![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 34 to 58 of 74. Go back in thread:
Posted by PartlyCloudy on May 7, 2010, at 6:21:18
In reply to Re: caring about each other » Dinah, posted by jane d on May 6, 2010, at 23:41:28
This post needs a "like" button.
Posted by Dinah on May 7, 2010, at 8:16:55
In reply to Re: caring about each other » Dinah, posted by jane d on May 6, 2010, at 23:41:28
Yes indeed. :)
That would be ideal. And that's likely what a good number of posters do.
But if Dr. Bob were that irrelevant, Admin might be smaller?
I think I got caught up in the intellectual challenge of figuring out what Dr. Bob was asking for. :) That really wasn't even what I started off the post intending to say.
Posted by Dinah on May 7, 2010, at 8:33:25
In reply to Re: caring about each other » Dinah, posted by TherapyGirl on May 6, 2010, at 15:12:26
Thanks, Therapygirl.
My therapist is really big on guiding me gently to see how my thoughts and my actions based on those thoughts contribute to the results I tend to receive. He has an interest in community dynamics.He used Babble a lot when he was trying to show me that I was not powerless in this sort of situation. It's his training you hear. :)
I was a bit confused as to what response Dr. Bob was trying to elicit from us. It appears he was looking for something in particular, and in context of the thread, I wasn't sure what that was. I was thinking out loud, and am still not sure if that's what he is aiming at.
Posted by Glydin 2010 on May 7, 2010, at 8:50:56
In reply to Re: caring about each other » TherapyGirl, posted by Dinah on May 7, 2010, at 8:33:25
Maybe Dr. Bob wanted a little ego boost? Who knows but him....
I'll be the first to admit that I could be odd person out on this, BUT truly honestly all I really expect of Dr. Bob is the adm. of the boards. My opinions and thoughts about him don't go much passed that. He is not the first thing that comes to mind FOR ME when I visit.
Posted by Tabitha on May 7, 2010, at 10:51:17
In reply to Re: caring about each other » jane d, posted by PartlyCloudy on May 7, 2010, at 6:21:18
> This post needs a "like" button.
Totally.
Posted by Tabitha on May 7, 2010, at 11:43:34
In reply to Re: caring about each other » Dr. Bob, posted by Dinah on May 6, 2010, at 8:51:25
I see how Dr Bob's line of inquiry about expectations setting up outcome was relevant to Poster X, and to some degree with Poster Y, but it falls apart for me with Poster Z also.
So Poster Z idealizes Dr Bob, gets a big boost off any attention from Dr Bob, then feels extreme distress when Dr Bob doesn't provide that same level of attention. So obviously Poster Z is holding expectations that will lead to repeated distress periods.
Yet what's Dr Bob doing? He's enabling the idealization phases by allowing all the gushing admiration posts and interacting with Poster Z at the babble events. So he's feeding this cycle of fixation and distress for Poster Z.
Sigh. If one thinks the good outweighs the bad for Poster Z here, or that this is the option of least harm, I guess it's all OK? Is that what Dr Bob is assuming? Has he made some wise decision here? Poster Y might imagine so. Poster X, on the other hand, might think he's just enjoying an ego boost at the cost of continued harm to Poster Z.
A person might think Dr Bob could clear it all up for us by giving us a clue why he's taking the approach he's taking. Again, Poster Y's and Poster X's will draw different conclusions about his silence.
P.S. Obvs Bob has some Poster Y's at the NYT. "Brilliant and reticent". Wow, I guess he's encouraging us all to be Poster Y's with that sig. Yet Poster X might see it as more evidence that he's an out-of-touch narcissist.
Posted by Dinah on May 7, 2010, at 12:02:00
In reply to Re: caring about each other » Dinah, posted by Tabitha on May 7, 2010, at 11:43:34
I meant no one in particular with any of the posters, and my own struggles with my therapist were on my mind when I wrote up Poster Z. I was just trying to try to figure out what Dr. Bob was trying to lead us to, given the context.
I threw out a guess, and others might as well, but if we don't get his point, I hope he'll be more explicit. It would be around this stage that I'd be pounding my head and telling my therapist to just tell me what he wanted to have me know. And of course, Dr. Bob isn't our therapist.
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 7, 2010, at 12:19:42
In reply to Re: caring about each other » Dinah, posted by jane d on May 6, 2010, at 23:41:28
> So that Poster X might want to question whether your intent towards them is harmful or if whether their expectations of your actions and their interpretations of your intent lead them to actions that bring about the result they fear.
>
> And Poster Z might be better off recognizing the severe limitations of your role here, along with the many evidences of your caring about Babble in general and Babblers in particular. And that no matter how administrative the role, the relationship with each Babbler is bound to be different ... And that those individual relationships, however limited, are special in their own way and the Babblers are special to you in their own way.
>
> Is that what you were looking for?
>
> If it is, might it be your turn to own your share of interactions?
>
> DinahI think that was excellent, thank you. Sid, are those the sort of dynamics you had in mind?
"My share" means my prophecies or expectations about posters might, by influencing my actions toward them, also become realities? I'm constrained by the policies and procedures here, but that's definitely still possible.
> I can care, but it doesn't mean I make any changes to suit anything but my own beleifs.
I agree, not making a change to suit someone else's beliefs doesn't necessarily mean not caring about them.
> I don't mean to personally diss you Bob.
> Just I don't like to see you hurting people.
>
> MI don't like to hurt people, either. At the same time, prophecies or expectations of hurt can make real hurt more likely.
> Posters X, Y, and Z could simplify their lives by deciding to interact with each other and all the other posters in the alphabet instead. On the board, in chat, or somewhere else entirely. Much less complicated and more gratifying.
>
> jane dThat's true. Posters have the power to not to engage with those they don't get along with.
--
> Dr. Bob, I don't think that you've ever "spoken" to me and that's just fine. I prefer to fly under the radar, LOL, but I do appreciate having this space.
>
> TherapyGirlThanks! :-)
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 7, 2010, at 13:42:33
In reply to Re: caring about each other » Dinah, posted by Tabitha on May 7, 2010, at 11:43:34
> Poster X might feel that you are insensitive and provocative. ... They think you will hurt them
>
> Poster Y ... might consider your [interactions] to be evidence of your wit and of a detached interest, and ... busyness.
>
> Poster Z ... [tends] to interpret things as meaning he didn't care about me.
>
> Dinah> Poster Z idealizes Dr Bob
>
> He's enabling the idealization phases ... Poster X ... might think he's just enjoying an ego boost
>
> TabithaDinah and Tabitha, are you referring to the same types of poster as X and Z?
> all the other posters in the alphabet
>
> jane dI think it might be useful to think about other posters in the alphabet, too. Can anybody else imagine other hypothetical posters? Or other hypothetical expectations of me?
Bob
Posted by Deneb on May 7, 2010, at 15:07:30
In reply to Re: caring about each other, posted by Dr. Bob on May 7, 2010, at 12:19:42
(((((((((Dr. Bob)))))))))))))
Poster D interprets your interest in this thread as evidence of your caring and wanting to help Babblers. Poster D feels all warm inside.
Hugs from poster "D". LOL
(((((((((((((((((((Dr. Bob)))))))))))))))))))))
Happy sigh. Poster D loves you soooo much! You're the best.
Posted by obsidian on May 7, 2010, at 21:54:02
In reply to Re: caring about each other, posted by Dr. Bob on May 7, 2010, at 12:19:42
> I think that was excellent, thank you. Sid, are those the sort of dynamics you had in mind?yes :-)
that's it. Thank goodness for dinah, and her powers of explanation.
Posted by jane d on May 8, 2010, at 0:55:56
In reply to Re: caring about each other, posted by Dr. Bob on May 7, 2010, at 12:19:42
> > Posters X, Y, and Z could simplify their lives by deciding to interact with each other and all the other posters in the alphabet instead. On the board, in chat, or somewhere else entirely. Much less complicated and more gratifying.
> >
> > jane d
>
> That's true. Posters have the power to not to engage with those they don't get along with.
>We don't get along? I'm sorry to hear that!
I'm also sorry if I offended you in any way since that wasn't my intent. I merely meant that the amount of your engagement with individual posters here is limited. It's been that way for as long as I can remember and there's no reason to think it's going to change. If one wants more of a personal relationship I think one is more likely to find that with other posters. Therefore that's more gratifying. And less complicated without the power imbalance.
Anyway it's worked for me and I'm grateful to you for providing a place it could happen in.
Jane,
wondering if she's put her foot further in her mouth but too sleepy to care
Posted by Tabitha on May 8, 2010, at 1:08:13
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet, posted by Dr. Bob on May 7, 2010, at 13:42:33
>
> Dinah and Tabitha, are you referring to the same types of poster as X and Z?I think so. My Poster X is the type that sees you as a tyrant and gets blocked repeatedly as a result of expressing anger over that here. My Poster Z is the type that gets a huuuuge crush on you and expresses that here. I assumed we had roughly the same X and Z types in mind, then Dinah was also drawing a parallel between Poster Z's interaction with you and her own interaction with her therapist.
Posted by vwoolf on May 9, 2010, at 2:42:20
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet » Dr. Bob, posted by Tabitha on May 8, 2010, at 1:08:13
Interesting discussion.
Well I suppose there could be Babbler A who doesn't post at all because she is so in awe of an omnimpotent and wrathful Dr Bob. She might be convinced that he would ignore her posts or be angry with her for daring to post:
or
Babbler B who might fear that Dr Bob has ulterior motives in hosting this site. She might be constantly suspicious of what he wanted of her, whether to use her as case material or, more ominously, for some kind of secret experiment;
or
Babbler C who might think that Dr Bob would be interested in and excited by her pathology (because otherwise why would he run a site like this - he must have some prurient interest). She might play up her symptoms to draw and hold his attention.
I suppose I can identify with all the attitudes expressed so far, A to Z and probably others besides. I go through most of them on any single day. I think it is one of the things about therapy that frustrates me most, not knowing who is on the other side of the blank slate, and being forced to expose myself in attempting to work it out.
Mostly with Babble my interaction has been with other Babblers and transferencial stuff with Dr Bob is limited. However I have often been aware of it working away in the background. After I post I wonder whether he will see it and what he will think. I guess it has been helpful to me to have a place to bring things where the exposure is not as raw as in therapy but involves similar dynamics. I am not sure that I would have survived the first few years of therapy if I had not had this place to bring things to first. It has felt like a half-way house, a place safe enough to test things out but not meaningless like many other unmoderated boards where there is no sense of the eyes of the other looking on.
And I suppose that's what it is all about - the eyes of the other. Are they cruel or mocking or loving or bored or preoccupied or amused or hateful or murderous or hungry?
Or perhaps nothing at all? Perhaps, and this might be the worst thing of all, perhaps there are no eyes, nobody looking. Perhaps there really is no Dr Bob.
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 10, 2010, at 7:38:35
In reply to Re: caring about each other, posted by jane d on May 8, 2010, at 0:55:56
> I merely meant that the amount of your engagement with individual posters here is limited. It's been that way for as long as I can remember and there's no reason to think it's going to change. If one wants more of a personal relationship I think one is more likely to find that with other posters. Therefore that's more gratifying. And less complicated without the power imbalance.
Thanks for elaborating. I agree. At the same time, posters may find interactions with me ungratifying and complicated even if they aren't looking for a personal relationship with me. But that may be a learning opportunity.
> Anyway it's worked for me and I'm grateful to you for providing a place it could happen in.
>
> Jane,
> wondering if she's put her foot further in her mouthThanks, and no worries,
Bob
Posted by Dr. Bob on May 11, 2010, at 0:03:21
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet, posted by vwoolf on May 9, 2010, at 2:42:20
> Poster X might feel that you are insensitive and provocative. ... They think you will hurt them
> He's enabling the idealization phases ... Poster X ... might think he's just enjoying an ego boost
> Poster X is the type that sees you as a tyrant
> Babbler A who doesn't post at all because she is so in awe of an omnimpotent and wrathful Dr Bob. She might be convinced that he would ignore her posts or be angry with her for daring to post
--
> Poster Y ... might consider your [interactions] to be evidence of your wit and of a detached interest, and ... busyness. They might appreciate that even though you are so busy, you take time for Babble.
> Poster D interprets your interest in this thread as evidence of your caring and wanting to help Babblers.
--
> Poster Z ... [tends] to interpret things as meaning he didn't care about me. ... wants to be special to you
> Poster Z idealizes Dr Bob
> Poster Z is the type that gets a huuuuge crush on you
--
> Babbler B who might fear that Dr Bob has ulterior motives in hosting this site. She might be constantly suspicious of what he wanted of her, whether to use her as case material or, more ominously, for some kind of secret experiment
> Babbler C who might think that Dr Bob would be interested in and excited by her pathology (because otherwise why would he run a site like this - he must have some prurient interest). She might play up her symptoms to draw and hold his attention.
--
I tried to summarize and group above the hypothetical types of posters that have been mentioned so far. What do you think? Any others?
> I suppose that's what it is all about - the eyes of the other.
>
> vwoolfI also tried to match them up with eyes:
> Are they:
> cruel or mocking ... or hateful or murderousX, A
> loving or bored or preoccupied or amused
Y, D, Z
> hungry?
B, C
How about that?
Bob
Posted by vwoolf on May 11, 2010, at 7:14:40
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet, posted by Dr. Bob on May 11, 2010, at 0:03:21
I guess there might also be poster P who would feel supercilious and superior or sceptical and would behave quite critically and abusively towards Dr Bob. I'm finding this one more difficult to define - I can see how she would behave, but not how she would view Dr Bob. I understand that it would be the inverse of feeling vitimised. Perhaps this is the kind of poster that Dr bob would dread most?
There could also be Poster Q, an incest survivor, who might expect Dr Bob to treat her as an equal, to share inside information with her and not with other posters. I suppose this falls into the category of Hungry Eyes, but with a twist in the tail.
Posted by Dinah on May 11, 2010, at 8:26:16
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet, posted by Dr. Bob on May 11, 2010, at 0:03:21
I thought of another possible one. Babbler W, who wishes to use Babble as a peer oriented mental health community. Poster W might not wish to think about Dr. Bob at all, although Poster W expects Babble to be well run, for intervention to be minimal and non-administrative intervention to be even more minimal. Poster W may or may not disapprove of what minimal non-administrative interaction Dr. Bob has with Babble and may or may not think it is professional in their understanding of what Dr. Bob's role is. But overall, Poster W would expect Dr. Bob to act swiftly and logically to resolve objectionable postings(by Poster W's criteria), and to remain out of anything unobjectionable (by Poster W's criteria).
I think this is actually the way you see it yourself, Dr. Bob, and oughtn't be that much of a problem. Unless the expectations (especially about timeliness) are strong and result in disappointment and anger. Or the definitions of logical and objectionable are based on references to Poster W's beliefs and don't allow for differences in interpretation. Those differences can be inexplicable if Poster W's belief is that those things are self evident and can be seen by any neutral party.
I suppose that over time, Poster W might even begin to resemble Poster X - not because they see you as evil or malevolent. Merely incompetent and unprofessional and lacking in sense and sensibility.
(Can you tell I listened to a Linehan tape about the difference between fact and interpretation, and the non-utilitarian nature of judgment last night?)
This would be not dissimilar to Poster Y as far as possible negative results. Except that Dr. Bob is not is being idealized and overvalued. What's being idealized is *truth* (seen as fact, not fact + interpretation + judgment).
The possible negative results would be the same, in the form of contempt and even rage when Dr. Bob falls short of those expectations.
(Now naturally, my own truths really are totally objective, and readily seen by any neutral person of sense and understanding of basic human emotions. And any anger I might feel at Dr. Bob failing to see these self evident truths is entirely justified. ;)
I say that tongue in cheek, yet... I still do feel that way about things like Twitter and Facebook buttons on the bottom of each page.)
I'm not sure how those expectations change literal reality other than that it increases the chances that Poster W may feel rage or contempt based on the failure of Dr. Bob to live up to their expectations of what a reasonable and professional board administrator ought to do. As opposed, say, to Dr. Bob failing to live up to his own expectations and his own truths. Which one would like to believe is not something that happens frequently.
And while I'm a huge believer in the lowering of expectations, and doing so is generally my response in any relationship I find overall valuable, I can't help but think that a better thing would be for all parties - including and especially Dr. Bob - to make an effort to understand and be sensitive to the emotional meanings that attach to facts, and respectful of them.
But there, you see how insidious that is. There's an expectation in there that contains both facts, interpretations and judgments. And I'm bound to suffer all the consequences that come along with that.
Still, I'm not quite seeing how that influences actual reality. Although I suppose that a person's experience at Babble doesn't necessarily rely on actual reality, just perceived reality.
Perhaps actions taken by Poster W might increase administrative actions, which Poster W might find objectionable and hard to understand? Bah. I'm having trouble with the applying how expectations become reality to this poster.
Posted by Dinah on May 11, 2010, at 8:41:34
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet, posted by Dinah on May 11, 2010, at 8:26:16
Of course, there is likely a variation on Poster W, who has the same expectations of Dr. Bob, but doesn't feel them as keenly. So if Dr. Bob disappoints their expectations, they are more likely to be able to shrug it off as his idiosyncrasy and something that Poster W(2) has to put up with for being here. Or to feel mildly that Dr. Bob was unprofessional or wrong or whatever, but that's part of life. Especially if Dr. Bob's actions don't affect them personally. And sometimes even if they do. So that their enjoyment and participation in Babble is largely unaffected by anything Dr. Bob does.
In fact, there may be permutations of all the alphabet posters that lead to a more detached version.
The difference there may be in a different way of viewing the world (and their relationship to the world) rather than Dr. Bob, and different expectations of life and fairness, etc.
I envy the (2)'s. :(
These posters may have more reactions to other posters responses to Dr. Bob than they do to Dr. Bob himself.
Posted by vwoolf on May 11, 2010, at 9:33:49
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet, posted by Dinah on May 11, 2010, at 8:41:34
Dinah, I think the (2)'s must have either had really good parenting so that they can afford to ignore any authority figure, or have come from huge sprawling families where the parents were completely ineffectual and could be ignored. Not my case, I'm afraid.
Posted by PartlyCloudy on May 11, 2010, at 18:25:44
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet, posted by Dr. Bob on May 11, 2010, at 0:03:21
Yuck. I don't particularly care being characterized as a letter in the alphabet in my behavior. I'm an individual with my own responses and they are like no one else's.
I'm not Poster A, B, C, X, Y, nor Z.
I'm PartlyCloudy. I have also been ClearSkies, amongst others. I have my own characteristics. Maybe I should not be reading this thread, much less participating in it, as it does make me feel more like part of a research project and less like a member of a community.
Posted by 10derHeart on May 11, 2010, at 21:09:33
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet » Dr. Bob, posted by PartlyCloudy on May 11, 2010, at 18:25:44
I feel pretty much that way, too.
But I also have the advantage of becoming lost several posts back. I never can follow these sorts of discussions for long, which I am realizing really doesn't bother me much at all. I barely managed weak B-grades in sociology-type classes, which is what this is to me, but it was tough, with a mixture of rebellious disagreement and disinterest. That's okay, though. I leave it to others who can follow it.
Group stuff, I do not get and perhaps do not want to get. One-on-one, or very small and intimate group interaction I do get, for the most part.
Hope you are doing well :-)
Posted by Justherself54 on May 11, 2010, at 23:29:51
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet » PartlyCloudy, posted by 10derHeart on May 11, 2010, at 21:09:33
I got lost too. I don't do well with these particular types of threads. You're not alone 10derHeart!
Posted by 10derHeart on May 11, 2010, at 23:58:17
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet » 10derHeart, posted by Justherself54 on May 11, 2010, at 23:29:51
Posted by Dinah on May 12, 2010, at 9:12:53
In reply to Re: other posters in the alphabet » Dinah, posted by vwoolf on May 11, 2010, at 9:33:49
I've never known where to come down in terms of cause. In my case it may be more because my parents encouraged us to speak openly to them and to other authority figures. Maybe it was because I usually got along better with adults than with many children because I was an only child who spent my early years isolated geographically from other kids. I naturally learned to look "up" (literally) rather than to the side. But maybe there are some temperament factors in play as well.
I do know that it has always been helpful to me to be curious about my experiences of life, and open to the possibility that there are things I can do to change my experiences.
It might be helpful to me to think about new points of view that might make incremental changes toward the side of (2). :)
Go forward in thread:
Psycho-Babble Administration | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.