01/19/2018
"Me Too!"
The "Me Too" idea of empowerment has come up a lot lately. Awards shows have come up with actors showing solidarity for the movement of proving what's happened to women, by wearing all black. One actress showed up, wearing a gorgeous red dress. There was criticism on-line for her choice.
It seemed as if perhaps she didn't support the "Me Too" movement. However, she was clear that she did, and if we are really about women's rights, we are about ALL women's HEALTHY rights. She loves red, so chose a beautiful dress, in a color she described as "passionate". One article mentioning her, states that going into attack on anyone who thinks differently than us is part of the problem. I would agree.
I bring this up, because it's been a hot topic lately, this idea of "Me Too". A lot of people have been coming out of the horror story closet lately. A number of people have the courage now to take the stand, and as a lot of people know, it's been widely needed, for a long time. Stories and horrors are exposed, people are actually being fired en masse for harmful behaviors, whereas it wouldn't really happen to a lot of people before, especially to this degree.
During all of this there has been so much solidarity, and a lot of people have come out with their stories. While it's been beautiful and a much needed process, (especially after the bouts of racism were out and about so highly) what has been happening in certain corners is that along with the healthy rights for women (and some men too) being aired, as usual, some people are taking advantage of the process to bring about unhealthy behaviors and attempting to put those in the spotlight. People have been taking the "Me Too" platform, and using it to bash, harm and abuse other people. Just like some were using misguided notions to justify racism, s*xual harrassment and worse, there are people are using the idea of pain, to not take personal responsibility for self and to lash out at other people, instead.
The "Me Too" platform, ideally, is used to bring attention to true cases of abuse. It is to help those who have not been abused, understand exactly how much pain and suffering one entails as a result of true abuse. It is NOT an excuse to bring pain and suffering raining on innocent people, due to disliking their gender, being mad about failed past relationships with that gender, or having actually been abused ones self, and then attempting to abuse others due to one's own pain and suffering. For the truly abused, while it is normal to have suspicion, hurt, and a need for healing, part of the reason people end up abused in the first place, is because other's who have been hurt in the past, are claiming some sense of right, entitlement, or thinking it's okay to lash out, due to their own suffering. While some in pain think it's not okay to have to put a stop to their lashing out, unreasonability and non reality, these exact same reasons are why they ended up hurt in the first place. A man grabbing a woman by the p***y, because he's been hurt by a woman breaking off a relationship in the past, is not justified in his actions, just because he's been hurt before. A woman who has been mo**sted, is not entitled to destroy an innocent man, because someone else took advantage of her. The abuse of the "Me Too" movement, is to use this platform of calling on and up for human rights, to hurt other's, even in cases of healthy emotional conduct.
It has recently come to my attention that there are a lot of people who do not understand the difference, between healthy uses of emotion and healthy action based on such emotions, and unhealthy uses of emotion, along with unhealthy actions based on such emotions. There is also a lack of understanding on actually being a victim, and being in the victim state. I understand far from everything always gets translated in print. Today, I'm going to clarify these points, so everyone can understand better. Additionally, I want you to understand that this is a more advanced idea. This is not what you're going to be finding in mainstream self development. Far from everybody is going to be in the position of being able to utilize and deal with what I'm going to write here today.
First off, let's clarify some of the ideas out there, that go into the misuses of the "Me Too" platform, which is when we go into actual victim, vs. victim state. I'm going to change the format of the following example to preserve privacy. This idea of over exaggerating claims has come about, in many different formats.
What is important to understand with this idea of being a victim, vs. being in the victim state, is that there's a huge difference between coming out and speaking up against actual cases where one has been a victim, to the degree one actually was, with the impact it actually had and exaggerating and accusing in ways that are out of reality, in order to sink an innocent person. Everybody will always have their opinions of course, but the clearer we are with what actually happened, the more we build believability, with what happened within us. This builds internal self esteem, because when we are in reality, we actually understand and see for real, the places where others are not in reality when they do not believe us.
At last count that I saw, more than half the people in the US were still unable to tell Truth from Falsehood. I can only hope we have better numbers in Canada, but it would be hard to imagine by much. I also want to be clear, that you can be a victim, and be a healthy victim even in the midst of your healing. A healthy victim doing a healthy process, may still end up in tears, anger, and run the whole gamut of emotions. She may have good days, and bad days, even if others accuse her of playing the victim in a victim state, vs. actually being a victim. The difference between being a healthy victim, and the victim state, is a healthy victim is one who had something bad happened to them, that they honestly had zero control of. (Getting randomly grabbed in a public park in broad daylight for example). They will still have healing to do, obviously. It may be far from pretty at times, but they do their work and are far from using the incident as an excuse to be abusive, slanderous or to play the victim. They do not use it as an excuse to lash out. Confused? She may be scared to go out, may need time to go out, may take time to be able to have s*x again. There is however, a huge difference, between having a process to go through, and accusing all men of being abusers. There's a huge difference between finding it hard to get out of bed because she is depressed, exhausted and in healing mode, and demanding that she should be allowed to sink a guy due to her own unreasonability. There's a huge difference between a drink on a date, and being roofied by someone who wants to take advantage of an unwilling woman. The latter forms of accusation, when not true, are when people go into victim mode, and start thinking they are entitled to accuse unreasonable things, (ie, claims of being roofied over a normal drink on a date) because they have suffered and think they are entitled to make claims, just because there was a drink and she was mad he didn't end up interested The victim state, also happens, when people refuse to look at the effects of what they are created in their Life, and how they've contributed to the issue. If someone needs healing after being grabbed in the park, is that playing the victim? Far from it. Yes, there are those who would bash (unhealthily) those who genuinely need to heal. However, someone who just lost a child, who just lost a parent or just got grabbed in the park, would find it healthy, and it would be healthy for them to need a good cry, need to start their healing (and perhaps not even be able to do it right away), and taking time to heal as a result of what just happened. The effects of such losses or invasion may take well over a year to heal, and may pop up randomly with crying effects, for a couple years to come. The difference between that being healthy and an unhealthy victim state, is when an incident happened twenty years previously, and people are still holding onto the incident as the ruination of their Life. They are still trying to press others into special behaviors and taking care of them, as if being mo**sted two decades earlier somehow entitles them to bully other's who have zero to do with the incidence. I want to be clear here, that the original incident, still hurt, if it was actually there. I also want to be clear here, that I still have compassion for people who are very much in a victim state. This article, however, is about realizing what the flip side of that victim state is. The places it causes us problems, WHY it causes us problems. And why thinking it is an excuse to do unhealthy behaviors, ends up doing them more harm than good.
In order to get on the "Me Too" bandwagon, reports of stories like people claiming they think their father mo**sted them are going around. Note the operative word, “think”. The story? (Which again has had the details changed for privacy’s sake. I want to be clear here and note however, that versions of these stories are definitely making the rounds).
The story: When the person was 8 years old, it was time for bed, and so the father took off their clothes, put on their pajamas and made them go to bed.
The end.
Wait. How does this end up with the father being a child mo**ster? Well, the conclusion goes, that obviously he was s*xually attracted to them, otherwise why would he take off their clothes?
One would think to help them get in their pajamas. Yet, apparently, they were old enough to get into their own jammies, so therefore the help was not needed, so obviously he must just want to have seen them naked. Did he actually touch them s*xually? No. Did he make other passes at them that made them feel uncomfortable? No. Were they uncomfortable at the time? No. Then why do they “think” their father mo**sted them? Because they were 8 years old and they could have taken off their own jammies. Obviously, he must have wanted to see them naked.
Now if the father actually mo**sted them, that would be an actual victim. However, if the father was far from ever laying a hand on them s*xually, and the mother was normally the one that followed through on getting the kids into their jammies, then he might have yet to realize they were old enough to get their own jammies on. Other options are, that the father actually told the kid to get his pajamas on repeatedly. Let’s say the child did not comply, the father could have just as easily gotten frustrated, decided it was just easier to quickly make the kid get into their jammies, and so whipped the kids clothes off and then changed them.
I really wish, that what I've just written, was somehow an exaggeration. While some people did feel a little uncomfortable, some did not, and some were lacking even that much of a story to go on, before claiming mo**station.
If we ignore the Truth to play the victim, such as the above claim that the father must have mo**sted the child, would be both far from true, and actually be slanderous and abusive against the father. Sure, some would agree, but perhaps he deserves it. Maybe, but putting someone in harms way due to, "it might have happened", based on so little info has serious consequences. Reality leaves the scene, either partly, greatly or wholly. In this case, it wrecks the family, destroys the father, destroys his trust in the child as he realizes that anytime the child wishes to play the victim, he may be up for abuse that can wreck his life. Pedophiles get death threats, loss of job, and people wanting to abuse him in the community. Is letting it be known you have a pe*****le in your community, necessary if one has been released there? Yes. Crossing a boundary to mo**st a child is a pretty big deal. However, so is accusing someone of doing a horrendous act they are not.
The fact that one could and has crossed a large boundary such as r**e, is definitely be a reason to be alerted. However accusing someone who is not of being one, puts them through an incredibly terrifying process, "just because someone didn't feel like being accurate". People who play the victim a lot, often wonder why people start to not like them. It's because falsehood, or over exaggeration, causes huge damage as a result of slander. So while someone would say they would never accuse other people (other than the person they are accusing) of being a pe*****le, they may accuse others of doing other things, while playing the victim. People realize then they too, can end up being accused of horrible things w***y nilly. It can be as easy as someone taking the last hot chocolate in the office work space, with one playing victim because they wished they had gotten it instead. Instead of putting in a request for office supplies in terms of hot chocolate, teas and coffees to a higher degree than normal stock (or bringing in their own), someone in this instance in a victim state, may just start going on about how the person who took the last hot chocolate is inconsiderate and selfish. If they were really playing victim, they may even go around trying to let everyone know how selfish the "hot chocolate stealer" is. A responsible person, would simply get there earlier and/or put in a request for more hot chocolate to stocked in a greater volume, to make sure they stopped missing out. People who do bashing, often underestimate the consequences of their actions.This is how milking having ever been a victim creates harm. It is why it is different from someone who has been through a lot recently and/or is in healthy healing, and while still crying a lot and having anger jags. Responsible people refuse to or lessen taking it out on anyone else.
I hope this makes it clearer, as to why it is damaging to play the victim just because one feels like it. Sometimes, this idea gets confused in the self development communities, and people will bash or mock someone who's crying because their husband just died 2 days ago. Or their cat, and they haven't "miraculously gotten over it already". Healing takes time, some healing takes longer than others. The victim state is far from only being about how long one holds onto the pain. It's also about the attitudes and the actions that accompany this state.
I You know those places where people give you ridiculous requests or demands, then bash you for not accommodating and act like you're a bad person for refusing to accommodate them? Welcome to being on the receiving end of the victim state, when people think their past entitles them to take things out on others. It has become fashionable, to get on the "victim bandwagon", even in spots where one was not the victim. That has to be stopped. It's one of the reasons why victims were not believed in the first place, or why people were scared to believe them. Truth builds power. Lies break trust. This is far from meaning true experiences should not be shared. Rather, it is when the “recounting” of the experience is taken far out of context, to either play victim, to get people to feel sorry for them or to unfairly bash. Truth of the experience is one thing to put out there. Definitely put one's foot down when needed. But lacking accuracy (or having very little truth) causes a lot of issues and is unfair all the way around.
I've seen this idea, where people are shrugging off their words when making wild accusations, as if it's no big deal. It matters a great deal. Especially when people are spreading those stories to other people, and involving them in it. I can understand the point of the victim, when they feel like they wanted the mo**sting stopped. Obviously, that would be great. Or perhaps they feel like the other person is far from deserving accuracy, if they hurt us. But to say that someone who overheard a slight comment, and didn't realize it had implications as to what was really going on, and that they must have known and were complicit in the attacks, by "refusing to put a stop to it" is extremely harmful.
Responsible practitioners, are aware of their words, and are aware and responsible in their telling of their stories. Saying it is okay to be far from accurate, is giving license to victims to abuse other people. Victims (actual victims) are victims, yes. We still have responsibility, even as one who was once the victim or is still the victim now, to be responsible and accurate in the telling of our stories. Yes, sometimes, the impact of the action, goes far beyond what the action appeared at the time. This is why small children will often recount stories of uncomfortable things, in large formats, such as a giant monster came and bit their hand, as opposed to a bee stung their hand. The child is in touch with the largesse of the feeling of the event, and is unaware of how to properly express it. The issue is, a giant monster bite would obviously be far more painful than a bee sting would be. And as adults recounting our stories, we are not overly blaming a bee, we are overly blaming adults, who have lives and reputations too. Some people think that being considerate of both parties, is victim blaming or victim shaming, or letting the predator off the hook somehow. Far from it. Should child mo**sters be stopped? Absolutely! Should people beating the living heck out of their children be sent to jail? Abso-completely-lutely! Should you let predators off the hook out of some idea of enlightenment, even when they might prey again? No. Definitely not. However, there is still a facet of the healing, that one needs to be in reality with. Yes, there has been victim shaming, however there also has to be victim responsibility. Being hurt, by no means lets us off the hook for having responsibility as the victim. It does however mean, being accurate. When people claim "victim shaming" by saying the victim needs to be responsible to for their actions, it is not. It is simply personal responsibility.
Yes, it would be far from fun to have someone get mad at us. However in this time of victim chic, people are taking someone getting mad at them (for rightful reasons), playing victim, and calling “emotional abuse”, when they were in fact, the actual, original problem. The victim state, is that just because someone got upset with them after getting made for being late for work for the 5th time that week, somehow, magically, they are now “getting abused” by their boss, because now he got mad at them for doing so. Are they really, “being abused” because a boss got mad at showing up late for the entire work week? No. Is the boss being abused, by being called an abuser, by being slandered by someone who was in a victim state and lacked responsibility for showing up on time? Absolutely!
And it affects the woman as well. The sad thing about all the victim state stuff going around, is that a lot of people seem to think lacking accuracy is a victimless crime. That they can and should be able to call abuse (and far, far over abuse, than what actually occurred), and there will be zero repercussions. Yet the person in the victim state, stymies their self as well. How long do you think that person will last at a job, where she is playing the victim state, accusing people of doing things they haven't, before she's terminated for being abusive to her co-workers, or for creating a hostile work environment? The over playing victim affects more than just the person, the over playing has been aimed at. It affects the person in the victim state too. It breaks Trust. It breaks believability. People who play the victim in the victim state, show they are willing to hurt others based on their mood, or from past experiences that have nothing to do with you. Then when the chips are down, they stop being believed. Then they wonder, complain and play the victim, wondering why people stop believing them. It is because they set up the process, the knowledge that they are one who exaggerates. The problem is when those same people, suddenly want people to believe them, they don't. Why? It is hard to tell from the outside whether someone is being accurate or exaggerating because they mean it, or exaggerating because they want someone else to believe the exaggeration. It is the less disciplined mind, the one that wants to take less responsibility for self and our actions, that says, "others should know and others should believe me". Yet, when we look at others and are trying to get along with them, how often are we able to know (and with how many people) exactly what is going on within them internally all the time? Even you, my sensitives and my psychics will have issues at times. If you would have a hard time, others have the possibility of understanding even less.
Accuracy needs to be in play. It is both part of the personal responsibility of self, and a great part of the healing process. How does this come to be so? Well, a bee sting is a lot easier to get over emotionally, than the idea that there are big huge hairy monsters, waiting to bite you. A bee sting, hurts way less than a big huge hair monster bite. It's a lot less frightening too. You can learn how to swat away a bee or send it love. How would you possibly be able to fend off a giant monster that's far bigger than you'll ever be? It is always easier to "fight and heal" the reasonable, than it is to have to take on giant monsters in order to be okay. I'll take a bee over a giant, furry 10' being that bites. Any day you please! It's also easier to trust men, or to trust women, when we get into the reality that the person only had really bad experiences, with 3 men in their Life or 3 women, instead of the idea that "every man or woman that they dated was bad". 3 bad men or 3 bad women, are a lot easier to get over, than 15 bad ones. You dig? It also helps put things into perspective a lot easier. Accuracy does that. Truth helps heal!
