Posted by Racer on October 7, 2004, at 16:26:07
I was trying to figure out why negative validation was so much stronger than positive validation for me. And I did figure it out! (All by myself, too, so pat my head and give me a lollipop.)
It's because I learned to internalize the negative, since that was repeated -- ad nauseum -- but the positive was both rare and often later contradicted. So, I learned to pay a lot more attention to the negative than to the positive.
All this came up because of that agency -- thus the post the other day about being upset about them again. They sent me a copy of my chart, which I had requested, and I read it. The chart confirmed what I'd been saying all along -- they weren't listening to me, and they were dismissing my strengths or interpreting those strengths as "signs of mental illness/emotional dysregulation/Axis II behavior" (take your pick -- those are all in the chart) -- and yet it when I read it, I immediately internalized it all. "They must be right, my wonderful SparklingBright must be wrong since she doesn't see it -- I really am so damaged that nothing can fix me, since I can't even see how wrong I've been all along!"
Yesterday, I talked about this with two people I respect a lot, people I trust. SparklingBright and Gardenergirl. Both of them said essentially the same thing, they both commented on teh validity of my preceptions, and the accuracy of my insight. Gardenergirl -- who says hello to all, she's very busy with her internship -- went farther, and said that they had retraumatized me. Despite that positive feedback from two sources I trust and whose knowledge and understanding I respect highly, I still found myself placing greater credence in people I DIStrust, people I DO NOT respect, people I think were just this side of absolute malpractice. I still believe the people who were telling me that they're doing everything right, so any problems I have with it are signs of my own essential wrongness. Why?
And, it's because I've learned that lesson so well. It must, by definition, be because I *deserve* to be miserable, because I'm weak, I'm lazy, I'm unwilling to understand, I don't work hard enough, etc.
So, now I guess I have to re-un-learn that lesson. I did unlearn it once, you know. GG and I just talked about that. Want proof? I was on a jury a few years ago, on a very long case. During deliberations, most of the jurors were unsure of whether they thought it was first degree murder, or second degree. Many were leaning towards second degree, and despite the pressure I might have felt to accommodate that, I remember thinking to myself, "Gee, I really hope that I don't have to hang this jury -- this is first degree murder, and I can't see saying it's not." (If someone could have offered any evidence that the guy did not go out hunting for his victim with the intention of killing him, I would have modified that decision, by the way.) I was not pressured to make the others happy, I didn't feel that they must know something I didn't -- I could say, "Hey, this is first degree murder, and here's what convinces me of that." In other words, I was strong, I was sure of myself, I trusted my own judgement.
When was the last time any of you saw that in me recently? Been a while. I hardly remember what that was like, frankly.
Anyway, that's my epiphany for the day. Since it's one of those things that I think a lot of us struggle with, I hope it helps others, as well.
poster:Racer
thread:400073
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/psycho/20041002/msgs/400073.html