How can one overcome the fear of social ramifications when speaking the truth

[Cornetto97]

I am quite new to attempting to spread the truth to people, and i am finding it quite hard to ignore any possible social rejection, and shouting down that can often come when countering the popular social ideas that permeate society. I have only succeeded in doing so whith my closest friends whom i have built up enough of a relation with to know that they will respect what i say and hear me out, as oppose to rejecting me and shouting me down.

 

Has anyone here experienced the same thing when first attempting to speak truth with others? Is it something that must be trained in order to speak with conviction and fluidity to others about the truth?

 

Just wanted to get some thoughts on this, and some ways others have countered it.

[brucethecollie]

I was reading Letters from a Stoic by Seneca a while back and two quotes circling in my head helped give me a push when it came to talking to some people close to me (which can be downright terrifying as the risk of social rejection seemed overwhelming to me).  Anyway, here they are:  

 

“Limiting one’s desires actually helps to cure one of fear. ‘Cease to hope … and you will cease to fear.’ … Widely different [as fear and hope] are, the two of them march in unison like a prisoner and the escort he is handcuffed to. Fear keeps pace with hope … both belong to a mind in suspense, to a mind in a state of anxiety through looking into the future. Both are mainly due to projecting our thoughts far ahead of us instead of adapting ourselves to the present.” 

 

“To expect punishment is to suffer it; and to earn it is to expect it.” 

 

Basically, meet the fear head on and you will likely see the reality is not as bad as your worst fears...plus...there is so much to gain and after all, you are already suffering with your worries on the subject so what have you really got to lose? (keep in mind in some cases there really may be good reasons not to speak up)

 

As for being able to speak your ideas clearly, that does take a lot of studying and practice.  I am still working on it.  Asking people if they wouldn't mind you elaborating in written form can help give you time to express more clarity on a subject.

[Cornetto97]

Thanks for the reply,

 

Interesting insight, so maybe i'm simply thinking too much about the future, and due to that, fear the present, and the possible ramifications And instead i should just ignore the hope, and the future, and focus on meeting the fear head on? and it's an interesting way of looking at fear and hope, because fear implies your thoughts are in the future as oppose to the present, so too does hope, which in turn means you place too much emphasis on the future as oppose to the present, which can create anxiety.

[dsayers]

Have you checked out Stef's Bomb in the Brain series? Before you can change people's minds, you have to understand WHY they think what they do. Being true isn't enough for many people if the falsehoods bring them deep-seated comfort. Trying to spread truth to those types will only cause them to respond viscerally, the act of which will actually serve to bolster their opinion.

[HollywoodSimon]

I would disagree with brucethecollie and say, Put some thought into the future. In this case, consider the consequences of not presenting the truth. You can't go back to a past conversation and undo the regret of not speaking the truth, but you can come back from the future and speak the truth now.

 

The apprehension of disapproval is a short-term concern. You can overcome it by taking a long-term perspective, which you're more likely to do while relaxed and not in immediate need. If you're not practiced at handling disapproval try to avoid pushing your point while anxious. Satisfy the immediate need, get calm, then engage with the long-term in mind.

 

Apart from that, practice makes more perfect.

 

All of this is easier said than done. You could probably find some coaching to help you along with it.

[Cornetto97]

Alright i'll have to check it out, i guess it's like the stereotypical movie detective thing of getting into the mind of the murderer. So before i can attempt to spread truth to people i have to understand why they so visciously shut out anything that penetrates their reality.

 

Cheers for the reply.

[flazak]

This article in the mail is interesting, this is what happens when someone speaks their mind

 

Sorry its the mail.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3506275/Publicity-boss-asked-Muslim-woman-street-explain-Brussels-deluged-angry-hilarious-Tweets-reply.html

[castus]

If you're a materialist, you're at an inescapable loss; you'll never truly deal with that fear/dilemma without the promise of some ultimate assurance in life.... after death. Think about it: logically, seeking corporeal self-empowerment via selflessness is circular logic, thus contradictory. To take it further in the right direction, which is actually better: the man who values himself less than others, or the one that values himself equal in greatness?

 

Jesus Christ is really the only teacher on this.

[Cornetto97]

I would disagree with brucethecollie and say, Put some thought into the future. In this case, consider the consequences of not presenting the truth. You can't go back to a past conversation and undo the regret of not speaking the truth, but you can come back from the future and speak the truth now.

 

The apprehension of disapproval is a short-term concern. You can overcome it by taking a long-term perspective, which you're more likely to do while relaxed and not in immediate need. If you're not practiced at handling disapproval try to avoid pushing your point while anxious. Satisfy the immediate need, get calm, then engage with the long-term in mind.

 

Apart from that, practice makes more perfect.

 

All of this is easier said than done. You could probably find some coaching to help you along with it.

Yeah, it's practice and mindset, i really thought it would be easy to just say it and spit out some full proof reasoning roght there but yeah, it's quite difficult, just going to have to practice it. Cheers.

[Cornetto97]

This article in the mail is interesting, this is what happens when someone speaks their mind

 

Sorry its the mail.

 

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3506275/Publicity-boss-asked-Muslim-woman-street-explain-Brussels-deluged-angry-hilarious-Tweets-reply.html

 

Oh my god, seriously, what is going on? What is going on, has twitter ever bothered to do anything about the isis supporters they have floating around, most probably combing twitter for new recruits? No, but we will delete the man who has simply voiced an opinion among the myriad of other opinions that float around. Have we no free speech, the man was arrested more efficiently than the perpetrators of these horrendous attacks. I mean come on europe really, really arrested in his home?

 

This is why social media can backfire as a way to voice the truth, you really have to tread more carefully, especially with twitter.

[tele]

This article in the mail is interesting, this is what happens when someone speaks their mind

 

Sorry its the mail.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3506275/Publicity-boss-asked-Muslim-woman-street-explain-Brussels-deluged-angry-hilarious-Tweets-reply.html

It's interesting that the newspaper are not allowing any comments on the article.

 

The person in question is indeed reported to have been arrested but this does not been that he will be charged with any offence, nor that he would be found guilty.

 

Apart from a bit of social opprobrium he will suffer no harm.

 

Learn from this and understand that we do not have to be cowered.

 

Why are you apologising from using the Daily Mail as a resource, it's no worse than other newspapers?

[Cornetto97]

It's interesting that the newspaper are not allowing any comments on the article.

 

 

Iv'e heard about many other mainstream news sites doing this, it says something about how the masses are starting to question the mainstream narrative when they stop all comments on their articles

[Hannibal]

Assuming that you can feel confident that you are in fact speaking truth, then understand this... the more self-respect you have - the more of a man you are - then the fewer 'friends' you will have. 

 

Early on you'll think this the unfortunate fact of reality.

 

Later on you'll find it a convenient fact of reality.

 

 

 

There is no real value in superficial friendships. A healthy garden needs a good pruning every so often.

 

If someone can't display intellectual honesty and integrity towards you , then they aren't a friend worth having. If they do, but are just wrong, then that's fine. 

 

I couldn't bear grudge against a friend who who is honest but mistaken.  Someone who's not honest doesn't display the respect necessary tp be considered a real friend.

[Killendel]

Hello, my personal experience in trying to break controversial topics with people has been in keeping it light, and keeping the perspective that I speak from, in a place where I keep my attitude calm, and do not become offended when other people disagree with me.

 

Having the truth, the no doubt about it, yes indeed - THE TRUTH - should allow you to feel in comfortable in any situation UNTIL you ego feels like it's running out of rope.

 

Now this is where we can reflect on our self, and the other person.  The chances are if they are getting upset, about something that makes sense to you but not to them.  Then I suspect that they are operating in a place of thought they don't have too well figured out on their own.  And the same is true if you are the one to get upset.  

 

A lot of the time, people say they want to help you, and give you the truth but the fact of the matter is, they just want some one to believe and buy into their prescribed version of "truth".

 

The truth is, everything is referenced back to principals established by your SELF.  The light patterns that make the structure of the letter A, have been defined to you, BY you, in your own unique way.  Some one once showed you, HERE THIS IS THE LETTER A, but the shape as defined by the light arrays that meet your eye balls are free to be interpreted in your own unique way. I could give you what I believe to be the letter A and ask you to match it, but what you see is the same pattern you have defined by your own means, and thats what you show me in reflection to say that YOU have mirrored the letter I gave you.  But as I take the information I reinterpret it to my own understanding every time no matter what unless I myself choose to expand upon what I once percieved to be the letter A.

 

That is the truth.  And so, you and another person can talk about a THING and say yes you both agree.  But all you are really saying is that the thought patterns as regurgitated by another person seem to match the thought patterns that you have given out.  And how we judge that is by pattern recognition and how close to perfect one pattern matches another.

 

But this isn't in fact considered an agreement, this is just "OKAY THE WORDS WE SAY ARE THE SAME IF NOT SIMILAR" but who takes the time to make sure you value those words the same?

[Spenc]

I'm a little uncomfortable with your terminology right off the bat.  "Speaking the truth" is a strange thing to say as far as I'm concerned.

 

I would take the approach of 'having conversations about matters of importance to me' which focuses on the exchange of ideas more than 'spreading the truth' which is more unilateral on your part, and quite frankly, more humble and sensible.

 

And you mention at the top that you are new to spreading the truth.  So that either means you've been working on uncovering truth for a long time but only recently started spreading it, or you're new to both.  Those would be two very different problems.

 

Can I ask how you were raised in terms of social pressures by your parents?  e.g. were your parents the type to avoid conflict and go along to get along?  Did your parents emphasize to you the importance of fitting in and avoiding social faux pas?  These types of things could result in you overvaluing social harmony over integrity and truth, not intellectually but in your psyche.

 

Finally, the tone of your post kind of infers that you are trying to discuss particularly controversial/red-button issues.  For example, the last 6 months of FDR programming have been heavily focused on different matters of race to do with IQ, violence, etc.  Is this the type of stuff you desire to speak about?  I suppose you could just as easily be talking about  lowering taxes though in terms of people wanting to shout you down and not even hear you out for a moment.  In any case, if it is the former, I would say maybe you ought to start small and work your way up

[flazak]

It's interesting that the newspaper are not allowing any comments on the article.

 

-------

 

Why are you apologising from using the Daily Mail as a resource, it's no worse than other newspapers?

 

They don't allow comments when they are reporting on a story that is part of an ongoing investigation by Law enforcement.

 

-------

 

I don't know why I am apologising, its just a hangover of when I was more left/socialist/brainwashed than I am now and papers like The Mail are not looked upon favourably by the left !

[Sima]

I think it almost impossible to tell the truth, many  people don't want to know any truth, even if its about small things, if its not useful for them.

They get hostile. So your fear is valid. 

There are some curious ones who want to know the truth.Maybe you will find those. But think first if the truth might be unuseful for them then better dont talk. Stefan mentioned something about not stating things, but asking people and they might admit themselves that things are bad, then maybe you could give an explanation.

[myclippedwings]

I tried "spreading the truth" to my house mates and friends, all it achieved was disappointment, since my goal of changing their minds about statism was not successful at all. All it seemed to achieve was just provoke an aggressive reaction. Even when I was having a debate and I showed them concrete facts, they just denied it with subtle evasions and justifications

 

Now I see that most people just don't want to know the truth, and no matter how much you do, there is nothing you can do until they are genuinely curious. The same rule applies to me, before self knowledge and fdr, I was committed to justify MY narrative of how I want the world to be, instead of accepting facts and reality even if it would make me uncomfortable. Self knowledge helped me a lot with this.

 

 

So I guess people with little to no self knowledge are very averse to the facts and the truth of life.

 

It's better if you just follow Stef's example, spread the truth through a form of outlet (like a youtube channel for example), and the people who are curious will eventually be interested. 

[Cornetto97]

I'm a little uncomfortable with your terminology right off the bat. "Speaking the truth" is a strange thing to say as far as I'm concerned.

 

I would take the approach of 'having conversations about matters of importance to me' which focuses on the exchange of ideas more than 'spreading the truth' which is more unilateral on your part, and quite frankly, more humble and sensible.

 

 

Yeah I really couldn't think of what to describe it as but conversations on matters of importance is what i mean. i see what you mean, spreading the truth implies it to be unilateral, as oppose to discourse that's more bilateral, so yeah that's more what i meant. Hope that clears that part up

And you mention at the top that you are new to spreading the truth. So that either means you've been working on uncovering truth for a long time but only recently started spreading it, or you're new to both. Those would be two very different problems.

 

Can I ask how you were raised in terms of social pressures by your parents? e.g. were your parents the type to avoid conflict and go along to get along? Did your parents emphasize to you the importance of fitting in and avoiding social faux pas? These types of things could result in you overvaluing social harmony over integrity and truth, not intellectually but in your psyche.

 

 

Well firstly let me clear up that statement of me being new to spreading the truth. I have always quite enjoyed having discourse about worldly issues, like immigration, politics, psychology, the future. I have some friends that i discuss important issues with. what i mean is that after watching fdr now for about 4 months or so, my thinking on these issues has changed to a more controversial one, so i'm new to discussing such things with my new perspective, and i'm relatively new to this new outlook i have. Hope that clears that up.

 

Hmm that's interesting because my parents always said it was important to not let peaople walk all over you, and stand up for yourself if you feel you were wronged or someone is in the wrong. So yes they said to me in social situations to stick up for what you believe. However in familial situations it is very much different respect your elders, don't question just do. So i would always question why when told not to do something, and the answer would be something along the lines of 'because i told you so'. So for example, i was discussing with my mum on the issue of foreign invesent, i told her in fact foreign investment is good, in a free market, and that the government and central banking is why prices are so high. She got frustrated and wouldn't listen and told me she doesn't want to talk about it any more. So it was very conflicting between what they told me to do and what they did, more so with my mother because she was raised in a very old school authoritarian family. Again hope that gives you a more expanded view and clears things up.

 

Finally, the tone of your post kind of infers that you are trying to discuss particularly controversial/red-button issues. For example, the last 6 months of FDR programming have been heavily focused on different matters of race to do with IQ, violence, etc. Is this the type of stuff you desire to speak about? I suppose you could just as easily be talking about lowering taxes though in terms of people wanting to shout you down and not even hear you out for a moment. In any case, if it is the former, I would say maybe you ought to start small and work your way up

Yeah the former more red button issues as you put it. However i do talk about the less triggering topics like lowering taxes and the ineffectiveness of the public sector, i just don't encounter much of a problem discussing such topics, of course because they are a lot less alarming to some. That's deffinently the tactic i have been trying, talking about the less meaty issues, and working up slowly to more red button topics. If that's what you mean by starting small and working your way up.

[Spenc]

i find it interesting when parents encourage certain qualities in their children because a lot of times they don't actually enable those qualities to come out or sometimes they restrict them to outside-the-family issues only.

 

if you really think about it, were your parents teaching you to be assertive yourself, or were they just modeling assertiveness to the point that they were teaching you to acquiesce?

 

the simplest way to delve into this would be to ask yourself if they encouraged obedience when presented with their assertiveness, or if they welcomed and encouraged negotiation if and when you asserted different preferences or needs.

 

More to the point of how they normalized you to social pressures, you could ask yourself, what types of things might you say or do in public that would cause your parents embarrassment and what would the consequences be for that?

 

for example, i can remember one time at the school for my sister's play, recital, concert, or whatever else that the show was over and my mom and i were sitting in the audience waiting for the kids from on stage to be released so my sister would rejoin us so we could leave.  my mom was making small talk with the mother of a classmate of mine who had coincidentally been in my same class every single year of our schooling, probably about 5-6 years total at that point.  i was bored as hell because it wasn't really my top choice for evening entertainment to begin with and now we're just twiddling thumbs waiting for my sister so we can leave.  then they turn to me and ask me to verify if it's true that i had in fact been in the same class as the girl for all 5-6 years.  instead of verifying by saying yes, I had no patience for the inane small talk and said, "who cares? let's get ready to go"  my mom and the other mom both went red in the face and didn't know what to say.  i think a nervous chuckle from both ended the silence and then my mom kinda went along with the "i guess we should find _sister_ so we can get home".  and afterwards i was made to feel shamed and guilty for 'being rude'.

 

sorry for the long example, but i recall it well and it strikes me as a good example of how parents assert a) their needs to accepted socially, and b) your duty to do the socially acceptable thing in order not to ruin it for them, or to be classified as rude, which is an inherent bad.  and the example also reminds me how trivial the instances could be to cause embarrassment, which strikes a kid hard.  who the fuck is this stranger my mom has nothing worthwhile to speak about that i need to be bored and censored from speaking my true feelings?  why is her experience more important than mine?  this memory helps me establish where the line my mom had drawn was, that i was not to cross.  knowing where the line is, i can begin to evaluate it for what it represents about our relationship

[Cornetto97]

i find it interesting when parents encourage certain qualities in their children because a lot of times they don't actually enable those qualities to come out or sometimes they restrict them to outside-the-family issues only.

 

if you really think about it, were your parents teaching you to be assertive yourself, or were they just modeling assertiveness to the point that they were teaching you to acquiesce?

 

the simplest way to delve into this would be to ask yourself if they encouraged obedience when presented with their assertiveness, or if they welcomed and encouraged negotiation if and when you asserted different preferences or needs.

 

More to the point of how they normalized you to social pressures, you could ask yourself, what types of things might you say or do in public that would cause your parents embarrassment and what would the consequences be for that?

 

for example, i can remember one time at the school for my sister's play, recital, concert, or whatever else that the show was over and my mom and i were sitting in the audience waiting for the kids from on stage to be released so my sister would rejoin us so we could leave. my mom was making small talk with the mother of a classmate of mine who had coincidentally been in my same class every single year of our schooling, probably about 5-6 years total at that point. i was bored as hell because it wasn't really my top choice for evening entertainment to begin with and now we're just twiddling thumbs waiting for my sister so we can leave. then they turn to me and ask me to verify if it's true that i had in fact been in the same class as the girl for all 5-6 years. instead of verifying by saying yes, I had no patience for the inane small talk and said, "who cares? let's get ready to go" my mom and the other mom both went red in the face and didn't know what to say. i think a nervous chuckle from both ended the silence and then my mom kinda went along with the "i guess we should find _sister_ so we can get home". and afterwards i was made to feel shamed and guilty for 'being rude'.

 

sorry for the long example, but i recall it well and it strikes me as a good example of how parents assert a) their needs to accepted socially, and b) your duty to do the socially acceptable thing in order not to ruin it for them, or to be classified as rude, which is an inherent bad. and the example also reminds me how trivial the instances could be to cause embarrassment, which strikes a kid hard. who the fuck is this stranger my mom has nothing worthwhile to speak about that i need to be bored and censored from speaking my true feelings? why is her experience more important than mine? this memory helps me establish where the line my mom had drawn was, that i was not to cross. knowing where the line is, i can begin to evaluate it for what it represents about our relationship

It's very much a do as i say not as i do. On one hand they do as you said in your example, force me and my brother to be polite in social situations and show respect as oppose to say what we think. On the other hand they tell us to be assertive and genuine. On the one hand they tell me to stick to what i believe, and speak up, on the other it is not negotiable when i have a problem with something my parents have told me to do, or said. But generally what tends to happen with such important figures in your upbringing like your parents you end up doing more what they do, conform to social pressures and norms.

 

On a side note i often find something very habitual and monotonous about the way parents in particular small talk with others. Like do they really find speaking about what they cooked, or how they have been cleaning the house. It just is all very shallow, and reflects one of two things a) life these days for the middle class is so grey, that the only things to speak about are the very things that they do not like doing, or, b) they are forced to speak with this person when deep down they don't want to, in which case the apparent 'friendship' is extremely fake. For example, my friend was convincing me to go to a party, and this was after school had finished, and people whom i really didn't care to see again after school were also there. I said no because i really didn't want to feel pressured into having mind numbing small talk with these people. To which my friend joked (with what i picked up to carry some seriousness) that i was becoming introverted. It made me think that to actually be an extrovert would be to easily have discourse with people and move past just small talk, as small talk is inherently reserved. So it just interests me why parents especially tend to go out of their way to continue what is most likely an extremely forced conversation, possibly in the interest of appearing socially active, and extroverted to an extent, when what they are doing is the opposite in many aspects.

[Ludwig van Bach]

I didn't expect it from this video, but this really helped 

It really helps for me to know that when people judge your negatively for your ideas on what you believe in / want to do, they aren't really trying to help you, they are just trying to paralyse you. 

[Sima]

i was thinking more on this topic: if you help somebody when you tell the truth, it can put his self esteem very low, because he was too stupid to understand that himself.

If he was unlucky in his life, made bad decisions, then his self esteem already low and fragile,  so he hears that you are basically telling him, that he is an idiot.

At the same time, we all were at the point in the past where we knew less then we do now, so we want to help people.  Because it wasn't easy for us without the knowledge.

Its really difficult to learn how wrong you were if your self esteem is very low. If somebody,s parents and the environment (school, TV etc) were always saying he is a loser, its painful to lose the last bits of self esteem.

Reason for low self esteem: fake self ruling.  Fake self is the voices of parents, or friends, or teachers who were inflicting their own pain, shame and guilt on others because they couldn't  recycle it. Somebody is cruel to you without logical reason: they are inflicting their traumas on you or they genuinely don't know you don't like some things.

Self esteem gets higher with acceptance of things that are not perfect in us: I am slow, but i think more, I miss some social clues, but I always try to help etc. I don't look perfect, but I am kind and loving.  Who says everybody has to be fast, very social and good looking? Maybe those who want to put others down while ignoring other people best qualities.

If the person next to us dont value those things, there must be someone who does, like different music artist have different fans.  Also addictions are based on 3 main things as I have read: shame, guilt and very low self esteem. Get rid of those feelings, you should be fine. As I mentioned before: most usually people will get angry if they have very low self esteem, because correcting them is basically telling, they are idiots.

[Cornetto97]

i was thinking more on this topic: if you help somebody when you tell the truth, it can put his self esteem very low, because he was too stupid to understand that himself.

If he was unlucky in his life, made bad decisions, then his self esteem already low and fragile, so he hears that you are basically telling him, that he is an idiot.

At the same time, we all were at the point in the past where we knew less then we do now, so we want to help people. Because it wasn't easy for us without the knowledge.

Its really difficult to learn how wrong you were if your self esteem is very low. If somebody,s parents and the environment (school, TV etc) were always saying he is a loser, its painful to lose the last bits of self esteem.

Reason for low self esteem: fake self ruling. Fake self is the voices of parents, or friends, or teachers who were inflicting their own pain, shame and guilt on others because they couldn't recycle it. Somebody is cruel to you without logical reason: they are inflicting their traumas on you or they genuinely don't know you don't like some things.

Self esteem gets higher with acceptance of things that are not perfect in us: I am slow, but i think more, I miss some social clues, but I always try to help etc. I don't look perfect, but I am kind and loving. Who says everybody has to be fast, very social and good looking? Maybe those who want to put others down while ignoring other people best qualities.

If the person next to us dont value those things, there must be someone who does, like different music artist have different fans. Also addictions are based on 3 main things as I have read: shame, guilt and very low self esteem. Get rid of those feelings, you should be fine. As I mentioned before: most usually people will get angry if they have very low self esteem, because correcting them is basically telling, they are idiots.

Yeah and it's almost existential in the way some react. I mean if you take a large chunk of someones self worth away and tell them they're wrong about something they have likely vested a lot of time thinking about, i mean provided you give strong premises and reasoning to your argument, it will invoke extremely outspoken feelings. Even i felt a set of strong feelings upon first seeing a video of stefan's that challenged my beliefs. It is quite remarkable, it's a feeling of momentarily being lost, without direction, a little bit of anger almost, it's difficult to explain in just one adjective but it was a strong set feelings nonetheless. It's goes far in explaining why we have this ever so strong SJW narrative today, that simply verbally lynch mobs anyone who dares counter the narrative that gives them soft cushiony feelings. I wonder whether this has to do with parenting and schooling. To a large degree schooling and parenting is done top down, especially the latter. So this really leaves no room for negotiating and questioning, and gives no chance for tbe truth to really come about, or for any rational thinking. Like in school if you were to question a seemingly pointless rule, which infuriated me, you were usually not given an explanation and told to follow it or be sent to the principal, or get a detention. So if you're treated like that in every aspect of your life growing up by the people whom you spend most of your formative years 'learning' from then your going to subjugate others yourself when you are questioned or scrutinised.

[Sima]

If you question a pointless rule at school, and they listen to you, then they have to admit that they are wrong, therefore they are stupid. They feel better if they say you have just follow the rule. They keep the illusion which is needed by fragile inner self.

 What could be helpful, is to show that we respect the other person . Stefan says its humility, I call it respect. Respect the other person, try to show that you see his good qualities,  and respect, respect, respect.  We cant broke down the last pieces of their self respect.

 

My mother always saw my bad qualities, 1 bad thing wasnt balanced out by my other 99 good qualities. Also while I was achieving few important things, i didnt have time for unimportant ones (like messy room), if I was trying to understand how physics work from an encyclopedia. The same at school. One subjects teacher doesn't know that I am very good at another, so he tries to put me down. It's not very nice.

If someone has a low self esteem, and he sees your good traits, that are "better quality" than his, he will try to put you down, because then his self esteem will be as low, as yours after he was putting you down.  Theoretically people with least self respect will criticize others endlessly, because only this was they feel better.

Also people with a lot of talents get attacked because people lose their self value compared to talented ones. That's why Stefan gets criticized as well a lot.

My self esteem is low. I didnt know that for sure, but I see the signs: if someone criticize me, i get hurt a lot. Also my problem is why i dont go to therapy ( I was for 6 months in the past and it helped). To admit that i am a loser who needs help, will break me to the bottom. Here is a double message in Stefan talks: you guys are very smart ones, but you are not smart to survive without therapy. Thats a pure insult to me. I am smart, but I am not. I know it has something to do with my self respect, but maybe I will do some self study, and I see what future brings me. I respect my own abilities.

[Spenc]

On a side note i often find something very habitual and monotonous about the way parents in particular small talk with others. Like do they really find speaking about what they cooked, or how they have been cleaning the house. It just is all very shallow, and reflects one of two things a) life these days for the middle class is so grey, that the only things to speak about are the very things that they do not like doing, or, b) they are forced to speak with this person when deep down they don't want to, in which case the apparent 'friendship' is extremely fake. For example, my friend was convincing me to go to a party, and this was after school had finished, and people whom i really didn't care to see again after school were also there. I said no because i really didn't want to feel pressured into having mind numbing small talk with these people. To which my friend joked (with what i picked up to carry some seriousness) that i was becoming introverted. It made me think that to actually be an extrovert would be to easily have discourse with people and move past just small talk, as small talk is inherently reserved. So it just interests me why parents especially tend to go out of their way to continue what is most likely an extremely forced conversation, possibly in the interest of appearing socially active, and extroverted to an extent, when what they are doing is the opposite in many aspects.

Well, in terms of us as children, our parents defy our agency by basically stringing us along and forcing us to go wherever they go whether we like it or not.  So not only are they spending their free time chatting about how it rained more than usual the past week, they are dragging you along to witness it, which is kind of like cuckoldry in the way it might cause negativity on the children.

 

1. You're being forced into an undesirable situation.

2. You have to witness the boring small talk which you implicitly understand your parents find more important than your enjoyment, interest and stimulation.

3. It presents a consequent conflict within you:  the behavior your parents model is what is preferred/expected while simultaneously you find it tedious and perhaps have resentment toward it as a result of being subjected to it in lieu of your preferences.