Tuesday, May 14, 2013
The psychiatrist who labelled me in 11 cost effective minutes tried to point out my “delusion” to me by asking, “But WHY would they DO such a thing? Do you not see? He/they would have NO REASON to do so.”
Here's your reason:
They do it for the emotional payoff they get from doing it which is two-fold.
A. They get to FEEL better about themselves by looking down on those they define as “less than” and who 'deserve” it.
B. They get a form of bonding/belonging from their agreement with the dysfunctional group of people who think and act out just like them. This makes their thinking and behaviour “normal.” (Common, a consensus reality) Since it does, then they can thank God, the universe, evolution, their genes, etc. that they aren't a nut, defective, or an inferior human being etc., like him/her/them.
THAT'S the reason. And there is no reason (logic) in It.
The dysfunctional superior splitters HAVE to talk both “us” and themselves out of knowing we can see them and hear them acting it all out, see and hear their contemptuous mocking and ridiculing etc. from a few feet away. They HAVE to keep themselves convinced that their group behaviour isn't “really” abuse or harm, because that is HOW they justify it and that is how they keep themselves deluded that they are all “hidden” in plain sight.
...At this Comment I Got Yesterday on this older post from March 2010.
I get quite a few of these but I don't post most of them as they are all from the terribly "sane" people who want me to get controlled.
Still this one seems so typical of those who want to control the 'defectives' such as myself that I wanted to have a second look at it. In fact, I am moved to answer this one as a special post which will appear here soon... and thank you Kelsey Benson, complete stranger to me who is nevertheless quite certain about what I need and what my own experience is and where I have gone "wrong" in terms of an ambiguous abstraction of course...
and why I need to be controlled. She has taken courses in psychology you see and so I must be the naughty disordered child for blaming the blameless "others"....that is why I need to stop this blogging and get saved by the psychiatric faith....
How Do We Define Sanity and Insanity?
Wednesday, May 08, 2013
Tuesday, May 07, 2013
The containment of psychiatric labelling, the reductionism, the psycho-spiritual isolation, and the social pressure placed on those who are so labelled IS the “stigma” and it always has been. Being defined in this way changes the people defined and it also changes all the people around that one, who accept the definition and then make the person “fit” into it. Even people who actually KNEW you BL (before labelling ) change the way they see you, hear you and relate to you for now you are a disease process, not a regular person, and experts have made it so.
Labelling human beings as “less than” or inherently “inferior” to the “normal” humans sends a clear message to those who are so “glad” that “we” aren't defective like “them.”
It is also like waving a red flag for the “Bulls”(ies) in society which signals to the ass-holes of the world; “we can feel free to abuse this defective person just as much as we like since no one is going to believe someone who has been labelled as defective and crazy for “believing' she has been harmed by others.”
Though the psychiatrized may well have been the targets of group abuse before labelling, it will pale by comparison to the level of abuse generated BY the official labelling of the individual's experience of life from his/her OWN point of view, now understood by others as irrelevant, imaginary and nothing but the product of a bad brain chemistry or defective genes.
Label = Stigma
If you pay attention you will notice that there are TWO types of labelled people who still promote the label while fighting the “stigma.” Those who don't promote the labelling, and there are MANY of us, are mostly ignored by the system for our dissenting opinion based on our own experience. We are often labelled “non-compliant” as I was, for refusing to deny our own reality and co-operate with the diagnostic pigeon holing which tells us, and others, that we “just have no insight into our own condition” for if we DID, then surely we would be embracing our labels with gratitude and not worry about any “stigma.”
I have a question for Gordon Warme, M.D.
Warme tells us in one of his books that he has the same problem with those labelled schizophrenic as he does with the Jews of the Holocaust and that is; “the taking of a victim stance brought it all down on their own heads.”
This is all part of the ever popular, “we can't blame others” bit.
My question is: are YOU not, right there in that statement, “blaming others”? If so, and you really believe that “blaming others” is a “symptom” of mental illness, should you, and all those like you, be picked up and taken for a psych evaluation?
Or is it different when it is you doing the blaming?
Thursday, April 25, 2013
April 24th 2013
I am at the library listening to a group of people debating and evaluating psychologically/verbally assaultive group behaviour. The most common emotion displayed during this discussion are the group's SMILES and laughter.
One guy says he would not know what it was like to be “ganged up on” as he “pretty much gets along” with “everybody.”
There is an old biblical saying, if “everybody” likes you, then you are doing something wrong.
What always strikes me in these group assessments is the turn around; the turning AWAY from the judging of the aggressors and toward the judgement of the victims. It is like saying you would not be group assaulted if you had been well liked (like the speaker who wants to feel safe and secure) by those performing the assault. It is similar to other excuses for group abuse or crimes against individuals. Like women being told they would not be a rape victim if they were not “sending out signals” indicating they wanted to be assaulted. Or university students “knowing” THEY could not get a psychiatric label because THEY are not sick.1 Or idiots trained to believe they can't be a victim unless they CHOOSE to be and therefore those who don't know that “deserve” to be attacked as an “inferior.” This is the stuff that generates Stockholm Syndrome in victims. "I have to get the psycho holding me hostange with the machine gun to LIKE me so he won't blow me away. Of course the smiling assessors rarely, if ever, see the lack of logic in their own assessments; mainly because they don't really WANT to see it or hear it. When held hostage it's one thing but why the delusional need to feel safe when it's NOT you? Are you smiling too much to get attacked?
Usually what the “popular” people are doing wrong is making sure they stay popular with pretty much EVERYBODY. That of course means not taking an unpopular stand against ANYTHING.
Then the topic turned to “teasing” which is usually defined as cute and “fun” and the smiles and laughter appeared again.
The reason we don't see this problem is because the people discussing it don't see themselves. You consistently miss the point. The point is this:
Your GROUP behaviour is DENIED to exist and is re-framed as the imagination of those on the receiving end of your assessments and evaluations. This creates the SPLIT in reality which you then work very hard to keep from seeing and hearing in order to maintain the group delusion of superiority, normality/abnormality and “difference.” There is no real difference. It is an illusion.
Next the discussion turned to crazy people and the difference between crazy people who are really smart and crazy people who are really quite stupid. The topic they did not cover of course is the one on the crazy people who think they are sane and “normal” and never suspect, for even a minute, that their agreements together about who is crazy and who is not, is a predominant symptom of the craziness in them and the sick society that they routinely support and enable, with all those amused smiles about those crazy people who are just not like them. This is another point of agreement between us.
Here is a new thought for you:
What if you didn't define the people you are discussing in their absence, or worse, from four feet away, as “crazy,” as your starting point for your group discussion? How would your assessments and judgements of what they say and do change, and how might your assessments of yourselves and what YOU are saying and doing change as well?
Change your premise; change your experience. Change to World, one idiot at a time. Pretend, just for the fun of it, that the people you are calling crazy, actually aren't crazy. They are just in a lot of distress from being CALLED crazy ,and then being treated by others “as if” they were crazy.
Then listen to what they tell you about their experiences of you and others and see if you can make any “sense” of it when attached to your new PREMISE.
1 Ignoring the fact that “claiming” you aren't “sick” is one of the things which gets assessed as a 'symptom” that you ARE sick!