kathryn

Thank you so much for this thoughtful analysis. It took me a little while to process all the aspects you bring up because it all really resonated with me. The Little Crickets - Noticing and worrying about little things is something I've always struggled with, and my parents would constantly tell me I was "too sensitive." It seems extreme to say they never cared about my feelings, but I can't remember a single time when I had a fear, and they patiently talked it out with me. It was always dismissed, disregarded, or laughed at. It did really fuck with my reality processing when I perceived something as a threat and was told I shouldn't feel that way, but never given any sort of logical reasoning as to why I shouldn't be afraid. I suspect the internalized belief here was that I had to control my feelings, not try to understand them. Gangster and Coin Flip - The psychological split... Thank you so much for pointing this out. One of the things that has been really confusing for me looking back on my childhood has been the dichotomy with my mother. She was both emotional neglectful and abusive, so she was either ignoring me or attacking me. It seems strange because often when I reflect on my childhood I just don't see her there, but I also remember the many times she screamed at me and called me names. For example, every day when my mom got home from work she went straight to her bedroom and closed the door. My father would bring her meals in bed. It was the same on the weekends, she just didn't leave her room. This seemed completely normal to me. But then there were times like the Christmas I had a stomach virus, and she yelled at me until I fainted. I blacked out and fell on my face. When I woke up with that throbbing feeling in my nose a few moments later, she was still ranting, raving, and contorting her face in hatred. I used to think I loved my mother so much, and I wanted her approval and attention so badly, but that didn't fit with the cruelty that she displayed so frequently, especially since her other side was never very loving. The split seemed to be between wanting to be seen by her, but also wanting to be invisible when she was angry and accusatory. In the dream, she was ignoring me, but the evil cricket jumped on her back like a warning that she could flip at anytime. It's also very interesting that the cricket was my size. I often blamed myself when she got so angry, and felt deep inside that I must be bad or wrong for her to treat me that way. I heard Stef say once that suicidality is the internalization of others murderous feelings toward you. When my mother was mad, I really thought she wanted to kill me. In my perception of my mother, she either ignored me or wanted to murder me. Either way I was completely worthless... I think the evil cricket was the nasty side of my mother, and it manifested in me as self-hatred, but for self-preservation I had to create an alter ego, the anti-conscience, to take on those characteristics. I was splitting my perception of my mother and also my perception of myself... Does that make any sense? (I haven't seen Coraline, but I may have to rent it now.) Cricket Sandwich - What frightened me most about the chomp at the end was that this cricket was a cannibal. Looking back on it now, it feels like he was eating his young. It really scared me, and I felt so bad for the baby cricket. The little crickets meant nothing to him. His callousness and disregard for life was horrifying to me. (Could this be why I became vegetarian?) Thank you - I really appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with me on this dream. It has given me so much to think about and process. I'm not entirely sure when this dream started, if I was 3 or 4, but it's validating to examine it and see how early my mother was displaying these behaviors and why I have felt so depress and suicidal for the majority of my life. I feel really sad right now, but I also feel a great amount of relief and clarity. Thanks again for your insights.

That's a good question neeeel and mellomama; I think the image of the gangster came from TV and movies. We watched a lot of Disney videos and Sesame Street, and the gangster was a typical archetype. Films like Lady and the Tramp and Aristocats featured characters like that. We also did watch Pinocchio quite a bit, which could have been the source of my anthropomorphic notion of the cricket. The idea of him as the anti-conscience is quite interesting. I hadn't thought of the cricket being the unborn child. I was thinking the dreams started before my little brother was conceived, but I'm not entirely sure about that... It could have been the child my mother lost in the miscarriage? Though the cricket seemed like a full grown man. There was nothing childlike about him, except for his relative size to me. Hmm. EDIT: The Bugs Bunny cartoons! Bugs was always flipping a coin and being sassy. I think he may have even had a leather jacket that he wore sometimes? I watched a lot of TV as a child...

Typically my dad was very quiet, reserved, and passive, but he was prone to outbursts of anger where he would yell and throw things, though I don't remember that happening late at night. I did have some fear of my dad when I was a kid, but my fear of my mom was more acute. She would get really crazy and have episodes where she would be verbally abusive and hateful to my dad, my siblings, and me. This happened more frequently then my dad's anger. Again though, not sure it really happened at night. My older sister would have been someone who terrorized me at night. She is about 4 years older, and she really bullied me and my other siblings. We moved when I was 5, and in the new house my sister and I had connecting bedrooms. So she would have to walk through my room to get to hers. Every single time my sister walked by my bed from age 5 to 10 she would knock my bed with her knees startling me awake. This happened multiple times every night and morning for those 5 years. If she was en route to the bathroom, leaving the room, any time she was in transit, she would jolt my bed with her knees. Upsetting me would amuse her greatly; it was a fun game to her, even though I cried and pleaded with her to stop. However, this didn't start until after I was already having these nightmares. I can't remember if she did that sort of thing before. No actual crickets. Haha.

Anyone care to help me interpret this nightmare I had in childhood? I had it on a regular basis from age 4 to about 6 or 7. It always started with me waking up in my bed in the nursery. My older brother was in the twin bed on the other side of the room, but he was asleep. At the side of the bed there was a large cricket who stood upright like a person. He was about my height. He was sort of a gangster, wore a leather jacket, and was often smoking a cigarette. He would stare at me and be flipping a coin in the air very smugly. On the floor at his feet were about a thousand normal size crickets, and he stood over them. He would give me this pointed look and then bounce away to the hallway. I was so scared, but I followed him because I knew he was nefarious as fuck and wanted to harm my family. My mom was in the hallway, either on the phone or otherwise distracted, and the gangster cricket was on her back. He was looking straight at me in this haughty way. Mom didn't notice at all. I tried to tell her and get her attention, but she couldn't hear me. I would cry and scream, but she just turned away and continued talking on the phone. Sometimes she would wave her hand dismissively and say, "Not now." Then the cricket would jump off her back and leap back into the nursery. He stood in the middle of the room over all the other little crickets for a moment before picking one up. He stuck it between two slices of bread and took a big chomp. At that point I would wake up, covered in sweat, and usually burst into tears. I brought this dream up to my parents over dinner a few years ago. My dad remembered right away and jokingly cursed those damn crickets, but it's interesting that my mom had no recollection of it. Much the way she was in the dream, she was completely oblivious of my fears and needs as a child. In terms of what was going on in my life at that time, my mom had a miscarriage when I was 3. It was really traumatic time in the family, and mom was really sad for the next couple years until she got pregnant with my little brother, who was born when I was 5. There was a fair amount of strife between my parents during that time because mom wanted another child, and dad didn't. He frequently joked about how mom "tricked" him into getting her pregnant. Any ideas about what this dream means? Also, is it fairly "normal" to have recurring nightmares like this? I'd be curious to hear if anyone else had repeated bad dreams as a child, and what they were about.

You are under no moral obligation to someone else, unless that person is your spouse or your child. If someone is "mysteriously slinking away," then the relationship probably wasn't very good to begin with. Also, if a requirement of friendship for you is not doing that, then the moment someone does, they are not your friend anymore by your own standards. Interesting that you mention passive aggression. Is it more passive aggressive to walk away from an individual, or talk to someone you don't like out of some imaginary social debt that needs to be paid? The act of talking to them, when you don't want to, will foster contempt that leads to passive aggression.

Great post! Absolutely. You may be familiar, but this phenomenon, the backfire effect, has been studied, and it's so dangerous. This part really resonated with me. In RTR, Stef makes the analogy of going to a bad restaurant. If the food is terrible, and you are unhappy with the service, you don't yell and scream about it, you just never go back. It's the same with one's parents. If they abused you and refuse to discuss, apologize, or even recognize that something was wrong, the only way to "punish" them is to walk away. It's removing the reward, which is the earned privilege of your company. The reward for the troll is attention, acknowledgement, and being seen. Take that away, and they no longer have any power.

I read your book today, and I enjoyed it immensely. Left you a review on amazon.

It seems somewhat dishonest to talk to someone about not wanting to talk to them. A person's silence communicates a great deal. Dismissing that silence by saying there is something wrong with the person who is cutting off communication, or believing there must be something wrong with yourself, isn't productive. All that is in your sphere of control is to examine the relationship and try to reach out, but by not reciprocating they are, indeed, responding. Have you heard of the Gestalt prayer? I've found it a helpful and comforting reminder as I am learning to set better boundaries with people: I do my thing and you do your thing. I am not in this world to live up to your expectations, And you are not in this world to live up to mine. You are you, and I am I, and if by chance we find each other, it's beautiful. If not, it can't be helped.

I was referring to the Adverse Childhood Experience (ACE) study, which examines the effects of adverse childhood experiences, like abuse or neglect, on health later in life. Stef talks about it a lot in the Bomb in the Brain series. Knowing and understanding my score has helped me figure out a lot patterns in my reflexive emotional responses. Here's a good link where you can take the test and learn more about it if you are interested. http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/03/02/387007941/take-the-ace-quiz-and-learn-what-it-does-and-doesnt-mean

I can only speak to my own experience, but understanding the politics of the family was the turning point for me. Once I fully understood the authoritarianism that was happening in my family of origin, and once I realized that the obligation I felt for them was completely imaginary, it was easy to see those patterns in the government and in schools. I went to a woman's college that was very left leaning and full of feminists. I remember during the Obama/McCain election, I voted for McCain (exclusively because that was how my parents wanted me to vote). The women at my school who were open about voting republican were severely ridiculed, so to protect myself, I told all my friends at the time that I was voting for Nader. It was sort of a running joke to all the girls. "Oh, that Kathryn! Voting for Nader... She's so quirky!" Of course, the only reason I felt I had to lie about my choice was because I didn't have a valid argument as to why I was voting for McCain. I was voting that way only to avoid the verbal attacks from my parents, then lying about it to avoid verbal attacks from my peers. The following election I voted for Obama (a huge rebellion and betrayal in my parents eyes), but I never felt sure of any of it. Never fully agreed with any of the politicians, and I always saw the act of voting as pretty useless. (Especially since I live in FL, so we literally didn't have any affect on the last election. Lol.) My uncertainty and pervasive doubt was part of what made the transition to AnCap so natural and easy, but the biggest thing was coming to terms with the realities of my family. The personal lead to the political.

I've heard of one game to play with kids at the dinner table called high/low, where you ask them what was the high of their day and what was the low. Addressing the lows is supposed to be especially useful. If something bothered them during the day you can ask why and explore what happened and what they could do differently next time. Thinking about highs and lows can also help them to be more aware of their preferences. It takes a lot of agency as a kid to say, "I like this" or "I don't like this." Plus, it's a fun way to review the day and see what's going on with them. Here's a link to the podcast Stef did with his daughter Izzy. They play the "Bad Philosophy Game," where they sing silly contradictory statements back and forth. It's one of my favorite things of all time. http://www.fdrpodcasts.com/#/2634/the-bad-philosophy-show-sunday-call-in-show-february-23rd-2014 And here's a link to a call in about general concepts of teaching children critical thinking. It's very similar to what neeeel says above. https://board.freedomainradio.com/files/file/222-teaching-children-critical-thinking/ Keep in mind, if you haven't been doing these things with the kids from an early age you might get some resistance from them on playing games. Not that you shouldn't try, but I would follow their lead and ask them if they want to play beforehand. My ex is a former teacher, and he used to get really pushy about games with my niece and nephew. After we hung out with the kids, he would often be bitter the whole drive home if they didn't want to play or seemed "unappreciative" of his efforts. He wasn't listening to their feedback at all.

Thanks for sharing your experience. Do you have any theories as to why they feel offended by the woman paying? That's interesting. I wonder why you feel that insecurity around the bill with groups of people... Has that happened before to someone you know? Is abandonment one of you ACE scores?

I think an argument could be made that it is polite and considerate to split a bill if you know you don't want to see the person again, so that there is no resentment about wasted resources, but I'm not sure if I agree with your comparison to an escort. For one, the idea of a couple of drinks or a dinner being a "payment" seems inaccurate. If that was the sole reason for going on the date, to get a free meal, then that person is already manipulative and would not be interested in being polite or considerate, and I think the escort comparison could apply in a situation like that. However, I think the majority of people go on dates to get to know someone better, not for some monetary value. It seems strange that there would be any sort of arbitrary obligation to someone you don't like. There could still be a negotiation and discussion on who pays even when you don't like a person, but having to pay a certain amount to this person you didn't enjoy the company of, or you will be labeled as a prostitute? I'm still thinking about the reverse situation, where you really like a person, and how that fits in with the escort comparison. I suppose in the scenario where you want to see your date again, one person can pay now the other can reciprocate later, so everything remains equitable. It seems like the value for you is equality and fairness, and if you know you're not going to see a person again, then there is no opportunity for reciprocation at a later time, so splitting things in the moment would be preferable to you. What are your thoughts on this? I'm really curious as to why financial equality in relationships and splitting the bill on dates is something that so many of us value.

Why is it so important to you that you both insist? Was that ever stressful? Keeping a spreadsheet doesn't sound very romantic, but I am curious how that worked. Was the split in this spreadsheet 50/50, or was it more specific to what you ordered? Like, if you got a salad and he got steak, did you just pay for what you ate or was the entire bill divided in half? Also, were there any concessions in the spreadsheet that made the contribution proportionate to income? Like, if the guy made a lot more money than you or vice versa, was the expectation that you would still pay the same amount? Should the negotiation happen before a date, or when the bill arrives at the end of a date? That makes sense to me. Are you comfortable with a woman asking a man out on a date? Or does that seem strange to you? Thanks for bringing up feminism. I've heard a lot of feminists say that they are not man haters they just want equality with men, but Stef rightly points out that men and women are different. I wonder if the tendency for perfect fairness in bill splitting is a direct result of feminism. Something doesn't seem fair about men being expected to pay all the time, but part of the reason that isn't fair is because men in this day and age have a difficult time finding work that pays well, partially due to the economic fallout of the feminist movement. I'm not sure exactly what that means in terms of how couples split finances, but it is interesting.

Yes, that makes sense. I had the inclination at first to attempt to apply the theory to it's opposite though. If you would like to see someone again that doesn't necessarily mean you should be the one to pay or not. I'm not sure I understand the escort comparison. In the two cases where I was paying for everything both individuals lost their jobs while I was dating them. One was only in a temporary position, and did not seek further employment after that was over. (He was an artist who wanted to focus on painting.) And the other got laid off and kicked out of her apartment 3 or 4 months after I started dating her. I should mention that my financial situation at the time was atypical as I was essentially a trust fund kid.

I agree that it isn't healthy for one person to continuously pay a disproportionate majority. I've been in a relationship where I exclusively paid for everything, and that didn't feel good. It's interesting that you say if liking the other person is in question, splitting is the best option. Can you tell me more about that thought?

I appreciate the feedback. Advice was definitely something I was seeking with starting this thread. It's very good to hear that with practice being assertive has gotten much easier for you. Practice with it is something I severely lack. The circle of people that I trust is fairly limited at the moment, but I'm hoping that will grow with time. I'm curious about what individuals personally contribute to relationships as well. The mutual inspiration that you bring up I think would be one of the most important factors. How much growth do you think can happen within the confines of a relationship? Like if someone is not financially in a good place, or if they are still dealing with a lot of self-esteem issues, do you think that a person should refrain from dating until those things are sorted out?

Would you be open to negotiating that notion with a respective date? If the person's reaction is calm and open to talking about it, but they still have a strong preference on the subject, would you be willing to pay or willing to let them pay depending on their reaction? I understand. Taking the effort to split the bill at the end of a date is not very romantic. I think generosity is a great virtue, and that is only fostered if both parties are giving and generous with each other. I do wonder, if something didn't feel fair, how one would bring that up. Stef talks about how he frequently checks in with his wife and asks if all her needs are being met. This seems like such a kind gesture, if something were truly wrong, I would find it really hard to disclose when so much kindness was being shown to me like that. Does that make any sense? I guess it all comes down to practice and self-awareness. Right now that seems so foreign to me, but if checking in was standard behavior in a relationship it would feel normal and easy to respond to. And if one is completely aware of their preferences and needs (as Christina surely is), then they will be able to accurately and thoughtfully respond to such an inquiry.

So, you're saying that you pay at first, but it should be reciprocated later? Do you feel it should be a relatively even split throughout the courtship? Also, does that mean that you are the one doing the asking? If she asked you, does that mean she pays?

Yes, I've read read all three and RTR twice. I'm also in Coherence Therapy twice a week. I'm getting a lot better at RTRing with people, but it's still a challenge as I often don't feel sure of my feelings. I frequently have conflicting emotions. I know IFS works a lot with the ambiguity of feelings, and I did my first audio journaling exercise this weekend with some tips I learned in an IFS video. That was really helpful. I know Stef says questions and curiosity are assertive rather than aggressive, but as asking questions was always punished in my household as a child I still have a reflexive feeling like I'm going to get in trouble. Also, growing up in the south being direct was considered rude and pushy. I can broach awkward subjects with people, but it's almost always anxiety provoking to some degree. What are your thoughts on a woman having more money or assets than the man she is dating? I feel skeptical that repeated discussions means someone isn't being honest. Can it mean that more than one feeling is occurring? Or that one's thoughts on the subject have changed?

So, I'm not currently dating, but I'm reflecting on my past relationships, and I see that money and etiquette has always been something that has confused me a great deal. My parents were wealthy, and money was not something that was talked about in my childhood, and I was scolded if I asked questions about how much money they made or how much things cost. I get a lot of anxiety now trying to discuss anything to do with money, so the idea of talking to prospective date on what his thoughts are on who pays for dinner is stressful. In the past, I have always either split the price of a date 50/50 or paid for it myself. A guy has never paid outright for dinner. Even on my birthday when a boyfriend tried to pay I felt awkward and insisted on contributing. I realize in the millennial generation with gender roles changing this might be very normal, but a friend of mine recently told me he thought it was emasculating for a woman to pay for dinner. Splitting costs has always seemed fair to me, but seeing as none of my past relationships have worked out very well I thought it might be useful to re-evaluate this notion. What are your thoughts on who should pay on dates? Is there an assertive way to bring this up with people to talk about? EDIT: Is it preferable to re-evaluate the entire concept of dating? Because on dates one is not necessarily showing standard behavior. It doesn't seem a very good way to get to know someone.

A friend of mine noted that what makes "Because I feel like it" passive aggressive is the "Because." When one goes into an activity with "I feel like doing this," the phrase is neutral. But when one wants to do something, and another person asks (or usually demands) you to explain yourself, responding with "Because I feel like it" sounds defensive. This is method is particularly apropos to controlling people. In the case that you feel like doing something the controlling person doesn't want you to do, they want you to give some kind of explanation that they can argue with and pick apart. With my mother, my not feeling like doing homework shifted the power. She was then trying to make me do something that I didn't want to do. I feel like in healthy relationships this kind of thing would never happen. There would be mutual respect and honest dialog.

You are absolutely right. "Because I feel like it" is not any kind of precise feeling statement. What I was thinking when I wrote that statement was that in open and honest relationships people are allowed to say things like "Because I feel like it," and it can be the beginning of a discussion. Imagining if I said that, someone might be curious and ask me more questions and want to know what is really going on. I was thinking "Because I feel like it" points to the true feelings. However, I see now that it should be the beginning of the discussion with myself about how I'm truly feeling because often when I use avoidant language it is because I feel uncertain, and I am trying to defer until I have more time to think about it. (Which, of course, I could just say out right.) I also see that thinking in that way, of bringing up an ambiguous feeling and hoping someone else will inquire further and help me figure it out, is robbing myself of personal responsibility in the scenario. It's not a fair expectation for another person to do all the work. It might be possible to say "Because I feel like it" without being passive aggressive, but I agree with you that the statement would be very difficult to say without the passive aggressive connotation. The whole reason I started this thread was that I was frustrated by people not being satisfied with my reasons for moving. I told them I have a friend where I want to move, and I'm sick of my hometown, but these things were not "good enough." (Or that is how I was perceiving their reaction, which could have been off because I didn't ask for clarification.) So, post-hoc I feel irritated and tell myself, "I'm doing this because I feel like it! No one can tell me that's wrong!" That's treating myself dismissively and avoidantly (as I treated my ex-husband) because then I don't get to the truth of the situation, which is that I'm really not feeling confident about my decision. I really appreciate your feedback. I'm going to think on this quite a bit more. Complete honesty about how I'm feeling still feels rather foreign to me. So much that I frequently feel very unsure about what my true feelings are. I feel disconnected from my true self. I'm in therapy twice a week and journal about this everyday, but I'm not living up to the standards I want to set for myself and others. This feels frustrating and defeating, and I don't feel good enough to be around good people. EDIT: I think the feeling of not being good enough to be around good people is accurate and healthy for me right now. This is the reason I'm choosing not to date at the moment because I don't live up to those standards yet. It would be hypocritical of me to expect that of a boyfriend or husband when I am not there myself.

These are great points you are making here. The things that we feel like doing are very telling to our internal states, and that can be dangerous to some people. I've been thinking a lot about this and other times in my life I didn't want to say, "Because I feel like it." For instance, when I was married I felt like taking naps all the time. My husband would want an explanation for the constant napping and not getting out of bed. This seems odd to me now because he knew I was in cripplingly depressed at the time, but I would come up with excuses like, "I didn't sleep well the night before," or "I want to rest up before we go out with friends later." Saying those things would get him to leave me alone. If I had said, "Because I feel like it," that may have prompted more questions about how unhappy I felt. I didn't want to be honest about the fact that I didn't admire the man I was married to, and that I wasn't sure I ever loved him. Talking about my true feelings felt dangerous because it threatened the entire relationship, one that I felt a strong insecure attachment to. Another example I can think of where it didn't feel safe to say voice my true feelings was in grade school when my mother found out I wasn't doing my homework. She demanded to know why, and I wasn't allowed to say, "Because I didn't feel like it." That explanation would have pointed to the huge problems at home or to the resentment I felt towards her and my teachers for telling me what to do all the time. It was easier for mom to say I was a "bad girl" rather than address the things that were really bothering me. "Because I feel like it" is an honest feelings statement... I think the fear of saying that is just as telling as the feeling itself. Does that make sense? What are your thoughts? Thanks for sharing this! I loved Blink, but it's been a while since I read it, so this was a very helpful refresher. I have a lot of trouble trusting my own instincts and intuition, and I constantly doubt my decisions... Something I'm working on in therapy, but maybe it's time to reread Blink. :-) Yes, I am very tired of explaining myself to others as well. So often the people that want those tedious explanations are not worth even being friends with, so why do I feel the need to defend my choices to them? That's rhetorical, I suppose... I know it has to do with my anxious attachment pattern. What did you do? Did you end up moving? How do you feel about the decision now?

Is it ok to do something just because you want to without much logical reasoning behind that choice? It seems like there are social needs to explain behavior, and for some reason it is socially unacceptable to say, "Just because I feel like it." For instance, I would like to move, but I don't really have a good reason that can be concisely summed up. I guess I don't entirely know why I want to move so much. It may be because I am sick of living in my home town so close to my family of origin. The place I want to move is fairly arbitrary too. It looks like an interesting city, and I have one friend there. I feel a little uncertain on whether these are good enough reasons to uproot my life and start over in a place I've never been. I'd be curious to hear thoughts on this topic. Is it just a social pressure I feel to justify my decisions to others? Or is there something inherently wrong with not knowing why we do things?