A psychiatrist speaking on the removal of children from a religious sect:
“The girls believe they are marrying these older men by choice. Of course they have been trained since they were babies to obey without question and to be compliant. To train children that way, of course, IS abuse. “
‘Really; you don’t say,’ I said back to the TV newscaster as I too contemplated my disobedience and non compliant ways which had been defined by psychiatrists as ‘mental illness.’
This is another moment of Zen.
If someone is said to be ‘some sort of big brain or something’ but you don’t see it, does that mean:
A: There is nothing there to see so your perception is correct and the accurate one?
B: You can’t see what you are incapable or perhaps just unwilling to see which is actually there?
If the fact that I know pretty much everything you say and do ‘covertly’ becomes known to you too, is that more ‘amazing’ from your point of view because you cannot see how it is possible?
Is it more ‘amazing’ from my point of view because I can’t see how it is possible for YOU to fail to see the perfectly obvious?
I have been told that if I was ‘really’ smart, I would be smart enough not to show my brains to a man. The only thing I can really say in answer to that is this:
If a man is really smart, he is smart enough to know that being threatened by a woman’s intelligence, to the point where he needs to instruct HER to ‘hide’ her brains to make him feel better about himself, is not smart at all. In fact, it is pretty pathetic.
If mocking and ridiculing our neighbours is ‘fun’ we must also remember to fully enjoy our own turn as the neighbourhood targets.
Intelligence can mean knowing when to keep your own mouth shut and just listen.
Why should people expect to be greeted with enthusiasm by those they ‘covertly’ denigrate?
Experience teaches us (or at least it should) that the people easiest to con are those who believe they can’t be conned.
Should it surprise anyone that those who are witless see no wit in the witty?
Society and psychiatry like to deny the dysfunctional reality of group thin and behaviour so they look for an alternate explanation that makes them feel better and find it in the idea of ‘disease process.’
When you silently mouth derogatory comments about someone in their presence so they won’t hear you, s/he can still SEE you.
When you already ‘know all about’ someone there is nothing further they can say to you; nor do they need to; not will it do them any good to try it.
Only normal human beings can turn the perfectly obvious about themselves into a great ‘mystery.’
Enlightenment for the dysfunctional “normal’: the group delusion of grandeur is a very common phenomenon. In order to maintain the psychological ‘high’ produced by It, an ‘inferior’ over whom to fell ‘superior’ is an absolute necessity.
One cannot see from the other’s perspective if one’s own error keeps blocking the view.
Some react to what they think they know about others and others react to what they really know about some.
People are still ‘looking for reason in the unreasonable’ and still failing to see reason where it really exists.
All we need to do to begin to resolve in the biggest problem is to first admit to ourselves that it exists. We cannot ‘fix’ what we can not acknowledge.
People who have caused themselves to believe they are ‘objective observers’ of others have reduced those they observe to the level of objects. This is the delusion of the observer.
If you knew that those you criticize ‘covertly’ knew everything you said about them, would their REACTIONS to you make more sense?
Those who play had games as a way of life thinks that those who don’t are just ‘stupid.’ Those who don’t play head games think that those who do and who believe they are fooling others by doing it, are the truly stupid ones.
The difference between a friend and a critic is that the friend who disagrees will tell the other and take it no further. The critic pretends to agree and then criticizes the other with everyone else.