I'm Prairie

[Prairie]

I'm on the LibertyHQ forum and have watched several of Stefan's videos. I appreciate his relentless application of consistent morality, especially to those who abuse children. In the past I've read Alice Miller and grasped how people generally side with the abuser when it comes to routine child abuse.I've experienced debilitating psychological/emotional abuse, mostly from my mother, from around when I started to assert myself, non-stop since. I consider myself an addict from age 6 or so, though my drug is burying myself in hobbies. I'm thankful that they provide such endless challenges because I don't think I could have survived without them.In general I turn inside to grow rather than attempt to change the world. There is so much out-of-whack in myself and much of it causes the symptom of imagining that things outside me need fixing. Not that I consider something wrong with myself, only (badly) injured and incompletely developed.Self-definition is central to me. Along with this I greatly value having my own fluid grasp of the world, and allowing others to have their own, without pressure to conform to anybody's idea of what is correct. I often experience others' models of the world used to gain power by putting values on things to justify taking action against me.I've practiced Re-Evaluation Counseling in the past and think highly of the core setup: one person talks about whatever they want while the other listens. The listener doesn't try to comfort, rather listens/assists the talker to connect with deep hurts from the past so that the talker can complete the unfinished processing of them and stop them from continually being retriggered in present situations. I've also had some contact with Non-Violent Communication, which is about resolving conflicts in the present. It focuses on expressing present needs in direct ways and getting them met, rather than indirect judgmental ways that tend to make it hard for the other person to hear ("tragic expression of unmet needs"). I see these two as complementary, one a personal process of working on deep issues and making lasting change, the other on everyday problems when relating with others.I've read some of the discussions, particularly Self Knowledge, and have been pleased with some of the regulars and their promotion of understanding the source of one's distress.

[_LiveFree_]

Welcome, welcome, Prairie!

 

So sorry to hear about the abuse you suffered. You'll find many people here with similar backgrounds including myself. Besides therapy, constructive hobbies are probably the best way to deal with abuse. You sound as if you are already skipping along the path to full self-realization! Well, let me tell you from my own direct experience, Freedomain Radio is like a massive shot of adrenaline straight to the heart. If you stay here and really dig into the content you'll see changes in yourself coming frequently and quickly. It isn't always fun. In fact, if you don't get pissed off now and again you're not doing it right . But the results are fantastical.

 

Glad you're here!

See you around.

[dsayers]

I greatly value having my own fluid grasp of the world, and allowing others to have their own, without pressure to conform to anybody's idea of what is correct.

 

Hello there, survivor! I was wondering if you could elaborate on this quote here. I was raised Christian and with the "politically correct" movement pushing tolerance, I have a pronounced bias against mythology being peddled as truth. As a result, my translation of the quote had to deal with having one's one mythology and allowing others to have theirs. Did I misunderstand?

[Prairie]

People peddling religion/mythology to justify their ongoing abuse of people? Reveal their claims to be the inconsistent, self-serving shams they are. They are at the very least accomplices to abuse.I meant on a more fundamental level a pressure to adopt the views that other people have of reality, in any way whatsoever. At some point I realized that I felt unsafe by abandoning the authority of others on reality, and anything related to it, and saw this pressure to conform. I had a real sense of freedom of thought after shaking this intellectual chain loose, of being able to think and believe anything at all about existence, what really is, etc. Even the pressure to be consistent is great from others, which when I'm under its spell feels like I have the weight of my entire past on me. Thus I don't submit to it and likewise don't pressure others to adopt my view of reality. Naturally if someone uses their views to justify using force against me, I will avoid/resist/defend.Thanks for your questions/responses.

[dsayers]

I'm sorry, it's still not clear to me. Are you saying that what is real is up to us? Because I felt the same freedom of thought you describe when I came to realize that what is real is not up to us. It makes it so much easier for me to be able to identify the truth.

[Prairie]

I've become uncomfortable with our interaction and would like to clarify some things. If any/all of this is uninteresting, feel free to ignore this. I mulled over sending this privately, but thought that others might find it mildly interesting. First, a rundown of my experience of the thread:I noticed the introduction area and mulled over whether to post. It involves trying to give a static picture of something dynamic, and I don't often try to sum up myself in words. But I figured that it might help people understand where I'm coming from, give more context to other posts.You made a reply that mentioned your history with others who have mythology (religious) beliefs and presumably some kind of pressure/force based on them, and how what I described about myself related to that.At this point I was concerned that what I wrote about myself meant that I would pressure others to be accepting of others' beliefs, and that I would defend someone justifying mistreatment because it was OK in their mythology. So I replied to show that it was a more fundamental thing, and specifically not about harmful actions from others but only what goes on in their minds.Your next reply asked for more clarification, so I now have the idea that it wasn't that you felt threatened by what I said before, but that you have further interest in how I approach things. You also compare your thinking to mine and describe what conclusions you drew.At this point I become uncomfortable, because I'm not sure what your goal is anymore, and I wonder whether it's to cause some kind of change in my view. In my past I've experienced regular attempts to pressure me to abandon whatever way I'm experiencing things and relating, even though it's not being imposed on anyone else. My attempts at communicating with the person about it have been virtually all unsuccessful, merely giving them more information about my inner world for them to attack. I'm not claiming you're doing this, just noting that for me it has the same indicators that these had. So I'm uneasy at this point.That's my experience and what's gone through my mind, now some questions. I'd mainly just like to understand your intent, whatever it is. That you compared my view to yours suggests some kind of evaluation, and described the outcome for yourself and how you consider it useful to you suggests advice. Are you attempting to get a better idea of me in order to offer advice so as to assist me? Has anything I've shared been threatening? If I indicated that I weren't interested in advice, yet shared more about how I relate with things, would you still want to comment on it? 

[dsayers]

I'm not sure how to answer that. I certainly want to begin by saying I meant no undue discomfort.

 

There was a time when if you said to me, "Forests do not exist," I would've replied, "Well of course they exist. Pull up a map and I'll show you." I remember the first time I began to watch Stef's An Introduction to Philosophy, I was fascinated both by how much I've come to believe in lies AND how seemingly innocent yet fundamental lies like "forests exist" could lead to evils of the highest order receiving my stamp of approval.

 

From the very first time I ever hurt somebody that meant a lot to me that I would never hurt intentionally, it's always been paramount for me to be corrected when in error. Back then it was more in terms of social evaluation, today it's more in terms of raw truth value. Not that it's the responsibility of others that I am accurate; I accept that responsibility. Just as I accept that I live in a world where the slightest criticism is often confused for a personal attack. As such, I've always been very forthcoming with others that I invite correction.

 

When it comes to the truth, particularly in the context of imprecision leading to the pain, suffering, and deaths of millions of human beings, I provide the same correction for others. When I read the sentence I first quoted, I took that to mean that we should allow others to believe whatever they feel like as if reality were up to us. Rather than jump to that conclusion, I sought clarification first. My intentions, assuming I did not misunderstand what you were saying, was to help you (as Stef helped me) to understand that reality is not in fact up to us.

 

I am very thankful you were able to express your discomfort and I admire the level at which you are in touch with your feelings. Emotions are something I struggle with since I've only actually been amenable to them for less than a year after decades of suppression. I'm really sorry if I came on too strong as a result.