Psycho-Babble Administration | about the operation of this site | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Lou's request to the administration » alexandra_k

Posted by so on June 11, 2005, at 20:37:00

In reply to Re: Lou's request to the administration » so, posted by alexandra_k on June 11, 2005, at 20:04:56

> It didn't sound like they bothered you to start with. It sounded like you were concerned for some hypothetical person who might be bothered by them. It did seem to take some time before you said that actually you did feel hurt by them.

Perhaps that is an artifact of the way I chose to express my feelings. Maybe the best part of my mental health strategy is minimizing the signifigance of my feelings. But that doesn't mean when asked, I can't explore and report what I felt, or that it is not legit for me to refer to the part of myself that feels something by a hypothetical reference --- in part that might be because I have mixed feelings. Maybe i agree that the laws are what people said they are, but my own view of the laws tends to put myself down. Isn't self-deprecation involving mixed emotions a basic part of some animal motivation, including human motivation?

> When I feel hurt by something that somebody has said then I find it useful to post something to the poster saying how I felt in response to whatever bits. That way we can sort things out for ourselves rather than me running off to Dr Bob to sort it out. I think most posters appreciate and respect that. It gives them a chance to clarify or apologise. And it tends to make them feel more charitable towards the person who feels offended.

Those are your feelings and your responses. Others can have vastly different feelings and coping responses that might be just as legitimate. It is legitimate of me to think that others might not react to my efforts to use your strategies in the same way they react to your efforts. And there is some basis for me to believe that, while others can call government policies hypocritical in the context of this board, I might be sanctioned if I made similar statements, or called contrary policies, such as legalization or decriminalization, hypocritical, pathetic or a joke.

Nonetheless, I can think of honest and honorable reasons to question policies that would allow more people to inhale and to promote inhalation of tars, carbon monoxide and pyrobenzines. And I might have experiences here or elsewhere that lead me to believe considering both sides of that question sometimes leads to escalated conflict with people who are willing to declare, at the outset, that public policies that prohibit inhalation of certain forms of tars, carbon monoxide and pyrobenzines are hypocritical, pathetic or a joke.


> The boards are here for us to support each other and find out information. The rules are supposed to facilitate that. One can get so lost in trying to understand the rules that the purpose of the boards just escapes one.

Support for people feeling confusion in a particular circumstance can be supportive of them in general, because the way we deal with particular dilemas can sometimes be typical of the way we cope with other matters. One way of supporting people is to help them face the fact that the circumstance they are confronting just might not be entirely rational -- that the irrationality might be more a product of environmental or social factors than it is a product of their own ill health. It's the "bad things happen to good people" problem.

> They were laughing in the face of their own mortal circumstances. Not anybody elses. And not mortal circumstances that were under their control (ie via self injury). The laughter was one of those coping strategies in the sense that without it they would be feeling quite despairing. IMO that makes a hell of a difference.

> Do you get the difference???
>


I'm not sure I get the difference. Once when I was in a situation that could have killed me but over which I had no control, I recall feeling quite jovial. But that doesn't mean I would be allowed to post details here. And admin often intervenes when he thinks someone might vicariously feel something, regardless who the postings were between. If I am the one vicariously feeling something, and I choose to report my feelings in the context of explaining what a person other than me might feel, what is wrong with that?

> If you don't then theres nothing I can say.

That's okay.


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Administration | Framed

poster:so thread:510946
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20050530/msgs/511222.html