Thursday, December 25, 2003

athiest- agnostic- and the 12 steps- Recovery in general

One of the most striking things I've found in my research of stuff to put on the web [which is to say stuff
I've found online, to put on my site(s)] is the amount of controversy regarding what path to recovery is...
the only way?
... if you don't do X, Y or Z you aren't recovered...

what is the definition of 'Recovered'

At what point are you 'cured'?

define sick

Ok what does Webster's Dictionary say about some of these terms:


Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Apparently the root word is Greek and means unknowable



Date: 1571
: one who denies the existence of God



"The first requirement is that we be convinced
that any life run on self-will can hardly be a success.
On that basis we are almost always in collision
with something or somebody,
even though our motives are good.
Most people try to live by self-propulsion.
Each person is like an actor
who wants to run the whole show;
is forever trying to arrange the lights, the ballet, the scenery
and the rest of the players in his own way.
If his arrangements would only stay put,
if only people would do as he wished,
the show would be great.
Everybody, including himself, would be pleased.
Life would be wonderful."
c.1976AAWS, Alcoholics Anonymous, pp. 60-1

more later...
Oh yeah, Merry Christmas, I almost forgot
My kids are grown now- they're spending Christmas with their friends
My ex lost her townhouse, we no longer (my family) have a central place to
meet for holidays... hmm, I must do something about that

Monday, December 01, 2003

Wanting and Willing

I haven't posted to any of my websites or blogs in quite a while.

I snipped this from one of the email lists I subscribe to because I thought it useful:


My sponsor sent me this meditation from Hazelton. I certainly relete
and thought I'd share it with the group.

Sometimes we get confused over the difference between willing and
wanting. We don't have to want, let alone enjoy, doing what needs to
be done. Not wanting to do something is altogether different from not
being willing to do it.
As one recovering woman said:
"Everything I ever let go of had claw marks all over it."

The bottom line is that she did let go no matter how badly she wanted to hang on:
she was willing.

Think of the people in the program we most admire, those whose
progress seems so speedy compared to ours. They may very well not
enjoy going out to meetings. They may find it uncomfortable to meet
with their sponsors or to say kind words when they really want to
complain. They may wish they didn't have to make amends to certain
people. but druthers aren't the point. The point is that they are
willing to do what it takes

I relate to the clawmarks! Have a good day.


This also came from the A Start to Recovery mailing list that is hosted on
and is primarily a sexual addiction self help group

More Later

Wednesday, August 20, 2003

Book review- A Question of God

Buy from now

Many of history's greatest thinkers have wrestled with the ultimate question of belief and nonbelief in God. Though it seemed unlikely that any new arguments could possibly be raised on either side, the twentieth century produced two men who each made brilliant arguments, one in favor of belief and one opposed -- Sigmund Freud and C. S.

Many of history's greatest thinkers have wrestled with the ultimate question of belief and nonbelief in God. Though it might seem unlikely that any new arguments could possibly be raised on either side, the twentieth century managed to produce two men who each made brilliant, new, and lasting arguments, one in favor of belief and one opposed. Few spokesmen have ever championed their respective positions better than Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis. Sadly, as far as we know, they never met or debated each other directly. In The Question of God their arguments are placed side by side, as if they were standing at podiums in a shared room. Both thought carefully about the flaws and alternatives to their positions; each considered the other's views. Both men considered the problem of pain and suffering, the nature of love and sex, and the ultimate meaning of life and death. Here, with their debate made explicit, we can take ringside seats at one of history's most profound encounters. For more than twenty-five years Armand Nicholi has studied the philosophical writings of both men, and has taught a popular course at Harvard that compares the two worldviews. In The Question of God he presents the fruits of years of labor among the published and unpublished writings of Lewis and Freud, including an extensive exploration of their private letters. He allows them to speak for themselves on every major question of belief and nonbelief, but also skillfully draws conclusions from their own lives. Why did Freud have such difficulty maintaining lifelong friendships? How did Lewis's friendships change after his transition from atheism to belief? Why was Freud unable to willfully ignore his own internal moral sense, even though he believed it to be purely a product of socialization and not in any way eternally "true"? The Question of God may be the best book about belief and nonbelief ever written, since it does not presuppose which answer is correct. Instead, it uses two of history

Buy from now
Library Journal
Over the years, a number of good biographies of Lewis, the perennially popular Christian apologist, have been published. George Sayer's Jack: A Life of C.S. Lewis is probably the least controversial of them, while A.N. Wilson's C.S. Lewis: A Biography is likely the most. This portrait by Downing (English, Elizabethtown Coll.; Planets in Peril) is unique in that it treats one aspect of Lewis's life: his conversion from atheism to Christianity. Focusing on his subject's inner journey, Downing considers the effect on Lewis of his mother's death; his estrangement from his father; the influence of a rationalist, atheistic, but well-loved mentor; his early interest in the occult and paranormal; and the trench warfare he experienced in World War I. Making use of both published and unpublished writings, Downing shows a deep understanding of Lewis and writes in a flowing style. For more than 25 years, Nicholi (psychiatry, Harvard Medical Sch.) has offered a course in which he compares the thought and life of the atheist Freud with that of Lewis as a way to consider questions about the existence of God, love, sex, and the meaning of life. Nicholi generally maintains a balanced view, letting Freud's and Lewis's words and actions speak for themselves. He examines why Freud remained an unbeliever (though not an unthinking one) and why Lewis accepted Christianity. While his sympathies obviously lie on the side of faith, Nicholi nevertheless offers a balanced view of Freud. Both books are well written and worthy additions to the rapidly growing literature on Lewis, although Nicholi's will probably appeal to a broader audience. Augustine J. Curley, Newark Abbey, NJ Copyright 2002 Cahners Business Information.

Kirkus Reviews
A careful examination of two major, and conflicting, currents of modern thought. Those currents, in the view of Nicholi (Psychiatry/Harvard Medical School), turn on the question of whether God exists. The founder of modern psychotherapy thought not; Sigmund Freud held that the belief in an "idealized Superman" is "so patently infantile and so foreign to reality that . . . it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never rise above this view of life," asserting that only scientific education could turn people away from "the fairy tales of religion." British writer and popular theologian C.S. Lewis argued in the affirmative, having turned from youthful atheism to a more or less orthodox Christianity in middle life and becoming preoccupied thereafter with the "questions of how to escape corruption in living and how in death to give meaning to life." Setting these thinkers in opposition is admittedly an artificial construct; it can be objected that Freud (1856-1939) and Lewis (1898-1963) were two generations apart and did not publicly debate each other. (Although Nicholi speculates that they might have met briefly at the very end of Freud's life.) Einstein and Muggeridge, Bohr and Schweitzer, or even Sagan and Tolkien might have done just as well in serving as spokesmen for their respective causes and in making the author's point. Yet Nicholi ably makes his case for pairing Freud with Lewis, and his essay takes inspired turns as he examines how believers and nonbelievers think about such thorny matters as forgiving those who have trespassed against us, dealing with the pain the world deals us, and even loving ourselves. Palatable food for thought for readers preoccupiedwith life's big, ultimately insoluble questions.

Buy from now

Wednesday, July 16, 2003

If the world were a village of 1000 people


Concerning Donella Meadows' original "Global Village" article, this was published as follows:

The Global Citizen May 31, 1990

Donella H. Meadows


If the world were a village of 1000 people:
584 would be Asians
123 would be Africans
95 would be East and West Europeans
84 Latin Americans
55 Soviets (still including for the moment Lithuanians, Latvians, Estonians, etc.)
52 North Americans
6 Australians and New Zealanders

The people of the village would have considerable difficulty communicating:
165 people would speak Mandarin
86 would speak English
83 Hindi/Urdu
64 Spanish
58 Russian
37 Arabic
That list accounts for the mother-tongues of only half the villagers. The other half speak (in descending order of frequency) Bengali, Portuguese, Indonesian, Japanese, German, French, and 200 other languages.
In the village there would be:
300 Christians (183 Catholics, 84 Protestants, 33 Orthodox)
175 Moslems
128 Hindus
55 Buddhists
47 Animists
210 all other religions (including atheists)

One-third (330) of the people in the village would be children. Half the children would be immunized against the preventable infectious diseases such as measles and polio.
Sixty of the thousand villagers would be over the age of 65.
Just under half of the married women would have access to and be using modern contraceptives.
Each year 28 babies would be born.
Each year 10 people would die, three of them for lack of food, one from cancer. Two of the deaths would be to babies born within the year.
One person in the village would be infected with the HIV virus; that person would most likely not yet have developed a full-blown case of AIDS.
With the 28 births and 10 deaths, the population of the village in the next year would be 1018.

In this thousand-person community, 200 people would receive three-fourths of the income; another 200 would receive only 2% of the income.
Only 70 people would own an automobile (some of them more than one automobile).
About one-third would not have access to clean, safe drinking water.
Of the 670 adults in the village half would be illiterate.

The village would have 6 acres of land per person, 6000 acres in all of which:
700 acres is cropland
1400 acres pasture
1900 acres woodland
2000 acres desert, tundra, pavement, and other wasteland.
The woodland would be declining rapidly; the wasteland increasing; the other land categories would be roughly stable. The village would allocate 83 percent of its fertilizer to 40 percent of its cropland -- that owned by the richest and best-fed 270 people. Excess fertilizer running off this land would cause pollution in lakes and wells. The remaining 60 percent of the land, with its 17 percent of the fertilizer, would produce 28 percent of the foodgrain and feed 73 percent of the people. The average grain yield on that land would be one-third the yields gotten by the richer villagers.

If the world were a village of 1000 persons, there would be five soldiers, seven teachers, one doctor. Of the village's total annual expenditures of just over $3 million per year, $181,000 would go for weapons and warfare, $159,000 for education, $132,000 for health care.

The village would have buried beneath it enough explosive power in nuclear weapons to blow itself to smithereens many times over. These weapons would be under the control of just 100 of the people. The other 900 people would be watching them with deep anxiety, wondering whether the 100 can learn to get along together, and if they do, whether they might set off the weapons anyway through inattention or technical bungling, and if they ever decide to dismantle the weapons, where in the village they will dispose of the dangerous radioactive materials of which the weapons are made.

Perhaps the one person who can be thanked for getting wider attention for the original article is David Copeland of an organisation called Value Earth, based in New Jersey. David Copeland, with Donella Meadows' permission, had 50,000 posters made based on 'The Global Village', for the 1992 Rio de Janiero Earth Summit,
which was attended by people from some 175 countries!

Details of this and the posting of the original article can be found at ttp://

The email version, which has circulated for several years reads:

"If we could shrink the earth's population to a village of precisely 100 people, with all the existing human ratios remaining the same, it would look something like the following. There would be:

57 Asians
21 Europeans
14 from the Western Hemisphere, both north and south
8 Africans

52 would be female
48 would be male

70 would be non-white
30 would be white

70 would be non-Christian
30 would be Christian

89 would be heterosexual
11 would be homosexual

6 people would possess 59% of the entire world's wealth and
all 6 would be from the United States

80 would live in substandard housing

70 would be unable to read

50 would suffer from malnutrition

1 would be near death; 1 would be near birth

1 (yes, only 1) would have a college education

1 would own a computer

When one considers our world from such a compressed perspective, the need for both acceptance, understanding and education becomes glaringly apparent."

It is with a mixed sense of great sadness and joy that I reached this point of the journey. Sadness because mine and Donella's paths came so close to crossing while she was alive. Joy, because of the timing of my being able to conclude this journey and attribute The Global Village article to it's rightful author.

This is my tribute to a remarkable woman.

There were a number of memorial services held around the US on the weekend of 21st April. Information concerning these can be found at the website of the Sustainability Institute (Donella Meadows' last great unfinished project). The general site is The specific website address for the memorial plans is:

April 2001 - Copyright David Taub, member of the National Union of Journalists (UK)
His website can be found at

============I found this very enlightening:~)

more later

Thursday, July 03, 2003

Secular sobriety vs God and the 12 steps- debate on AStarttoRecovery mailing list

This is what I posted to the A Start to Recovery mailing list hosted on yahoogroups

My current incarnation of this debate is:

I'm made in the image of God, so I was endowed with Christ like qualities.

This includes what John Bradshaw says in his "Right Brain Healing- The Jesus Nature" about Christ being precognitive, and powers of telekinesis

But I'm humble before my creator.

so in my world it's God (the creator) and I'm a sort of 'god' lowercase.

a junior partner so to speak.

I do have a large degree of control over what happens to me, and total
control over what choices I make.

Additionallly, I have total control over my reaction to what happens to me.

Human beings are the only animals who get to choose how they react to X, Y or Z stimuli.

It's not the snake bite that kills you, it's the venom

We get to choose whether or not X, Y or Z is venomous to us.

I also believe in (for lack of a proper name) manifesting, I manifest my
experience (which is a form of mind over matter, and a spiritual kind of thing)

At the very least, I manifest how I react to stimulus X, Y or Z.

However, my will is suspect compared to the creators will.

He knows better than I.

It would serve me well to stay attuned to what his will is.

So how does someone know what God's will is?

IF you don't have the antenna up, you'll never be able to receive
his transmission, or even be aware if there was a transmission.

I heard an AA saying that applies:
"God gave us one mouth and two ears for a reason"

Frequently acoa's (adult children of alcoholics) are grandiose.

It is, in my mind, not appropriate to bolster your self esteem, by yourself.

having your antenna up, to receive God's will is more than appropriate
with this in mind.

ACOA's in need of recovery are 'King Baby'

they are grandiose

Additonaly, I belive that all of our culture's agnostic belief system stems from
the shift the West took 400 yrs ago with Issac Newton. I say this based on
the author Morris Berman-

I edited this email (improved on it) for this weblog entry

Tuesday, July 01, 2003

sex addicts FAQ, a work in progress, from the sex addicts recovery list

I've found that addictions seem to be universal, and the good people in recovery from sex addiction seem
to have a *handle* on addiction.

The reason I think this is because no one wants to stop having sex, they
want to stop the addiction part of it...and to do that, requires (IMHO) that you really understand

(as opposed to the alcoholics or other substance abusers who mistakenly believe that ending the
substance abuse, ends the problem- the substance is really just the symptom, a symptom of immaturity)

The following *thread* is from this mailing list A Start to Recovery hosted on yahoogroups

While I feel like I've become a part of this group, I still have a lot
of questions that I haven't asked. I'll also include some of the
things I think I've deduced correctly. Perhaps we should have a FAQ
in the files section. I'd be happy to compile one and upload it.

General Questions:
What's the difference between SA, SAA, SLAA, COSA, what else is there?

f2f = Face to Face meeting, rather than online
A/O = Acting Out
DOC = ?

Is there a seperate big book for SAA/SLAA from the AA big book? I
know in my Sexual Anorexia f2f, they don't even use a big book, just
something they got at a bookstore.

That's all that comes to mind for the moment. I should have been
keeping a list somewhere.


DOC = "Drug Of Choice" (porn, masturbation, alcohol, other people, etc.

I've been to SLAA and SA (and AA) and each has a separate "big book"--all based on the Twelve Steps, but with different slants (as someone more qualified than I will be certain to explain!)

MB = masturbation
SO = significant other


Questions I've Been Afraid To Ask

I see that Ed has started to answer your questions...maybe I can help

BTW.....KEEP ASKING!! i know when I was new here I felt that the
group was going CRAZY with my questions...but on the contrary, they
were always very helpful...and only THOUGHT, "McKenna, shut up a
while." :P

About a FAQ site...I've been working on that for a while on my
own...with computer guidance from my kids (do ya believe it...MAN,
kids are smart these days). But I'm not finished yet. :( sorry to

> General Questions:
> What's the difference between SA, SAA, SLAA, COSA, what else is

Ok, I'll let you know what *I* have learned over the years. Mind
you, these are my "learned" ideas and opinions. If others feel they
would like to add their opinions...PLEASE do so.

SA- Sexaholics Anonymous

The strictest of the "sex" recovery groups. Uses the 12 steps.
Doesn't allow much if any masturbation or any acting out.
Relations only allowed in a committed marriage or relationship
(like REALLY committed!). Because of this strictness, SOME find
it unworkable. I have attended a SA meeting or two and have
never seen another woman there. My presense at these meetings
made the men at the meetings VERY uncomfortable. I felt un-
comfortable too. Not because I felt I didn't belong, but because
I felt that my being there was too triggering for the men.

SAA- Sex Addicts Anonymous

Another 12 step organization. Like SA they too work with following
the program, meetings involving sharing talks and encouragement
from the fellowship. They too promote the use of sponsors to
aid your recovery efforts. They talk about Acting out in terms of
a diagram with a series of rings. The inner circle is the DEFINITE
acting out behaviors. The next largest ring (circle) surrounding
it- the middle circle- includes situations, actions, items, that
are slippery in nature..and MAY possibly push you into acting out.
The outer circle includes SAFE activities. You judge what each
situation is for you and act accordingly.

SLAA- Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous

I belong to this group, because it's not JUST sex and sexual
activities that I am addicted to. My addiction also revolves
around emotions, connecting with people, being addicted to certain
persons, and relationships with them that are inwardly
destructive. This is also a 12 step group...and much of what was
written about SAA also applies here, though the circles aren't
really refered to in that way. It's more considered slippery
sitatutions, persons, relationships, etc.

COSA- Co-dependents of Sex Addicts

This is a Alanon...that deals with the significant
others of Sex Addicts. They are also a 12 step group. They deal
with the co-dependence issues of living and loving the recovering
and currently acting-out addict.

All of these organizations have websites of their own. I would
suggest you look further into each there and form your own opinions
of which group would help you the most. Their links (internet
addresses can be found in the links section of this group).

> Abbreviations:
> f2f = Face to Face meeting, rather than online
> A/O = Acting Out
> DOC = ?

Yes, Ed, DOC stands for Drug Of Choice.

*MY* main DOC was a man from Canada that I met through an adult
Intimate Question and Answer Room. We had a three year on-line
relationship,meeting a few times in person. Other addictions (though
not my MAIN DOC would be cyber and phone sex, fantasizing, porn, and
a MASSIVE love addiction that results in MAJOR people pleasing

> Literature:
> Is there a seperate big book for SAA/SLAA from the AA big book?

SLAA has a "big Book". It's called Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous.
I highly recommend it. The cost is $14.50 and you can get it on line
at the SLAA site. Hopefully this link will turn up.

If not....check out the on-line store at the SLAA home site.

There are MANY good books out there. Should you ever be looking for
a suggestion...PLEASE ask. It would be unlikely that we couldn't
guide you directly to something that would help you.

> That's all that comes to mind for the moment. I should have been
> keeping a list somewhere.

DO keep a list!!! In the Addiction and Recovery Game...Knowledge is
Power...and in this case...knowledge could ALSO be a matter of life
or death.


From the sex addict/ love addict recovery mailing list I belong to

being a love addict STINKS!

the self doubt

the setting yourself up for disappointment

the roller-coaster of emotions

the falling for too many, too fast, too often

I AM YOUR DISEASE (reprint--it's been awhile, but this is a good one)


Just in case you forgot me...I am your disease. I hate meetings, I
hate higher powers. I hate anyone who has and works a program. To
all who come in contact with me: I wish you suffering and I wish you

Allow me to tell you about myself. I am the disease of addiction. I am
cunning, baffling, and powerful...I have killed millions; I have
ruined the lives of millions more...and I am pleased.

I love to catch you by surprise. I love pretending that I am your
friend and lover. I have given you comfort, haven't I? Wasn't I
there when you were lonely? When you wanted to die, didn't you call
on me, and didn't I answer?

I was there. I love to make you hurt; I love to make you cry. Better
yet, I love to make you so numb that you can neither hurt nor cry. I
love to help you give up and feel hopeless. When you can't feel
anything at all, that is my true gratification. And all that I ask
from you is long term suffering and lonely despair.

I've been there for you always. When things were going right in your
life, you invited me in. You said you didn't deserve these good
things, and I was the only one who agreed with you. Together, we were
able to destroy everything good in your life.

When things went wrong, I was there to agree with you about how
unfair life is and how blameless you are for anything that happens to
you. I was the only one who would crawl down into the slimy
paralysis of self-pity and wallow around with you there.

People don't take me seriously, and while this wounds my pride, I
don't really mind because it so strongly serves my purpose. People
take strokes serously; heart attacks...diabetes...AIDS, these they
take serously. Fools. Without my help, those illnesses would not even
be possible for many people.

I am such a hated disease, and yet I do not come uninvited.
You choose whether or not to have me active in your life. Doesn't
that prove how powerful and cunning I am? So many choose me, over
reality and hope--even while they say they hate me.

But more than you hate me, I hate all of you who have embraced
recovery. Your refusal to invite me in...your program...your
meetings...your higher power. All of these things weaken and disgust
me, and I can't function in the manner I am accustomed to. Now, I
must lie here quietly, waiting.

Oh, you don't see me much anymore, but I am here...and I have all the
time in the world to wait for you. When you only exist, I may live.
When you live, I may only exist. But I am here... And until we meet
again -if we meet again- I wish you misery and death, just as I
always have done and always will do...

Most Sincerely,

Your disease

What are boundaries?

Wednesday, June 25, 2003

What do you call a person who does Victim Behavior? abusee?

What do I call this, Victim Mentality?

Why is it if you go to web forums where you think there might be people who should be familiar with
victim behavior, and you say "you're doing this"... why would they get angry at the 'accusation'??

Why is it that statement would be interpreted as an accusation?

possible answer(s)?

well, I didn't have rapport going when I started talking
and I did come to with an agenda

But there is more to this... maybe people who are doing victim behavior are...

how shall I say it?

for some reason they've linked a negative connotation to
or associated a negative value to
Victim Behavior

it isn't intrinsically 'bad'

there is no shame in it. it just is.

What's with the automatic assumption of "so you're saying I'm to blame!!??"

I never said squat about whose to blame...I never implied blame...
I don't even think blame is a useful topic (where victim behavior is concerned)

more later

Tuesday, June 24, 2003

example of self destructive sex addiction self talk- useful read

I used to do this. I used to hide under an alias and go and check on
my DOC (Drug of Choice---a man I had a three year relationship with,
that started on-line). I would pull up a name and go into chat as a
complete stranger and watch him. Sometimes talk to him, sometimes
not. The end results were that no matter what...I left feeling worse
than before.

If he wasn't there, I was worried (and mad)...where is he? Is he with
another woman? Is he thinking of me? Have I been forgotten?

If he was there...I was mad. WHY is he here? If I'm not in his life,
what is he doing here? Is he looking for another woman?

If i didn't speak to him, but watched him speak to others...I was mad.
How can he go about his life without me? Shouldn't he be in so much
grief that I am gone?

If I DID speak to him...I was mad. How DARE he speak with (and
**GASP** FLIRT with..yeah I was setting him up) another woman! He IS
over me and I have been replaced! (even if it was me temporarily
replacing myself)

It was insanity. Did I learn anything from it? Yeah, I learned it
hurt. But I did it again and again.

Going forward in my life...I used to do the same darn thing with
driving past the house of my soon to be ex and his girlfriend. If I
saw his car, I was furious. If I DIDN'T see his car, I was STILL
angry at the mere thought that they live there. If i saw them,
whoa....bad news...if I didn't see them, I STILL was seething thinking
of them together.

Looking...or having a friend insanity. It's not facing
reality. Your reality isn't there anymore. It's ahead of you (not
behind). You made mistakes back there, yes...but you are moving
forward. Learning, through recovery, what healthy relationships ARE.

Now...all this said. MAN! I know how tough this is to NOT look. You
are SURE that this time will be the golden time. You'll learn the
answers, they'll come back with open arms...blah blah blah.

There are times I am up within the suburb they live in. Turn left, I
pass their house. Go straight, I go home. It's the HARDEST choice to
make. But I've made the right move the last 4 or 5 times. I am
working NOW on not going that way at ALL(finding the same stores, etc.
in different directions/ telling myself that I really don't have the
hour of my life to waste going up to see-or not see- things that will
have me furious for a few MORE hours).

And on-line...sure I know I could go look for him again. My addict is
currently shouting..."yeah, like NOW! Go find him NOW!" But I have
come to understand that whatever I find will be bad for me. Maybe not
for that moment of "there he is!" but for the weeks that follow (of
beating myself up, checking e-mails, crying and wishing for him again,
and on, and on, and on...)

I want to understand healthy relationships....but that is not a
healthy way to do it.

After a KNOW what it is that you did wrong (without going
back to look)...because you can think clearly- both forwards and back.

Stay strong. Keep away. It's in the past--and nothing back there will
help your future. NOTHING!

reprinted with permission off of a sex addiction recovery mailing list
Non sex addicts will be amazed at the thought process

Sex addicts will read this and say to themselves: this is what I DO!!
you mean I'm not the only one??

more later

Depression and the West's sad state of medicine

Now that I have 3 blogs I'm constantly wondering what stuff from which one should
be on which blog.

This topic I wrote about on

So how would Western medicine look at depression? As a chemical imbalance of the brain, of course. There are not enough of certain neurotransmitters, including seratonin. Following the logic, the solution would be to do something that will increase the amount of seratonin, which is what antidepressant drugs like Prozac or Zoloft do.

But what if we look at depression, and the associated brain chemistry imbalance, as a symptom of something else going on with the person? Is taking a drug that tries to balance the chemistry really helping in the long run? My answer is a qualified no!

more later

Hey, I'm starting to get good press... sort of

snipped from

someone speaking about what they think of!

I have found the to be very right on and gives you
many tools to work with. The depression can be overwhelming yet it is
very real and force yourself to get out there and try some of the
tips. They do help.
We are here and rooting for you.


Now that made me feel good!

Post that I originally responded to here

Post that I did reply to (where I offered additional strategies)

Post where some kind person said nice things about my site:)

although I'm not clear on what she meant by her comment on *Dr.s* ??

more later

Monday, June 23, 2003

Going to have to completely redesign's front page

In light of what I learned by posting to's message board.

I learned a lot!

I came at the problem of how to build a site on the topic of Victim Behavior from the
perspective of the therapist... the people I'm trying to reach are getting offended by
what they see as a label???

the linking of the neutral statment of 'your doing victim behavior' with stuff that just isn't
there, it's stuff they're adding (the blame stuff) all by themselves

... no where is saying to someone that they're doing victim behavior
is also saying that they are to blame for x, y or z happening to them.

I'm going to have to come at this from the victim doer's perspective...

they sure don't see that anything is their fault, they seem to be cauught up in the
whole *fault* thing...

why did they do that?

taking responsibility has zero to do with fault

Why is it that people with bad boundaries don't like people with good boundaries?

Some people want to stay a victim...the are getting to play poor me, getting lots of never occurs to them that getting sympathy is a bad thing

Not all people that do victim behavior are aware that they're doing it

Some people do in fact like the sympathy, but just because you point out that
"you're doing victim behavior" doesn't automatically follow that they also fall in the
catagory of people who will just never accept the sympathy is pity...

more later

Sunday, June 22, 2003

Telling someone to 'take responsibility' is not blaming!!!

I've been warned by the good people on the message board to:
Please note, members have protested posts that label people as victims and posts that advertise other sites.

Our web editor has removed these posts from the bulletin board and requests that you refrain from such posting.

I get the second part... they're selling books, some of them were written by the owners of the site
(I think, I've not been there very long), my sig file is advertising my site.

What I don't get is semantics, or a problem with our use of semantics.

The statement- "you're doing victim behavior" does not imply:
1) that you should shut the f*** up, stop whining
2) that you are to blame (for anything)

The term 'blame' is found nowhere in the statement "you're doing victim behavior"

the only person who includes blame is the person who is taking it that way.

Why would they do that?

Semantics and/ or Linguistics are powerful

Language is hypnotic

don't believe me?

look at these two phrases(from recent world events)

COMbat stress

comBAT stress

two phrases that conjure up two completely different images

saying that one is doing victim behavior does not imply that
they're to blame!

the person taking on the blame is doing that to themselves

the term victim behavior is null

it contains zero blame, it's a neutral statement

no one told you to link blame with victim behavior

you did that all by yourself


look at what Becky posted (she came to my rescue on message board)

Becky quoted me below
If you're not healthy, you will stay a victim

actually if you know, or come to learn that
the old status quo is not healthy, one could
infer that you were doing victim behavior.

There is no shame in that, you can assert new
boundaries and end your victimization.>>>>
Becky's response
It took a very long time before I understood this.Once I did I never felt so free in my life! Leaving isn't easy; I'm having tough times financially and getting the divorce over with. But once I realized that I was in charge of how I was treated--NOT HIM--I began to feel some power over my own life, for the first time in my life.

I think sometimes people think taking responsibility is the same as taking blame. it's not. We are never to blame for being abused. However, if we choose to live with it we have to take responsibility for that decision. In other words, accept that you are there and plan for how to cope, and stop expecting anything to be different. Stop being surprised and disappointed that nothing about the VA'er changes.

Not everyone can get away; not everyone can walk out the door immediately. Even those who choose to stay can take their power back and thus no longer be a "victim." They can detach, live as separate a life as possible and put their own welfare above all. It's hard to do this while still living with an abuser, but some manage to do it. I toyed with this idea and decided that i am not made to live that way.

When someone new posts and starts right out with very strongly stated opinions, it can be construed as preaching. It can also raise suspiscions and resentment. What helps,I've found is everyone take a step back and not react immediately.

We are all at different stages and that's what makes for an interesting and helpful board imo. I think it helps to remember that some things said here apply to our unique situations and where we are *at* and others don't. I like the philosophy of taking what works for me and leaving the rest.



If you read the entire thread, you'll see that I posted to this list with an agenda.

my first mistake

I failed to do what I knew I should have done- I should have lurked (read a lot of
what is posted to this board, to get a feel for what kind of place it is)

I came out with a strongly worded opinion

I also made some mistakes in stating my opinion


I learned quite a bit from my mistakes!!!

It never occured to me that people who do vicitim behavior would get insulted by the
assertion that they're doing that.

why do they link 'blame' with taking responsibility???

you can see that I got called a troll, and some of the members of
protested that I should make such statements.

I added a line to explain this on the front page of

This reminds me of why my Mom is quitting being a counselor:

she is tired of having the same kinds of people come to her (and pay a lot) for
relationship advice...

...they all do victim behavior and they refuse to quit doing it

Mom told people "If you think she's a whore, then leave her"
and the woman said something to the effect of: "he won't do what I want him to do"

Mom says that all relationship problems (at least the ones she has a decade of
clinical experience with as a counselor) are this:

one person wants the other to do what they want them to do

that other person won't

and you want to keep on trying

it doesn't matter what any one tells you to do, you'll still keep on
trying to change the person

"she's been nagging him to come home after work...she's been
doing it for 16 yrs...and hasn't caught on yet that it doesn't work"
he won't come home because she nags him

which came first, the chicken or the egg??

more later

A short bio on me from an interesting message board thread

From an interesting exchange I recently had by posting to forum

I really, really learned something extremely useful from the above exchanges on

It hadn't occured to me that a person who is in the clutches of Victim Behavior would see the information
provided on and think that they were BEING ABUSED????

Especially this response to my posting (which stirred up much controversy, and I got called a troll ??)

"I think sometimes people think taking responsibility is the same as taking blame. it's not.

We are never to blame for being abused.

However, if we choose to live with it we have to take responsibility for that decision.

In other words, accept that you are there and plan for how to cope, and stop expecting anything to be different.

Stop being surprised and disappointed that nothing about the VA'er changes"

(a VA'er is a verbal abuser)

She said it better than I did, Thanks Becky!

more later

Saturday, June 21, 2003

Hulabalu on the topic of Self Esteem- notes to myself

[note to self- read up on the conflicting info on self esteem and take a position
pay special attention to the "let go and let God" position (which I do affirm) and
the "inflate your self esteem like it was a baloon" position (which I also affirm) and
include something that will lead me to a Higher Power/ Help your self balance.

"Pray like everything depended on God, and work like everything depended on you"

Read these pages:

and some others found on google here:

Invest some time here, there is a paper/ position/ ebook/ to be found here.

more later
This was posted to a delphi message board: Not Ashamed

hmm, I can't remember if I posted an intro here (I found delphi and
found several applicable forums for me to peruse)
My name is David Bruce Jr, I'm a recovering incest survivor.

A bio of sorts is on the contact me page on my website:

I started the site Healthy Boundaries- Victim
because I wanted to put up all the information I wish I'd had
(in one place) when I began to work on fixing the effects of
being a survivor.

For me, being a survivor was about finding out where my
boundaries had holes/ were broken/ non-existant

For me, being an incest victim was about most of my life
(up till I had my first flashbacks)...was about my life
being victim based (codependent vittim based)behavior.

I also have a weblog that says this:

I titled the blog:

Repair Manual for Self Destructive Behavior

How to doc to fix vicitim behavior, dysfunctional self destructive and general codependent patterns. Where ever you search, all you get is how we got screwed up, not much on how to fix it, till now.

And lastly I joined here (and other places like this) to research
how to set up the forum I have hosted on my site- see my sig file.

Hopefully that says what I'm about and what I hope to accompilish

David Bruce Jr
Frederick Maryland
Which still needs choices decided on configuration and topics, input is welcome!!

Name your addict- separate the sin from the sinner

I've got to remember to add a section to
about the AA concept of naming your addict.

That is a gross generalization, I know,
but the idea is to separate your self into parts, different identities:

The real you (the one God gave you, the person you were meant to be,
the person you want to be (I threw that one in there if you're agnostic)

And your addicted self (substitue your dsyfunctional self)

On the sexual addiction mailing list I belong to on yahoogroups, astarttorecovery
(which has done me a lot of good with all my addictive behaviors btw)
I kept reading where people called their addict(ed part of them) by name.

for example, lets say my addict's name is little bart (Bart is my middle name)
when he is running the show, my life is more than a little chaotic
he's impulsive (which by itself I don't really mind...except he often gets me into
he's selfish
he's childish- he is given to temper tantrums
and so on

I could go on and on (and should except I"m supposed to be writing my ebook
right now)

more later

Thursday, June 19, 2003

To My Right Fighting Posters

"Having the alcoholic in our lives admit that they are Alcoholics doesn't mean you're RIGHT and they're going to FIX it--some do--some don't. We often want them to admit having big problems with alcohol so they will act responsibily and recover--certainly they can admit that they are alcoholics and hope that we'll just accept it, pitty them, or continue to do the impossible fix them to keep us attached. Having our mates admit that they're alcoholic only proves that they know what we know--and of course we were right--but it doesn't necessarily change anything.
What do you think? "

This was posted to the message board. [note to self] make an entry like this in my forum.
I've got to get more topics on my forum

It looks like it will take me considerable time to organize the forum to make it useful for people to want to go there.

Tuesday, June 17, 2003

Homeostasis: a relatively stable state of equilibrium or a tendency
toward such a state between the different but interdependent elements
or groups of elements of an organism, population, or group.

[note to self] remember to include stuff here about family systems theory,
and a person who is changing their boundaries for the better-
the rest of their family will fight them (and they will feel blindsided)

a person who is setting boundaries, is also upsetting the status quo
upsetting the homeostasis of their family
Found this gem while searching on (a usenet style mailing list)

Subject: I found this to be helpful.....

View this article only
Newsgroups: alt.recovery.codependency
Date: 2003-06-02 13:25:08 PST I printed it out, stuck it on the fridge door and make a point of
reading it every morning.

Do You Work Too Hard For Love?

Many of us have worked too hard to make relationships work; sometimes
those relationships didn't have a chance because the other person was
unavailable or refused to participate.

To compensate for the other person's unavailability, we worked too hard.
We may have done all or most of the work. This may mask the situation
for a while, but we usually get tired. Then, when we stop doing all the
work, we notice there is no relationship, or we're so tired we don't care.

Doing all the work in a relationship is not loving, giving, or caring.
It is self-defeating and relationship-defeating. It creates the illusion
of a relationship when in fact there may be no relationship. It enables
the other person to be irresponsible for his or her share. Because that
does not meet our needs, we ultimately feel victimized.

In our best relationships, we all have temporary periods where one
person participates more than the other. This is normal. But as a
permanent way of participating in relationships, it leaves us feeling
tired, worn out, needy, and angry.

We can learn to participate a reasonable amount, then let the
relationship find it's own life. Are we doing all the calling? Are doing
all the initiating? Are we doing all the giving? Are we the one talking
about feelings and striving for intimacy?

Are we doing all the waiting, the hoping, the work? We can let go. If
the relationship is meant to be, it will be, and it will become what it
is meant to be. We do not help that process by trying to control it. We
do not help ourselves, the other person, or the relationship by trying
to force it or by doing all the work.

Let it be. Wait and see. Stop worrying about making it happen. See what
happens and strive to understand if that is what you want.

Today, I will stop doing all the work in my relationships. I will give
myself and the other person the gift of requiring both people to
participate. I will accept the natural level my relationships reach when
I do my share and allow the other person to choose what his or her share
will be. I can trust my relationships to reach their own level. I do not
have to do all the work; I need only do my share.

Author Unknown
Post a follow-up to this message

Message 2 in thread
From: David Bruce Jr (
Subject: Re: I found this to be helpful.....

View this article only
Newsgroups: alt.recovery.codependency
Date: 2003-06-09 19:53:19 PST

I found it useful too.

I'm going to reprint it on my site:

probably in the /codependency directory

thanks for posting it:~)
David Bruce Jr
Frederick Maryland
Self Help tools for self destructive behavior

Mission accomplished

This post speaks to codependents (children of alcoholics, children of rageaholics) victim based behavior,
many of them want so badly to be loved, they feel they have to work hard at it-

the underlying assumption being that internally, they don't really believe themselves to be lovable-
not on their own merits.

the more I look at things, the more I see that fixing boundaries, fixes everything.

more later

[note to self: remember to add a section on emotionally unavailable men/ women to site, and while I'm at it, to the VictimBehavior Forum as well}
hmm, what is a blog image?
it says 'image icon'- this is from

which reminds me that I have to make a favicon graphic

among other things...


Last night I was lurking on a new forum (a message board) called Verbal Abuse Forum

From the looks of it, that forum from has been around a very long time- it wouldn't have so many members if
it didn't provide value...BUT

That got people stirred up, the women on that message board all jumped on this guy, who said he was
dysfunctional, was a verbal abuser, and wanted help.

he was blasted for being predatory (my paraphrasing)...this will be interesting.

Here's my post/ reply:

Man you all sure are hostile.

I didn't read anything in Joe's post to warrant
everybody ganging up on him.

I did read his ex wife's post.

What comes to mind when I read this thread is
that people who let themselves get verbally
abused (and they DO let it happen)are so quick to

"Five years & you have done nothing to change???? Unbelievable"
why is that so unbelievable?

you gals seem to want a pound of flesh.

people that are wounded have learned that the
best defence is a good offence.

it's dysfunctional, but that is the underlying
premise of abusers.

Why would someone give up their percieved best
defence without having a suitable substitue?

You can't get abused if you set functional

I've not been here for more than a couple hours
but not fixing your boundaries is a sure fire
way to get hurt (allow yourself to get hurt)

fool me once, shame on you
fool me twice, shame on me

I'll have to invest more time here to see if my
first impression of this forum is wrong.

I can see that this place has been here for a long time. It will take some time to lurk and

David Bruce Jr
Self Help tools for self destructive behavior
Learning all the time about this blog stuff, it's really cool!

you can have someone 'guest blog' for you, you can add what they call 'feeds' from other blogs.
hmm, you could even compete with thedrudgereport and not know html coding (well, very little coding skills)

here we go, am trying to add this code:

Rate Me on!

the best
pretty good
pretty bad
the worst


Monday, June 16, 2003

Wow, trying to set up my Victimbehavior Forum to make it someplace valuable to go to for help,
advice, experience/ strength/ hope is proving to take up a lot of time.
I've been to dephiforums and getting to know the people there, the way I've gotten to know the people on
the yahoogroups email mailing lists will also take up some time.

The machine shop finished with my engine's cylinder head- $455
I've got to either get a job driving a tractor trailer, or get the airport super shuttle franchise in gear soon
more later
Wow, trying to set up my like the new for example, and new ideas/ directions the site is going to take
and such.

more later

Sunday, June 15, 2003

Boundaries are the CONTAINER for our sense of self

Without a functional boundary system, we cannot do several things:

Own our own reality- this is why we gossip and take the inventory
of othere

Boundaries are the CONTAINER for our sense of self

No boundaries, no self worth

They work together like an automobiles clutch and gas pedal

without one, the other is useless

I'm getting a new understanding of the how and why of my
"messing up" or self sabotage pattern that I've been
runing since the mother of most of my children left me.

My latest ebook "Dysfunctional Behavior Rapid Repair Manual"
spells out a lot of this.

In a nutshell, boundaries and self worth work together like a car's
clutch pedal and gas pedal

If you don't work them at the same time, you'll stall

Dysfunctional Behavior Rapid Repair Manual
A short report about an effective strategy to end
Dysfunctional Behavior Patterns.

Up till now you thought you were the voice inside your head
That voice is your Ego

You are much more than an Ego

See our newest Ebook here:

The only real time expiriances we have are:

With our selves (our authentic self)
and with God

consider this:
All perceptions are in the past

When we look up at the night sky, some of those
stars are not there anymore... it took so long
for the light to travel here, that some stars
have exploded millions of years ago

We'd never know that by looking with our eyes

All sight, anything we see- light takes 186,000 mph
to reach us, then several milliseconds for our
optical nerves, cornea, retina as so on to process

All we hear, sound travels at 760mph at sea level,
anyway- everthing we hear is in the past

Even Sex, the closest we can be with another person
swaping bodily fluids and such...

tactile expiriances take milliseconds
for our nervous system to process

See more about this in our Ebooks:

"Self Esteem Takes Too Long"

Self Destrucitve Behavior; Rapid Repair Manual

Dysfunctional Behavior Rapid Repair Manual
Our latest ebook-
A short report about an effective strategy to end
Dysfunctional Behavior Patterns.