AdamC

Heinz Kohut Basic Shame, Toxic Shame

I'm going to stop our exchange here to consider what I can learn about myself from having engaged in this discussion with you. If it means anything to you, I promise to watch out for any evidence you might post of these other factors you keep suggesting.

I'm withholding evidence of other factors?? I would willfully ignore evidence of other factors??

I don't consider them to be well articulated or well timed, and I prefer to spend my time reading and sharing actionable research rather than debating a body of knowledge that most seem to accept as still evolving and far from settled. Also, I accept the non-aggression principle, and peaceful parenting logically/morally follows for all children, sufferers of diabetes included. And you've lowered your expectations accordingly?

Oh, something like: Abuse and neglect seriously messes children up. And if children get messed up, they can't grow up to become researchers to figure out how to prevent children from getting messed up.

Why do you suppose you're not receiving the response you're hoping for?

Some neuropsychobiological perspective on nature/nurture and psychopathology:

Irresponsible compared to what? If I recall correctly, in an earlier thread you suggested that peaceful parenting techniques might harm a hypothetical purely-genetically-determined sociopath.

Is it your position that all current efforts to prevent violence against children should stop until the nurture/nature debate is settled? How much do you think those children currently suffering inflictions of violence care about a future "anarchist peaceful paradise"?

I sympathize with your frustration. It may be worth considering that forum posts are only words, and podcasts only sounds – and that you just can't get the full spectrum of real-time relational/biological resonance and reassurance you need from such impersonal means. Some perspective from Stan Tatkin's couples therapy that seems to confirm much of what you are experiencing: The anticipation of relationship failure is as psychobiologically wired for the angry resistant individual, as autoregulation and indifference are for the avoidant individual. The strategy of the angry resistant individual is to offset anticipatory disappointment and failure through negativistic conduct, a personality feature influenced by early childhood development... Driven by hope that is dashed instantly by the anticipation of failure, the angry resistant individual employs negativism as a control mechanism against dependency. The angry resistant individual ‘knows’, with certainty from within his or her body, what is to come from hope, and it is bad. This becomes what is, in essence, an allergy to hope. While the avoidant individual is allergic to dependency, the angry resistant is allergic to hope. As a result of their negative early life experiences with preoccupied caregiver(s), angry resistant partners often present with problems with self-regulation. Easily overtaxed by responsibilities (e.g., school, work, marriage, children), angry resistant individuals often view themselves not only as overwhelmed, but as envious of and threatened by their partner’s ability to do whatever he or she wants. Feeling the underdog, angry resistant individuals complain about not getting the help they need or deserve. The meta complaints of angry resistant individuals may appear situational, but really are global and not so easily managed. Their complaints include worries about a partner’s unreliability or recalcitrance, rejection, being neglected or punished, being wrong, being deprived (usually of love and affection), unfair treatment, injustice, confusion, ambivalence, and being hurt or wounded. They are unable to remember ever feeling this way before, yet such sensitivities originate very early in childhood as relational trauma involving caregivers. Inwardly, they believe something is wrong with them, that they are a burden to their partner, that they are too needy, and that they don’t deserve to be loved in the way they long to be. People are hurt by people, and only people can repair those injuries. No one is better positioned to repair injuries than the primary relationship partner, and the couple therapist can promote this. The angry resistant’s negativism both engages and pushes away, as we have seen. The angry resistant’s partner, regardless of his or her own attachment orientation, likely will be faced with an ongoing challenge to remain undaunted by the waxing and waning of this negativism. The partner must come to understand in therapy that the corrective counter-movement is to move forward on the angry resistant (in friendliness) and not away. Angry resistant individuals expect their partner to move away, pull back, or otherwise rebuke their cloaked wish for the angry resistant partner to override his or her negativism. The true hope of angry resistant individuals is that their most important other, their partner will see beyond their negativism and recognise it for what it is: a real bid for patience and understanding; kindness and compassion; and ultimate reassurance that the angry resistant is not a burden, overly needy, or destined for rejection. In other words: She: [approach and reunion] “You are so handsome. I love you.” He: [angry resistant reaction to approach and reunion] “Yeah, right. Tell that to someone who’ll believe you.” She: [typical but wrong response] “Forget it. You’re impossible.” She: [corrective response] “You are my handsome man and I – LOVE – YOU.” [she kisses him] Allergic to Hope: Angry Resistant Attachment and a One-Person Psychology within a Two-Person Psychological System (PDF)