easier time with ambiguity than others.

I’ve never been one of these people - who has an easy time with it, I mean – I have often, in the past, pushed for a ‘decision’, one way or the other, just because I *hated* sitting on the fence, especially if it was somebody else’s uncertainty, and not mine. *Mine* I’m ok with, I think :-)

Department of Inconsistency, Irritating Double Standards Division :-)

Indifference: Spiritual poison

Meaning, it poisons the spirit to be around people who don’t care – about you, about themselves, about other people in their lives.

People who don’t care are poisonous. Avoid them as you would any other noxious substance.

Id squink :-)

Like squid ink, only different...

It’s what the id squirts out to protect itself, to hide its fears and shame – a powerful, *potentially* noxious substance that wells up from the subconscious in times of great stress/distress.

Use carefully. Like an acid? it can etch a beautiful work of art on a hard surface – or, it can do great damage.

I guess it’s time that I accept that I can’t have one without the other. That I just have to learn to be *careful*, and not throw out the good with the bad.

It’s *not* inherently evil – "Nothing is either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." (Hamlet).

***
I felt a space, a hole, as if something had been removed, or cut out.

I tried to imagine what it might be, and then it occurred to me: It’s a channel for something to flow in. What is it that’s been cut off or disrupted so that it’s not filling this space?

I thought of the Chinese idea of kidney and sexuality and the raw life force that flows from these sources. I thought maybe I’d been cutting this off in myself, and so I don’t have the ‘power’ of that so-called ‘darkness’. By judging it as ‘bad’, I lose whatever ‘good’ it contains, as well.

It seems that, even as a non-religious person, I am unable to escape the influence of such thinking. Religion permeates the culture, just as a fish cannot escape the water it swims in. Just sitting here thinking, by myself, in my own house, with *theoretical* control over the influences that enter my life, and mind, I *still* can’t seem to block it out.

And then, of course, any time I leave the house, and am confronted with any other human being at all, of any shape, size, age, gender, what have you, I’m *immediately* aware of ‘the rules’ yet again, and my hard-won, house-of-cards edifice is toppled.

Ach.

People judge this ‘darkness’, say it is *always* bad.

The trouble with seeking saints? is that we’re *all* sinners (and not in the biblical sense).

“I’d rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints, the sinners have much more fun – you see, now, only the good die young.” ~Billy Joel

We *all* are drawn by ‘the dark side’. It’s what makes the ‘light’ seem so bright...

I’ve always (or often?) been afraid of it. Afraid of the damage I’d do; afraid of hurting other people. It’s a bit like giving someone a rapier, or maybe a broadsword? but not teaching them how to *use* it, and expecting them to just figure it out for themselves.

That’s why we have laws, rules, social codes of conduct, what have you. Religion is just a more – what – structured? long-standing? established? way to attempt to enforce the boundaries between black and white.

But GRAY is where it’s at, where most of us *actually* live. The rest is stuff of fantasy – exaggeration for the sake of making a point, ‘teaching a lesson’.

Eyes of love :-)

Learning to look at myself in the mirror
with love
instead of with

hatred
resentment
anxiety
criticism

I realize that I contain both
the viewer
and the viewee

as the shrinks say, I’ve ‘internalized’
the critical gaze
of my parents.

I think I’ve *finally*, finally, after all these long years of hard and persistent effort,
learned to
give myself a break.

I catch myself with that same critical, harsh, unfriendly, judgmental look on my face

that used to be so painful when my parents directed it at me

And I *change* it.

I smile.

I hold my *own* gaze in the mirror, and can *almost* do it now without feeling like a complete idiot or fearing someone will ‘catch’ me at it. Or accuse me of narcissism. Fuck ‘em – I gotta do what I gotta do. Weird-ass shit ensues, transitions through strange places. Ain’t no omelettes without breakin’ eggs, as somebody says.

So.

Learning to love myself
helps me see that
I *am* loveable.

And it opens the way to *receiving* love from others,
and not always remaining on the defensive, fearing rejection.

The rich get richer
the poor get poorer.

But if you don’t *see* yourself as poor, then maybe – you’re as rich as you feel?

Hm. Not sure about that one – platitudinositousness. Sounds like something that ought to be extinct :-)

my wings weren't clipped, they were just furled

til such time as I could open them freely, stretch them out and soar.

The image of a hawk or eagle
being harassed by a horde of smaller birds
comes to mind.

I’ve seen such powerful birds
plagued, dive-bombed by entire mobs of
crows, seagulls
(bird equivalent of bullies?)

sitting calmly, peacefully, apparently oblivious to their would-be tormentors.

Their placidity in the face of such cacophonous pestiferation is – breathtaking. Awe-inspiring.

I wanna be like *them*. The *big* birds, that is.

'defensive self-reliance'

From phttp://www.naturalchild.org/robin_grille/eq_2.html (bold[s] mine):

Developmental Task: The child is at this time trying to learn that it is OK to need, to reach out interpersonally and to ask for what she wants. At a core level she is also learning about deserving, and the joy of receiving. What can be imprinted during this stage is that satisfaction and fulfillment are a birthright, always worth vigorously and assertively pursuing. Our capacity for interpersonal care, giving, and generosity is most authentic to the degree that our passage through this time was favorable. True independence, as opposed to defensive self-reliance, can only spring from satiation of dependency needs.

The Main Wounding Experiences: When a baby of this age is left alone to cry for extended periods, and is refused the holding and attention that she is calling for, this has profound and long-term consequences for her emotional make-up. She deeply absorbs the message that she mustn't ask for what she wants or needs, her impulses to reach out collapse and she becomes resigned. She is not as yet equipped to cope with delayed gratification, and therefore experiences rigidly scheduled feeding, early weaning and "controlled crying" as abandonment and neglect. On the other end of the scale, over-anxious and over-indulgent parenting startles her and disturbs her natural serenity, interrupting her need to express her accumulated emotional stress. The middle road consists of being guided by the baby's cues, and letting her take the lead.

Emotional Function and Core Beliefs: Some core beliefs arising from injurious experiences at this time include: I must do it alone, I must show that I don't need anyone or anything. I don't deserve love, I am not loveable. I am loveable only if I don't have emotional needs. I am only loveable when I am "giving". Others' needs are more important than mine. My happiness depends on being liked by others.

Some core beliefs arising from positive experiences during this stage include: I have a right to have and to express my needs and wants. Life nourishes me. Life is plentiful and abundant, and I deserve Life's generosity. I am free and fulfilled enough to care for others. Others have a right to their needs too. These are the emotional foundations underpinning the capacity to be appropriately assertive, and to be direct rather than manipulative or seductive.

The fulfillment of these essential developmental needs is the font from which we can later draw a natural generosity of spirit. Full gratification of infantile need is also what gives us the capacity to be genuinely respectful of others' needs and limits; to gracefully let go when someone says "no" to us. The organic strength that enables us to sustain disappointments, and to cope with the fact that we don't always get what we want, springs from early childhood satisfaction; not from premature, enforced "independence".

Initiative, self-motivation, emotional stamina and endurance, patience - all of these qualities are fostered when the optimal conditions are encountered at this second stage of development. True independence, as opposed to defensive self-reliance ("I don't need anyone"), is paradoxically the product of dependency having been embraced. Emotional independence enables us to care deeply for ourselves, it empowers us to reach out to others for intimate connection, yet also to let them go.

Potential Adult Manifestation of Injury: When our needs go unanswered at this oral stage of development, this leaves us stuck in dependency, living as if waiting for Mother to show up, subconsciously longing for the lost bliss of unity at the breast. We "suck" at and cling to relationships, food, alcohol, drugs, tobacco, gambling or material goods. We feel as if life owes us, waiting passively for things to change, or impatiently grasping at life. Unfulfilled at the core we remain as "suckers", gullible to the seductive wiles of P. R. machinations, merchandising campaigns and "charismatic" individuals. An individual whose needs of the heart are essentially met is less susceptible later in life to co-dependent relationships, idolatry and addictions. A healthy passage through this time contributes toward a healthy skepticism later. One is not so easily fooled, and will be more perspicacious in relationships.

Our co-dependent clinging in relationships provides no contentment, so we blame each other for our personal dissatisfaction. We fantasize romantic notions of a "true love" which lasts forever, a fanciful and symbiotic union that will meet all our needs for love and understanding; and thus we harbor unrealistic expectations of one another. Alternatively, we convince ourselves that we don't need anyone, but collapse with exhaustion or bitterness. The unsatiated grow up to become insatiable. The breathless greed that afflicts our civilization is no more than the cry of the emotionally malnourished baby disguised in adult garb.

Third Rite of Passage: The Right To Support

What is Happening: This stage spans from 6 months to two years. It is during this time that the child begins to take his first frail and uncertain steps away from symbiosis, toward autonomy. Until roughly 18 months, the baby ha0AThis third stage marks a tenuous threshold of transition from babyhood into childhood, from prostrate helplessness to the boldness of standing. The developmental drama which unfolds at this time is about personal power, the power to exert some control on the environment as the child begins to learn to stand, to take his first steps and to utter his first words.

This third stage marks a tenuous threshold of transition from babyhood into childhood, from prostrate helplessness to the boldness of standing. The developmental drama which unfolds at this time is about personal power, the power to exert some control on the environment as the child begins to learn to stand, to take his first steps and to utter his first words.

Optimal Developmental Experience: There needs to be an abundance of support provided at this time. Support is only true support if it meets the child's needs as they emerge. In other words, support for the child's sake, as the child needs it, rather than "encouragement" to progress at the rate expected by parents or others. The toddler needs his parents behind him as he tentatively steps out to explore. He wants us to share in his wonder as he becomes more agile, to hold him when he stumbles, to be his unfailing safety net when he becomes afraid. He does not want us to cajole or pressure him to "make progress". The child's innate rhythm sets his pace; if allowed he will come to walk and talk without hurry or push. Appropriate support therefore embraces him both at his strength, as at his frailty.

Now that the toddler is mobile, boundary-setting becomes an issue. Realistic safety boundaries can be defined compassionately, clearly and respectfully; without resorting to punishment or shaming.

Developmental Task: At this time, the toddler is learning whether he can trust in the support of others. He needs to find that it is OK to reach out for and receive support, as well as to rely on his own strength; that it is human to be vulnerable as well as strong. This includes trusting that his vulnerability will evoke care, rather than manipulation, seduction or shaming. It also involves the experience that his strength will be respected, and not exploited by others. He needs to distinguish help that is genuine from help that is manipulative, or bait on a hook. His autonomy and personal power are there to serve his own development, not others' expectations. Hopefully, he will learn by example that true personal power comes through honesty, not through domination. Finally, the toddler wants to learn that love is only real if it is love for being himself, not for being what others wish him to be.

The Main Wounding Experiences: The child's growing personal power is a central theme at this time. There are a number of ways in which the wrong kind of support can distort personal power so that instead of being based on honesty, it is based on manipulation, seduction or the use of force. Here are some of the ways that this might happen:

Unfulfilled or lonely parents at times seek comfort in their child, exploiting the child's willingness to be there for the parents' needs. The parent may not be consciously aware that they are loading the child with their own unfulfilled emotional needs, inadvertently leaning on the child, who then grows up too quickly. The pay-off for the child is that he gets to feel special.

It is very tempting at this time to manipulate the child to exceed his own need for supported growth. The trap lies in the temptation to make the child special for being a "champ", or compelling him to make Mummy or Daddy proud. This orients the child toward performance, or showing off: adults become their appreciative audience, as the child splits off from his authentic self to project an image or role designed to get the positive strokes. In the quest to have the "wonderful child" that we can gloat about, "support" becomes manipulative and exploitative. Encouragement to perform more competently (feats of walking, talking, being "cute") risks being seductive to the child, who willingly rises up to meet the parental expectation. He trades in his inner pleasure for the power to entertain, gratify, and thereby control others. Seductive encouragement stands in contrast to a sharing and celebrating of the child's own pleasure gained from his accomplishments.

Some children are turned to by one parent to fill the space of an absent, inadequate or alcoholic partner. Responding to the parent's cues, and sensing the parent's pain, the child grows prematurely to become "Mama's little man", or "Daddy's little girl". In order to meet the adult's emotional need, the child must learn to deny his own frailty, his own need for support. He quickly learns to abandon his true, childish self, and to present a false self-image scripted to enchant his parents. Inside, he feels deeply betrayed, and becomes suspicious and mistrustful; yet he adapts: he gains control over the parents by pleasing them, by disguising his vulnerability, and by becoming indispensable. It is alarming how young a child can mold himself to the role of protector, healer or confidant.

This prematurely developing child becomes astute about other's unspoken needs, and gains control by promising to meet those needs.

The abuse this time consists of over-empowering the child, who is given (or intuitively picks up) the message that the parent is dependent on him.

Tarot/torah? unspecified Google-istic musings, link harvest, random

Fool: Querent; seeker (after 'truth', meaning, her [or his] *own*, personal, truth)

From http://www.wejees.net/whatistarot.html (bold mine):

How does Tarot work?

The cards are like a mirror, reflecting back to us our inner state. The images appeal to the archetypal images we carry in our subconscious, and reflect the archetypal tales known to every civilization. We merely insert ourselves into the tale, and pick up the story at the place we are at right now. We ask the Tarot a question, and like a psychic mirror, it reflects back a story that will have personal meaning to us. At the heart of most questions, especially those most deeply felt, is the question of meaning. To experience life with joy you must find a sense of personal meaning. When someone asks, "What's going on?" they usually want to know, "Why is this happening to me?". The cards imply there is an understandable order and reason for our experiences, that the events themselves are mirroring some deeper cause that is veiled from ordinary sight

I Ching Hexagram 21: Cutting Through

From http://www.tarot.com/oracle/daily/ (bold mine):

Today's I Ching Hexagram for Everyone:
21: Cutting Through

Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010
Hexagram 21 General Meaning: The situation calls for confronting a knotty conflict and cutting through it. Somehow, the way to harmony and unity is blocked or frustrated — perhaps by a tangle of misunderstandings or outright deceit. Like Alexander the Great cutting the Gordian knot, assert yourself now and you will meet with good fortune. Don't be afraid to shake things up a bit. The ability to take corrective measures when they are needed is an essential trait of true leadership.

But those who bring discipline to bear must, above all, be honest — with others, and with themselves. Honesty is the hallmark of the strong and self-confident. The successful person masters the art of honesty much as a swordsman masters fencing.

When lies, delusions and game playing are getting in the way of teamwork, a swift sword of honest action, perhaps even correction, must be wielded to protect one's integrity and values. Decisiveness with integrity brings good fortune.

Though your actions be vigorous, they must not be hasty, severe or arbitrary. Be sure to carefully consider all the circumstances. In the case of a serious disruption of relations, you must forgive, but not forget to give a person a chance to make reparations for his mistakes. If some penalty or punishment is necessary, make certain that it fits the crime. When boundaries have become slack and useless, only through the institution of clear and swift correction can their effectiveness be restored.

In situations where serious issues of justice are at stake, keep careful records and do not hesitate to go public with the truth.

Love

Basic Tarot Story

The Fool comes to a cross-road, filled with energy, confidence and purpose, knowing exactly where she wants to go and what she wants to do. But she comes to a dead stop. A flowering tree marks the path she wants to take, the one she's been planning on taking. But standing before a fruit tree marking the other path is a man. She's met and had relationships with men before, some far more handsome and charming. But he is different. Seeing him, she feels as though she's just been shot in the heart with cupid's arrow, so shocking, so painful is her "recognition" of him. As she speaks with him, the feeling intensifies; like finding a missing part of herself, a part she's been searching for her life long. It is clear that he feels the same about her. They finish each others sentences, think the same thoughts. It is as if an Angel above had introduced their souls to each other. Though it was her plan to follow the path of the flowering tree, and though it will cause some trouble for her to bring this man with her, to go somewhere else entirely, the Fool knows she dare not leave him behind. Like the fruit tree, he will satisfy her. No matter how divergent from her original intent, he is her future. She chooses him, and together they head down a whole new road.

Basic Tarot Meaning

Originally, this card was called just LOVE. And that's actually more apt than "Lovers." Love follows in this sequence of growth and maturity. And, coming after the Emperor, who is about control, it is a radical change in perspective. LOVE is a force that makes you choose and decide for reasons you often can't understand; it makes you surrender control to a higher power. And that is what this card is all about. Finding something or someone who is so much a part of yourself, so perfectly attuned to you and you to them, that you cannot, dare not resist. In interpretation, the card indicates that the querent has come across, or will come across a person, career, challenge or thing that they will fall in love with. They will know instinctively that they must have this, even if it means diverging from their chosen path. No matter the difficulties, without it they will never be complete.

Thirteen's Observations

The Lovers is a confusing card as it is ruled not by an emotional water sign but by airy Gemini. The original trump featured a man and a woman with a cupid above them about to shoot his dart. Later this became three figures, the interpretation being a man choosing between two women, or a man meeting his true love with the help of a matchmaker. Still later, with Waite, we have an Angel above Adam and Eve. The Angel stands for Raphael, who is emblematic of Mercury and Air, planet and element of Gemini. Gemini is the communications sign. It's all about messages and making contact; also, as it is the card of the twins, it's about finding your other self. In this regard, you can see that the Lovers card begins to make sense. Especially if you change it back to "LOVE." Here is a card about perfect communication, about finding something your soul requires. In this regard, its most common interpretation about being "A Choice" makes sense. When this card appears, you are being told to trust you instincts, to choose this career, challenge, person or thing you're so strongly drawn to, no matter how scary, how difficult, irrational or troublesome - without it, you will never be wholly you. It's sudden and unexpected, and it means a complete change in plans; but this is LOVE. True love.

Text from http://www.aeclectic.net/tarot/learn/meanings/lovers.shtml, genders reversed (and some minor editing) to suit *me* :-)

Lovers

Although it has taken on a strictly romantic revision of meaning in some modern decks, traditionally the Lovers card of Tarot reflected the challenges of choosing a partner. At a crossroads, one cannot take both paths. The images on this card in different decks have varied more than most, because we have had so many ways of looking at sex and relationships across cultures and centuries.

Classically, the energy of this card reminded us of the real challenges posed by romantic relationships, with the protagonist often shown in the act of making an either-or choice. To partake of a higher ideal often requires sacrificing the lesser option. The path of pleasure eventually leads to distraction from spiritual growth. The gratification of the personality eventually gives way to a call from spirit as the soul matures.

Modern decks tend to portray the feeling of romantic love with this card, showing Adam and Eve at the gates of Eden when everything was still perfect. This interpretation portrays humanity before the Fall, and can be thought to imply a different sort of choice -- the choice of evolution over perfection, or the choice of personal growth through relationship -- instead of a fantasy where everything falls into place perfectly and is taken care of without effort.

Theme: Integrate two potential realities or let go of one of them.
Astro Association: Gemini
Element: Air
Number: 6
Alias: Love

Image and text from www.tarot.com.

it is RIGHT to protect yourself against people you don’t trust

feeling guilt

for protecting myself.

My mother taught me that
protecting myself?

was = to SHUTTING HER OUT.

So I was not allowed to shut her out, though SHE was allowed to shut ME out. The power inequity, once again.

So I learned to have boundaries to protect *her*, but *not* to protect *me*.

How fucked up is *that*????

And I don’t blame myself.

Positive spin (hourglass spinning here while I try to think of something):

I now *call* her on her bullshit. I *draw* my lines in the sand, for *me*, and I *enforce* them. She does not get to get *away* with this ‘one way’ bullshit any more.

the Garden, part two

reading about developmental stages:

“what you describe is actually pretty common. It occurs just about at the onset of puberty, when kids go into what Piaget called the age of abstract thought (and what religions call the Age of Reason). It's when you become aware of your consciousness as a separate entity from your physical being. Certainly there can be internal monologue before that happens, but that odd feeling of observing oneself is a function of new brain processes that come about as the brain matures.”

~Miko, 12/1/2004 http://ask.metafilter.com/12374/What-on-earth-is-going-on-in-childrens-heads

Wondering if there’s a correlation/parallel here between human species (?) evolution and developmental stages of human growth. I seem to remember reading somewhere that humans go through all the same phases while growing up that – oh, wait, maybe it’s that the developing embryo, in the womb? goes through all the ‘evolutionary’ changes that humans went through on the road from being some water-based critter to bipedality (?).

So I’m thinking: What if the ‘age of reason’ corresponds to that same point in human evolutionary history where we went from animals who had no ability to self-reflect to being the currently self-absorbed, self-obssessed, guilt-ridden creatures we are today?

Maybe that’s the ‘apple’ point, at which the fruit of the Tree is absorbed?

The painful, hyper-self-consciousness/awareness of teenagers; the development of the ongoing ‘internal monolog (or dialog???)’. Wonder what age that starts? I’m thinking around age 6? Don’t know why that age comes to mind, exactly.

***
It’s something to do with shame, and sexual shame, in particular.

Cultures which don’t develop this sexual shame (are there any left?) don’t become split into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ portions of themselves; they remain whole, integrated, as nature intended.

Those who find themselves judged, and thus end up being judges themselves, are also subject to shame.

Can’t quite capture this, it keeps escaping.

Battling internalized cultural constructs and external expectations

where they conflict with MY NEEDS.

Sun :-)

‘god’ as a substitute for LOVE.

Is there some translation of yhwh that = love? Literally?

Clearing the mental? heart- al? :-) log jam.

confused.

Help me, rhonda.

I cannot reach out to *him* ♥ because

I am reaching

inward.

No. it is –

OK for me to reach for him.

But the place I reach from

is

also OK.

So.

What is it?

***
Unfurling.

Leaves must grow
UPWARD
OUT.

ROOTS

grow DOWN, not inward.

So.

Soil;
water
sun.

He is my sun.

Why?

voices say, “that is *not* ok, not good. Wrong.”

But *I*, I, say, to myself:

Love. Love him.  Let him love you.  Including: Reaching out. Asking. *Taking* what is given. It is *not* selfish. He ♥ said this, when I said that I was *trying* to learn to reach for what I wanted: "Don't ever lose that."

The ‘parents’* had it WRONG. Do NOT listen to them, grasshopper. In any smallest nano-place of your soul, spirit, mind, body, heart – any cell of your being.


Exeunt. OUT, damn spot!

Punished for being smart? (tentative title, not sure what this should say)

I felt singled out, my father’s WRATH (there really is no other word for it) was like an acid – an oozing poison that trickled out steadily creating a noxious atmosphere in which I could scarcely breathe, much of the time.

I needed him so badly; and yet? when he was gone – there was the chance for fresh air.

The emotionally oppressive, repressive father.

Being held to a higher standard than everyone else.

I don’t know how on (earth?) I got ‘elected’ to this role in my family, but I want out. NOW.

I think it was partly

being a girl
being the eldest
being the first born (meaning, my parents had no previous experience, and I was their ‘guinea pig’, on whom they got to practice being ‘good’ parents in the eyes of the world – what.ever.)

being sensitive to the needs of others (part of an overall general sensitive-ness)

Anyway, it feels like I got *hammered* for being who I *was*. Not just simply for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, but being the *wrong person* for whom my parents ‘needed’, especially my father. He *needed* a boy – for his ego, for his – what – I’m not sure I can figure it out. In any case, I was definitely *not* what *he* needed at that place and time in *his* life.

So it goes, as one friend says.

Not my problem. Nor my responsibility. HIS responsibility, HIS problem to figure out.

And *not* to take out on *me* or on *my* head (psyche, spirit, mind, etc.)

Healing the puer

“...a windblown spirit who cannot fly and therefore cannot fulfill [her] fate.” ~ Ralph Severson, Puer's Wounded Wing

I dreamed last night that a funny-looking boy came and put his head in my lap.

My impulse was to reject him; to push him away. But then I realized he needed me, and what could it hurt? He was just seeking simple comfort, no more.

So I let him rest his head there, and stroked his hair, gently. He seemed calmed by it, and went to sleep.

***
This is the part of *me* that I’m trying to re-absorb – that rejected adolescent, the one my father didn’t want.

Why is it the puer? I think it’s a boy in my dream because boy represents the active, or outgoing? part of the self. But (he) was made to be *passive* by my father, because my father couldn’t handle a woman who could outdo him at anything – be smarter, faster, cleverer, more talented. So I learned to hide myself, my wings were clipped, so to speak, as the price of being accepted by my family.

Now? I *insist* on flying. No more nice.

***
But it is not only my *father* who blocks this flight in me: It is the culture as a whole.

Men feel threatened by strong women. Or, at least, *many* of them do. They act it out in all kinds of ways, from overt violence to verbal undermining and emotional gaslighting.

For example, I called about a car part the other day, and, without thinking (maybe I was a little tired? not enough sleep and up too early), I kind of ‘barked’ at him, the guy on the other end of the phone. I wasn’t really brusque, so much, as just very sure of what I needed and not making that extra effort to sound ‘feminine’ so as not to bruise the fragile male ego on the other end of the line.

Of course I was ‘punished’ for it – he left me on hold, and when I finally hung up and called back, he said, “Oh yeah, we don’t have it. Sorry, kiddo.”

What the *fuck* is with the ‘kiddo’? To a grown woman, a total stranger. I’ve been in to that shop before, and I know for a fact that the guy on the other end of the line is the same age as me, if not younger. It’s pure power play, plain and simple. (wow, look at all that alliteration! :-) Accidental.)