Knowing when to smile at ignorance and when to fight it.

I was searching for a song or video via Google and YouTube the other day and I ran across a song and lyrics that I hadn't listen to in a long time.  Many moons ago, Sting wrote and sang on his second album a song called An Englishmen in New York.   One line that stood out in that song was "It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile".   I've never forgot that line.  As a kid with low self-esteem, a dad with a dominant personality and four older siblings, I was trained to accept ignorance. Now I didn't smile, but I accepted it, but never forgot it.  As I left my family of origin, got older, got success under my belt and became a parent, I became more assertive and advocated for myself more.  I've detailed how 2011  was a pivotal year in my life.  I lost a long-time job, my first marriage crumbled, I was well on my way to bankruptcy and losing my house and probably most importantly my closest sibling took his own life.  The last event as much as anything broke the dam in terms of me having any serious reservations about standing up for myself.  I realized he never truly stood up for himself properly which cost him the possibility of healthy relationships (and a family of his own), career and financial success and most importantly his dignity.  It's been nearing 9 years, but I still miss him.  I digress, however.

My brother's death, along with the hardships I was going through at the time woke me up to something: The cost of not advocating for one's self properly.   He'd been ridiculed as child, had been take advantage/abused as a child and an adult, had been overlooked as a possible companion and been overlooked as a valuable contributor for a job that suited his intellectual gifts.  All of this weighed on him heavily.  When financial hardship that threatened his ability to 'make it' came, it was just too much for him.  It cost him his life.  I'd been subjected to much of the same thing he had and yet I some how 'made it'.  However, as I previously mentioned, it was not a banner time for me either.  It woke me up.  The old Rich that tolerated any ignorance, slights, being minimized, ignored or shut down and/or being taken advantage of, disappeared quickly.  I was angry for my brother and I realized my role as a dad, especially that I hoped my daughter could be proud of was at stake.  Some that had known me for a long time were surprised by the transformation.  Some were not ready to accept it and I had to 'remind' them that the old me had been sent packing.  This was good and bad.   Obviously, this had been long in the making and had been long overdue.  However, the anger at what happened with my brother, my slights and the slights to my family--including family of origin--drove me.   If I were honest, I'm still processing some of it.  The toxic political climate of the past decade (or two) hasn't helped either, but I digress.  

This all leads to a question.   What is the proper balance between suffering ignorance and fighting it?  I'm not going to pretend I have the right answer or that this is not a work in progress for me.  But then again, that answer may be different for different people.  So, I'm going to explore this subject a little bit, throw out a few ideas and leave it up to the reader to figure out their sweet spot.

Before I delve further let me define ignorance.

• Slights
• Insults/Slanders/Libels/Taunts
• Threats
• Negative actions

Continuing on...  When should I smile and when should I refrain from smiling?

A TIME TO SMILE AND TIME TO REFRAIN FROM SMILING

• Does the ignorance harm you only?
• I believe many people will tell you they can roll with punches.  However, when the ignorance is directed at their loved ones, especially their children, it seems to be a different story. In that case, I believe most people push back more.
• I believe when it is directed at the ones you love, especially where they are looking at you for protection, it is more permissible to engage it to defend on their behalf. 
• I would consider however, if I am undermining them jumping in. 
• Sometimes, they need to practice or learn how to defend themselves.

• How much harm would tolerating the ignorance cause?
• Will the person delivering the ignorance be seen as petty, insignificant and harmless?   If so, it may not be worth the trouble as you could literally get caught up with these types every day.
• Put another way, is the cause even worth it?
• Could the ignorance undermine your authority or cause harm to you, loved ones or your 'neighbors'.   If so, challenging the ignorance may not only be a tolerable course of action, but actually the responsible course of action. 

•  How much harm could fighting the ignorance lead to?
• Is the ignorance too strong to fight at that point?
• Sometimes the timing just isn't right.  Considering fighting the battle another day. 
• Will fighting the ignorance put an end to it have little impact or could it just make things much worse.  
• Sometimes the person who tailgates you and then cuts you off won't learn anything if you lay on the horn.  It won't stop him or her from cutting you again or others.
• Sometimes engaging the idiot driver who cuts you off, could cause further problems on the road.  He or she might get pissed off that you are 'calling them' out and slam on their brakes.
  
• 
  

In the Bible, my Higher Power (God) states:
There is a time for everything,

    and a season for every activity under the heavens  (Ecclesiastes 3:1)

So yes, there is a time to suffer ignorance and smile and a time to call it out.  A man (woman) will tend to have a better idea of the timing.  In society today, we could literally spend our time stewing in or dealing with the ignorances we are subjected to every day, but that doesn't move us forward.  That keeps us stuck in the anger and/or resentment.  So, it is best to consider the cost/benefit of suffering ignorance quietly vs. the cost of engaging it and calling it out.

Just some thoughts. 

-- Rich

A negative tends to have a greater impact than a positive.

As Mark Twain was purported to have said, “A lie can travel half way around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes.”  Obviously, what he meant was that it is easier to spread a falsehood than to correct it.   I also realized when in was in my first year of college that failure is easier than success and spoke about this concept in The Fine Line: Failure takes no effort, success takes a lot of work .  Most of the time you don't have to do anything to fail.  In fact, I believe that it is doing nothing that will inevitably usually lead to failure.   In more recent years, it has occurred to me that a negative generally has greater impact than a positive.  As a matter of fact, the concepts here actually go hand in hand.   Just as failure is easier than success, a negative tends to be the default or more pervasive state than a positive.

But, think about.  When studying history what do we put more of our energy on?  When we have both good and bad interactions with people, what do we tend to focus more on?  If we have an otherwise good driving record marred by a life-changing accident, what will we and others focus on?   When we have a good work record marred by a very bad screw-up or marred by an unfortunate interaction--especially if we are dismissed as a result--will we feel like a success?  When we have an uneventful or clean deployment that ends with a trauma, what will we be tend to focus on?

I've had some successes in life, but in my later 40s and 50s, I have worked through and processes a lot as a childhood sexual abuse survivor.   The successes have helped me keep perspective BUT they did not completely erase the impact of CSA.  This all leads to the questions:  Why does the negative in many (or I dare so most) cases have a greater impact than the positive?  I'm going to consider that here:

Impact of Negatives vs. Positives

• I think the positives, though we appreciate them, we can take them for granted and not realize their goodness or importance.  Negatives on the other hand I think are harder to dismiss as 'these things just happen sometimes'.  I think we tend to look for a reason or why.
• I think often the consequences of a negative just is more devastating than a positive.  
• I understand a common exercise to teach teens the difficulty and challenges of raising a baby utilizes an egg as the baby. 
• The goal is to take the 'baby' wherever you go without 'breaking it'.
• No matter how many times or days you've handled the egg, if you drop it once on any kind of hard surface, it will break.  Similarly a baby can easily be injured if you drop him or her once.
• I believe we may savor the good or positive times and relive them, but they will tend to become a distance memory. Their impact can fade over time and we won't usually tend to second-guess them.  Bad or negative times, if bad enough, can come to the forefront.  From my experience, if they are not resolved, can come to the forefront very quickly.  Bad times are a lot more likely to lead to second guessing.  That is, how could we have made that choice, said those words, done that thing, etc.
• I believe we tend to view 'negatives' as a moral failure.  Meaning we have a harder time 'forgiving ourselves'.  I think this is especially true if the weak or more challenged our faith is.  The positives we take pride in but we are taught not to gloat too much about them or take too much credit for them.

So believing that negatives tend to have a greater impact, what do we do to mitigate against that?  I don't have all the answers, but I do have some ideas.

Mitigation Strategies (Against the Oversized Influence of Negatives) 

• Make reminders of success prominent in your life.  Not to gloat on them or to show or develop arrogance, but as a reminder to yourself when the bad times or negatives hit that your life has balance.  Meaning that as much of a particular failure or negative hurts, it is not who you are.
• Remember who your Higher Power sees you as.  Yes, it hurts if the world or you in particular sees a negative or failure in your life, but how does your Higher Power view you?  For myself, I've been taught that we are made in God's image and 'God doesn't make junk'.
• Surround yourself with those tend to be uplifting for you.  That's not to say surround yourself with yes men, but those who will be more willing see you in a positive light than a negative.   In other words, while you don't want those who would 'Blow smoke up your *ss', you also don't want those who would "Rain on your parade' either.
• Learn to view negatives or failures as blessing in disguise where possible.  If not that, then at least learn to view them as a learning experience or point along the journey.

Few people can completely shut the negatives in their life and I believe it is human nature to focus on the negatives over the positives.  However, that doesn't have to be a place 'where we live' but instead maybe a place we visit from time to time or a reminder of what to avoid.

Anyway, that's my thoughts for the day or my story and I'm sticking to it.

-- Rich

Strays, Part 2: Those whose struggles we struggle with.

I recently read about and heard a lecture from and will probably buy a book of a man who was at age 12 started to lose his ability to communicate with others and fell into a vegetative state.  After less than three years, started to regain consciousness. By age 19 he was fully conscience, but with exception of eyes, was unable to move and thus found it hard to let anyone know he was conscience and aware.  Eventually a compassionate and perceptive caregiver realized when talking with him that he 'was there' and understood him.  By age 25, he was sent to Center For Augmentative and Alternative Communication at the University of Pretoria, where they tested him and realized that he was conscience and aware--essentially that he was 'alive' as we know it.  He was a boy, then later a man trapped in a locked body.  He effectively lost his ability to communicate in virtually any way. His name is Martin Pistorious and his story is told in a book called Ghost Boy.  He eventually gained some control over his upper body and was able to communicate with others via computer software and now he even wheelchair races.

I had written a blog called Strays: Thoughts on those who don't conform or fit in.  It was about those who don't fit into society's mold of what is preferred or acceptable.  Effectively, in a way I see outsiders as 'strays' of a sort.   After reading Martin's story, I feel compelled to expand my definition of 'strays' or give a specific category of strays.  If we live long enough--usually by an early age--we run across and struggle with those who struggle physically, mentally and/or emotionally.  I think individually many people struggle with them.  I believe as a society we struggle with them.  To me these are the true 'strays'.   It's one thing being an outsider and being largely invisible.  It's quite another having struggles you didn't bring on yourself  that literally few around you can relate to or even know how to deal with.

Mr. Pistorious was alive and aware but he was literally out of reach of people.  For most he was a chore, something to take care of.  He was a living shell of a human, but not a person.  It got me to remember someone in high school.   I knew a kid in high school who had stunted growth and got around in a wheel chair and reminds me of a teenage version of a Shiner's Hospital kid.  I sat with him, but I didn't fully embrace him as I was not sure and a bit selfish.  Instead of focusing on a possible friend,  I was worried about how poorly I fit in and how I'd wished I'd fit in better with the "cool kids".  I have thought about that circumstance from time to time and have felt ashamed of myself that I didn't embrace him more and be a true friend.  I don't know what happened him or if he's still alive, but my hope is that he was able to have a fulfilling life despite his limitations and despite not being embraced properly by people like me.

I guess my point is this, when given the chance take some time out, go out of your comfort zone and embrace someone who is not easy to embrace, that you struggle with embracing.  I don't mean to not embrace the 'run-of-the-mill' outsider, but take the time to embrace those who could use a little compassion and love.  Yeah, it might awkward, you might not know exactly what to say or do, but do a random act of kindness.   At this time our nation is in the clutches of a pandemic, so the opportunities might be more limited, but I would guess there still are some.  When it lifts, opportunities will be plentiful.

Whether it is volunteering to feed the homeless, to offer childcare at a 'crisis nursery', to sing to the elderly, to plant a flag for our fallen soldiers or veterans at a memorial, or to help a sick kid get a wish, they opportunities are out there to embrace 'true strays'.

 - Rich

•  Even fallen soldiers are strays, they are people who deserve to be remembered or thought of.  You may never get spiritual feedback from them, but I think on some level, you will give something to them.  Whether it is to their spirit or to the families that lost the loved older one, you are still giving.

Projections of the Way I Used to Be

You ever make a boneheaded mistake or  poor choice that you were not proud of?   You ever hurt anybody in way you weren't proud of?   You ever fail as a parent in a big way?   You ever just fail in a big way you weren't proud of?  I think everyone has been there.  Sometimes or some people may want to talk out those situations or circumstance, but other times and other people will not.  I think sharing with the world all your dirty laundry can be really dumb, but avoiding it all costs is just as foolish.   For me, I've never been one to brag on social media or elsewhere or otherwise just breathlessly admit failures.  For me, it can be like the "Wanna Get Away" commercials from Southwest Airlines.  If I were to wrecked my car, the last thing I want to do is admit on social media about it.  For me it feels like admitting that I'm a terrible driver--even if that is not a proper characterization. I'd rather be just wanting to get away and to pretend the bad thing or mistake never happened.

I've noticed an interesting tendency that some people have.  Sometimes when people make mistakes or bad choices or otherwise fail in a way that would be humiliating--or condemning if known, they will try to secretly 'atone' for it rather own it.  Some examples:

• Rep. Mark Foley - He was chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, yet he was found to have inappropriate communications with a young page.  He "couldn't" publicly own his failings, but by chairing the committee, he could at least feel better about himself.  That is, in his mind, perhaps he could privately even the scorecard.  He'd be helping more people than he hurt or so he might think.  Never mind, his failing would be seized on by those that he had helped to expose.  
• Ministers/priests who have come down hard on sexual deviancy, but later have been found to have engaged in it themselves.  They can't own their own 'sin' publicly, but they could feel better about themselves.  After all, by cleaning up deviancy in the community, they WERE doing the "Lord's work".  Never mind, that they were compromised and were privately undermining the "Lord's work" in the process.

The mindset appears to be, if I do enough good, it will atone or cover for the mistakes or bad choices I've made.   Anyone who knows anything about a recovery program realizes how flawed that thinking is.  It is important to own up to your bad or failures as it is to own up to your good or successes.  Not doing so

• Can undermine your credibility on your good.  In other words, good that is seen as a way of atoning for hidden or minimized bad, will probably be discredited as soon as the bad comes out.  Even if the good was done with the best intentions, if it is tied to the bad, it will probably be seen as being done strictly out of bad intentions. 
• Deprives you of an opportunity to grow and potentially become a positive spokesperson of sorts.  Our culture can be VERY forgiving.   
• In the movie Catch Me If You Can, the lead character Frank Abagnale Jr. runs into trouble after his parents divorce, and commits widespread fraud, the most notable of which is check fraud.  He spent time in a maximum security prison before FBI agent Carl Hanratty, who was the one that tracked him down and eventually caught him, convinced his superiors to let Frank serve out the rest of his sentence on the outside while helping the FBI with check fraud.  Mr. Abagnale was forced to face his mistakes and instead of continuing his failed path, he turned it around and did right by society.  He owned up to whom he was and accepted the cost of it.  Doing so allowed him to move on and become example of prison leading to a successfully reformed convict.
• Robert Downey Jr. struggled with drug addiction for years.  But he owned up to his failures and he was given a second chance legally and career-wise.  He is now recognized as a successful man and actor and a serious voice in the national conversation.
• Can deprive you of the ability to make amends or fix the problem on terms more favorable to you.  Anyone who follows politics knows that politicians who get in front of bad news tend to survive the consequences thereof better.   It's painful to do so, but as Bill Clinton's survival  before and during his presidency indicates, owning up to bad news rather than hiding from it can help you out in the long run.

I've been guilty of something a little bit different than that.  I have sometimes misplaced or projected my feelings onto another mistake or screw-up.  In other words, I'd be VERY harsh on myself for something smaller, but will not want to talk about the bigger screw-up.  Inevitably, I noticed in those type of situations, when I don't own up properly to my mistake or failing, it still had a way of getting back at me.  Over the years, I've lost a friendship or two by not owning up to properly to a/some mistake(s) or failing(s) at the time.

Eventually, bad news comes out and people aren't happy when they've heard it elsewhere.  By owning up to much to a lessor screw-ups when in reality I felt bad about something worse,  I was projecting my shame onto a small/smaller mistake.   It's sort of like dismissing culpability in an accident, but beating yourself up over cutting off someone off yesterday during a drive.   No, if I caused an accident, then I should own up properly to my role in it, even if doing so would expose reckless driving.   Pretending or minimzing my role in it, but then saying, but you know I have inadvertently cut others off before is sort of ludicrous. But that's essentially is the driving version of what I'm talking about.

It's hard to own up fully to mistakes, but in the long run, it is better for all who might be involved.  To do otherwise is essentially like a half-hearted apology or a half-hearted acknowledgement of role or culpability.  Beating yourself more over old news, doesn't help if you need to own up or atone for 'today'.    If I break the fine china and try to hide that fact, but tell you out of guilt or shame that I dropped and broke a glass, it doesn't help you.   For when it time for you to pull out and use the fine china, you will find out then that it is not available and you will be more upset that I hid that I broke it.  My displacement of it by condemning myself too much about breaking a glass, doesn't really solve anything.  Just saying...

I'm sure other can relate.

Faking It without being Fake

I think by the time we are well into our adulthood, we've heard society's "grown-ups in the room" spout the cliche "It's okay to disagree without being disagreeable".  Some cliches, no matter how overused they are, still have value.  This one is one of them.  Anyway, we've all heard others discuss having to deal with 'fake people' and it got me to think.

We've all been around groups of people that are fake and hopefully we are not unwittingly part of such a group.  We see them on Facebook and they like each other's posts.  You wonder if they even care about the posts for the others in their clique or they just want to be seen as being friendly or supportive, but I digress.   Sometimes you'll see them virtue signaling on social media or elsewhere and you wonder whom they are trying to impress with their 'thoughtful' take.  Sometimes we'll see them hang out in clubs together.  We may also see them group together at our place of education, employment or worship.  Wherever we run across them, they can be annoying to be around or to deal with.  Unfortunately, they due to circumstance between our control sometimes we have to deal with them--coworkers, classmates, supervisors, etc.

We could get or stay annoyed by them.  However, sometimes, especially if they have authority over us, it is best to learn how to 'play the game without being a piece on the board'.  That is, "Fake it, without being fake".   Before you take this step, you have to determine what it means and if you are capable of it.


The Rules of the Game.

• Remember when you are 'going along to get along', not to cross you own red lines.  Such as:
• Not hurting others.  For example, try to avoid piling on when others are being attacked, especially where the ones being attacked could be hurt or get wind of it.  Even if it not harmful to the subject of the attack, it is at the very least harmful to you and those whom you influence.  Besides, it is below your dignity.
• Not going against your core beliefs.  For example, don't resort to helping them steal or lying about work hours if that's what it takes to be part of the group.
• Not putting yourself in jeopardy to get along.  For example, if you work somewhere where your coworkers are doing something unethical, don't participate in hopes of being accepted.
• Be aware of what really matters and what is safe to opine about
• Some things are throwaway such as talking about your favorite restaurants or your favorite vacation spots.  As long as the 'fake' people aren't rude to you about it, what does it really matter as these are subjects that don't matter in the big scheme of things.
• Some things are fairly uncontroversial such as rooting for the home teams.  You can typically talk about these things without hurting other's feelings or compromising yourself.
• Some things you should avoid especially if it is a sore subject for someone in the group, unless it is to empathize perhaps.  No matter how 'fake' a person is, he or she still has feelings buried underneath the facade.
• Be aware of what is important to others in the game and look for areas of actual agree-ability.
• Compliment where you can safely (and honestly) such as on their clothes, car or whatever.  Fake people, often are just people search for validation.  If you can provide it honestly, it costs you nothing, but can make a difference.
• Ask questions that show interest.  Fake people can be very vain and like to talk about themselves.
• Pay attention to what they talk about, you might learn something which can help in future relations.

Determining if you want to play.

• What is the cost of the game?  If the cost is too high, such as compromising your values or putting up with too much BS, it probably isn't worth it.
• What is the benefit of the game?  Fake people might actually be able to help you if you 'help' them.  If you show likability towards them, even if not necessarily 100% genuine, they might be pleasant to you and perhaps offer networking help.
• There is a chance that someone(s) you perceive as 'fake' are just insecure people who are playing the game too and who seek a true friend.
• Can you be friendly and agreeable with fake people without the fakeness spilling over?

Is that your final answer?

• When determining how you want to proceed with fake people--whether you want to avoid them as much as possible, be businesslike or kill them with kindness--you have to consider the costs and benefits.
• You have to determine how much you are willing to put yourself out there.  When dealing with difficult people in general, it is best to put yourself out there as much as you are comfortable with.  In other words, how much are you willing to safely share with others?
• You have to be willing to change approach if one approach isn't working.  For example,  
• If your efforts to kill them with kindness don't work and are draining you, you may have to step back and let it go.  If someone is fake and doesn't accept your kindness or worse, pushes back, you have to make sure your don't allow yourself to get hurt in the process.
• If trying to avoid dealing with fake people isn't working.  In other words, they try to draw you in, it might be best to accept their overtures and find where you can be agreeable with them.  Otherwise, you might just have to step away from them as much as possible.

This applies to adults as well, but most kids want to be accepted and thought of well.  Unfortunately, I think in some cases, they resort to being whom they think they need to be instead of whom they are.  They look for acceptance among the 'in' kids, they crave something that feel is missing and will do whatever it takes to get it.   I think this extends into adulthood.  Maturity is realizing it is okay to be yourself and not someone 'you need to be' and being comfortable with it.  We have to deal with them in our teens and our adulthood sometimes.  But like the saying, "When in Rome, do as the Romans do" implies, we should make an effort to meet others where they are, especially when we can't avoid dealing with them.  It may not be on our terms, and therefore may feel like we are "Faking It", but it doesn't mean that we are "Fake".  Being respectful of others where they are doesn't mean we are fake, it means that we are considerate (and in some cases out of necessity).  We become "Fake" when we cross our red lines to do so and/or allow it to spill over into how we deal with everyone.

Gaslights: Not just on our streets or in our yards, but in our society.

A number of years ago, I was talking to a friend and he referenced the term 'gaslighting'.  I'd never heard the term before and of course was intrigued.  My understanding was that it is a psychological tool by which someone tries to covertly manipulate another into doubting themselves such that they gain some sort of advantage over the other.

Wikipedia describes it as this:

Gaslighting is a form of psychological manipulation in which a person or a group covertly sows seeds of doubt in a targeted individual, making them question their own memory, perception, or judgment, often evoking in them cognitive dissonance and other changes such as low self-esteem. Using denial, misdirection, contradiction, and misinformation, gaslighting involves attempts to destabilize the victim and delegitimize the victim's beliefs. Instances may range from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.

I've seen this in relationships and at times wondered if this was present in my family of origin.  The following are ways I see it differently than "garden-variety" or simple manipulation.

Simple Manipulation

• You want your way, but aren't trying to disable or shutdown the other person in the process.  In other words, not purposely abusive.
• It may be overt.  It can be subtle, but it can be blatant too.
• It can be done out of fear or self-protection, but not usually out of downright contempt or throwing responsibility on the other.
• The focus of it is usually shorter term. 
• Examples
• Your significant other or child being all nicey-nice when they want you to do a favor for them.
• Your child or significant other whining when you ask them to do something they don't want to in hopes you'll drop it.
• A friend badmouthing a restaurant when what they really want it to have somewhere else chosen.

Gaslighting

• Used to disabled destroy or otherwise render the other person more compliant with little regard for the other's welfare.
• This is usually covert or subtle manipulation, meant to keep you from picking up on it.
• This is usually done with disrespect and/or contempt towards the victim of it.
• The focus is usually longer term.
• Examples
• You are the problem:  When you call and complain to a company about observably poor service or quality and they say "we are sorry you feel that way".  As if the real problem is that you are upset or calling out the problem.
• You can't do or say anything right: You are always challenged by parent, friend, child or other on your actions or take on everything (and it is clear that they aren't just trying to learn).  See the 98% rule: someone has to take blame...  Sometimes, it is just your opinion, take or feelings, but the other person seems to always take the alternative position.  When called out, they may claim that they are "playing devil's advocate"
• It's just your imagination: When you bring up a common experiences from years ago and they act like it never happened (and you know they don't have a bad memory or dementia).  Or someone gradually and inconspicuously lowers the lighting, the cooling or the warming and you say it is dark, cool or hot in here and they say act like you are crazy.
• If you are wanting a lifeline, go to someone else: When you speak on something that is pretty common knowledge and struggle to get your precise words out and they look at you like what's wrong with you or I have no idea what you are talking about.  That is it should be obvious from context what you mean, but they look at you like you are speaking an unknown foreign language.  This can either be to subtly mess with your mind or a form of contempt whereby instead of tossing you a lifeline, they walk away and let you fall on your face.
• Of course you did well, but what about him/her:  When you do well and the other party acknowledges it for a moment but then puts their focus on those who did better without acknowledging the shift in focus.

Whether it is simple manipulation or gaslighting, it is a control issue.  Gaslighting is just usually a form of manipulation that is more subtle and more malevolent.  If you get anything from this post, please read the following that touch upon the subject of manipulation and control.

98% rule: someone has to take blame...
Giving in relationships: Controller rescuer, fixer rescuer, useful partnership OR healthy supportive?
How to Save Yourself Without Drowning Others
Boxing others into our expectations
Control Freaks: Top down vs. bottom up.
Art of the Apology: Saying sorry without meaning it.

--

I will make one caveat.  I think sometimes, when defending themselves, that people sometimes do what looks like gaslighting in a bid to protect themselves.  That is change the subject and 'talk about their concerns about you' to get the focus off themselves.  If done defensively, I'm not sure I'd call it gaslighting, but rather self-preserving manipulation. 

So next time you have a legitimate complaint and the other party says, "I'm sorry you were offended or feel that way", make sure to remind them that the subject of the complaint is the issue, not how you feel.

Just my thoughts,
Rich

Closer to Me: Breaking the deadlock.

I don't know if I stumbled upon it while listening to music on YouTube or if I heard it when I was listening to XM radio in my car, but I heard a song that I hadn't heard in a while: Get Closer by Seals and Croft.   It's funny thing about songs: You can listen to them over and over, over time and like the sound as played and sang by the artists, but not really "hear" them.  I found that to be the case the case with this song.

This song is a little melancholy.  It hear a bit of a pleading.  He's wanting to be close to with his significant other, but he doesn't seem to be able to do at the current time.  It's like he needs some give from her.   It's like they are in a rut and he can't put himself out there for her until he knows it is 'safe' for him too.  Below is some of the lyrics.

Darlin' if you want me to be closer to you, get closer to me.

Darlin' if you want me to be closer to you, get closer to me.

Darlin' if you want me to love, love only you, then love only me.

Darlin' if you want me to see, see only you, then see only me.

There's a line, I can't cross over. It's no good for me and it's no good for you.

And there's a feelin', deep down inside me. I can't explain it and you're wondering why.

You say we've been like strangers, but I'm not the others you can wrap 'round your fingers.

There's a time, I when I would come runnin'. I'd drop everything for the touch of your hand in mine.

...

...

...

It seems like people hit that point in various relationships--friendship, family, couple relationships, etc.   People hit a rut or a point which they are stuck and can't seem to get past.   Sometimes that ends the relationship and sometimes it keeps it from growing or deepening.  

Why do we get to that point?

•  We let our fears get in the ways
• Sometimes this is justified.
• You've been hurt.  
•  Mistreated or subjected to abusive behavior.
•  By the involvement of another.  Pretty self-explanatory.
• You've been gossiped about or undercut.
• It could be involving someone else in the family or a friend in the circumstance.
• It could be by minimizing or shutting down the other or not taking their opinions, thoughts or concerns seriously.  It doesn't mean you have to agree with them, but sometimes it is a sense of being heard.
• Sometimes it is not justified.
• You've been hurt by another close to you and instead of treating each person invidually, you find yourself 'fighting the last battle'.
• You are so concerned that if you don't intervene, that a problem or concern won't be addressed properly.  Once again, if you've been let down by another who failed to live up to their role or part, it can be easy to 'take control' and not want to risk that happening again as an example.
•  We let our resentments get in the way.
• If we've feel like our concerns have not been addressed or not been taken as seriously as they should be, we can just stop engaging them and resent them sometimes outwardly. 
• If we've been hurt or let down by another, we can get stuck in cycle where we focus more on the unresolved issue or the thought that the issue will show up again than how to move forward.
•  We let our pride get in the way.
• I believe what we see portray as fear or resentment, really could as much hurt pride as anything.
• If we've put ourselves out there with another and been disappointed, let down or hurt, our pride can tell us 'I deserve better'.  Sometimes that may be true, but often times it fails to take into account our role in the circumstance.  I addressed this in It's just you and me and we just disagree... 
• Sometimes it is easier to keep an "arm's length distance" from another than to put away our pride or to risk further injury to it.

So, I've talked about the causes, but what about the solution?   I don't claim to have all the answers, but I do have a few ideas.

Where there is a deadlock in a relationship:

• Set down your weapons. 
• It's hard to expect another to feel like it's safe to engage if they have the sense that engaging will lead to conflict or dissent.  
• Sometime we just have to acknowledge to the other that you are a 'safe space' for them.  This is as true when dealing with kids as other adults.  
• If you 'set down your weapons', they are more likely to do the same. 
• Show a little give or be willing to offer a lifeline.
• If someone feels like all the effort to resolve the impasse is coming from them, eventually they will tire of it and it probably won't end well.
•  If someone is struggling to find footing with you and you offer them only folded arms and not a helping hand, it's a bit difficult for them to want to engage you.  Why would engaging with another and risk falling on your face when dealing with another, when you have a choice.
• Failure to do so can come across as lack of empathy or contempt.  I think this is probably common in co-parenting relationships.  You have to deal with another when you don't necessarily want to.
• Doing so could help them to feel at least a bit of a friendly connection.
• Agree to disagree
• Sometimes, you just have to decide you'll never agree on a certain issue.  You have to decide if it is a "hill on which you die" or if it is something you set aside out of respect for the larger relationship.
• Sometimes, one or both parties, have not had enough time really consider the issue.
• Sometimes, one or both parties, are amendable to the other's point of view, but they have to 'grow into' at least accepting that point of view.

I don't claim to have all the answers and sometimes what I write are ideals that I am not perfect in implementing.  However, I at least hope to give others food for thought.  Please take from my blog post whatever you might find useful and/or what may apply.

Thanks for reading,

Rich