Saturday, August 28, 2004

Needing and wanting are boundaries issues

Difficulty in determining the difference between what we
need and what we want is a problem of our Internal Boundaries
as defined by Pia Mellody in her audio set.

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



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 expiriences take milliseconds
for our nervous system to process




======================


more later

Sunday, July 25, 2004

Article from Healthy Boundaries Ezine

Hi [firstname]
You asked to receive articles from
Victimbehavior and Healthy Boundaries Ezine
Library of Congress number:
ISSN# 1551-3831
[today]
Publisher: David Bruce-
606 E Patrick St #5
Frederick Maryland, 21701
http://www.victimbehavior.blogspot.com

=========================
Are You Someone’s Puppet? Four Ways People Manipulate Others
By: Mary Treffert, LCSW, ACSW, DCSW, LPC

With the current interest in mental health topics, a mental health language has emerged with words such as manipulation, boundaries, limits, rescuing, dependence, and codependence. Many people are unclear what these words meanwhen applied to relationships. I would like to bring someclarity to one of these terms ­ MANIPULATION ­ and how itrelates to the other terms mentioned above.

Webster’s New World Dictionary defines manipulation as:
“managing or controlling artfully or by shrewd use of influence, often in an unfair or fraudulent way; to alter or falsify for one’s own purpose.”

In relationships, manipulation can be defined as:
any attempt to control, through coercion (overt or covert),  another person’s thoughts, feelings or behaviors.

From this definition, manipulation would seem to have no advantages.

However, if you are codependent and defined by others, there can be many advantages. When you allow others to control your thoughts, feelings, behaviors, and make decisions for you,

-- you do not have to think for yourself; --
you can avoid taking risks and making difficult decision;
-- you can avoid taking a stand on controversial issues;
-- you can avoid feeling responsible for negative outcomes;
-- you get to blame others when things go wrong;
-- you can believe, when others tell you how to behave,
; what to think, how to feel and what to decide, that you are “being loved” because they “want what is best for you”;
-- you can avoid feeling separate and alone by avoiding conflict;
-- you can avoid the hard work of emotional growth and development.

Appreciating the advantages of not being manipulated is to accept the hard work of living and interacting with others. It is about being willing to grow and develop emotionally.

These advantages can be that,
-- you learn to know who you are, what you like, what you think, and how you feel;
-- you learn to make difficult decisions;
-- you get to take credit for your decisions;
-- you learn to handle risks and uncertainty;
-- you learn to handle differences and conflicts;
-- you get to be in control of your life and know the freedom of personal self-reliance;
-- you get to have an increased sense of self worth by feeling competent and capable of taking responsibility foryour life and personal happiness.

Manipulation is usually attempted using power, unsolicited helping, rescuing, guilt, weakness, and/or dependence,  in order to achieve a desired outcome. For example,

1) Power ­ physical,  verbal,  intellectual intimidation or threats,  put-downs,  belittling,  withholding of things needed or wanted. The goal is to be in a “one up, I am right and you are wrong” position;
2) Unsolicited helping/rescuing ­ doing things for others when they do not request it,  want it,  or need it; helping others so they become indebted, obligated, and owe you.

The goal is to be in the “after all I have done for you, andnow you owe me” position;

3) Guilt,  ­ shaming,  scolding,  blaming others,  attempting to make others responsible,  trying to collect for past favors. The goal is to be in the “it is all your fault,”  or “after all I have done for you and now you treat me like this” position;
4) Weakness/dependence ­ being (or threatening to become) helpless,  needy,  fearful,  sick,  depressed, incompetent, suicidal.  The goal is to confuse want with need, with the message “if you do not take care of me, something bad is going to happen and it will be all your fault” position.

With manipulation,  there is a physical and emotional response,  such as a heightened level of anxiety or irritation,  although it may not be perceived as such.

Manipulation feels like a struggle or contest,  not free communication.  The reason is the manipulator is always invested in the outcome of a situation.

This is where boundaries differ from manipulation.

Boundaries (or limits) are statements about our values and where we stand on issues. 

True boundaries are not threats or about getting the other person to do what we want.
True boundaries are not compromised by another’s response.

For example,  you discover that your spouse has lied to youand has run up a large gambling debt. You discover the problem by chance,  get financial and professional help and are back on track.

However, there are new signs of trouble. It is time for some hard decisions.
- What is your bottom line?
- What will you tolerate?
- What manipulative tactics do you use to change yourspouse’s behavior ­ check up on them constantly, bird-dog them, never let them be alone, hide the credit cards, lie to your creditors, parents, and children? - How muchrescuing, guilt, power plays, threats, and protection doyou run on the gambler?

- At what point do you stop trying to change their behavior and let them know your bottom line?

You cannot make them do or not do anything. You can only let them know what your position is and what you are willing to do to protect yourself and those you areresponsible for.

The problem with loud, threatening bottom lines, is that they keep getting louder, more threatening, and redrawn lower and lower.
We tend to determine what our position and action is by what the other person does, instead of voicing our trueposition and then responding accordingly.  This is the time for tough decisions and actions.

In another example,  a friend asks you for a ride to work because she is having car trouble. This is the time toestablish ground rules,  such as,  how long will she need your help,  pick up times,  expense sharing,  days off,  etc. 

A boundary or limit is set when you clearly let your friend know what you are willing to do and not do.

Problems arise ­ she is frequently not on time morning and evening. Do you wait and be late, or do you leave her? Her car has been in the shop six weeks because she cannot afford to get it out. She has not offered to help with the expense, nor does she seem concerned about the arrangement.

Your friend is using weakness to manipulate and be dependent on you. She has transferred her problem to you and you have accepted it by rescuing and not setting boundaries or limits on your participation in her problem.
If you refuse to wait when she is late and she has problemsas a result, she will blame you and try to make you feel guilty. What we really want are for others to be responsible and play fair; however, when they do not, we either have to set boundaries, or feel manipulated and victimized with the accompanying advantages and disadvantages.
Lastly, often we confuse UNDERSTANDING with AGREEMENT.

This is when people confuse their decisions with wanting the recipient of a decision to like or agree with it. Whenwe make decisions that oppose the desires of others, thereis a cost. We usually attempt to minimize that cost by explaining, in exhaustive detail, our rationale for thatdecision, somehow thinking if they could just understandour position, they would agree.

Applying that scenario to parent and child ­ if a parent makes a decision based on the best interest of the child, it needs to be made separate from whether the child is going to like it. When a child knows it is important to the parent that they be happy with a decision, then it will never be in the child’s personal interest to be happy withan unwanted decision.  If a child knows that their happiness with a parental decision is of equal importance to the decision itself, then all a child has to do is be unhappy in order to make their parent uncomfortable and doubt their decision -- after all, it is always worth a try. This same dynamic can apply to interactions among adults also.

How do we manage manipulation?

By becoming more aware of our interaction with others.
Is the interaction an attempt to communicate or does it feel like a contest?
Are you beginning to feel anxious orirritated?
Do you want to get out of the conversation?
Doesthe interaction fit into a manipulative style?
Is there an attempt to use power, service, guilt, or weakness to get your cooperation?
Are you a willing participant in your own manipulation?
Is it easier not taking responsibility?
Are you attempting to manipulate others instead of setting clear boundaries?
Are you making a distinction between avalue and a preference? Preferences can be negotiated, but values should not.

Our society does not deal well with differences in values and preference. We tend to take it as a personal affront and insult when others disagree with us. We will avoid conflicts at all costs, because it feels like rejection.  What we need is to communicate to others, clearly and calmly, our values, preferences, and boundaries.  We need to be respectful and dedicated to listening, hearing and appreciating, if not understanding,  how we all are different.

About the author:

Mary Treffert, LCSW, ACSW, is a Licensed, Clinical Social Worker, who is an individual, couple, and family therapist in Baton Rouge, LA.

Copyrighted 1994

This article is for informational purposes only. Please contact a licensed professional in your area if you are in crisis or require mental health services


You may reprint/reproduce any of these provided you includethe entire copy, especially this credit.

Sunday, July 18, 2004

You can't use left brain tools to fix right brain issues

Here's the deal, "You can't expect left brain tools to impact right brain issues"
 
Not only that, even if the right brain was 'doing something', the left brain
would not recognize that anything of value was going on.
 
The right brain's most valuable tool is the tool of "Observation"
 
Observation is unconditional, it contains ZERO judgement.
 
Observation operates from the frame of Being, not doing.
 
When you BE something, you don't have to DO anything.
it's like Grace, you don't have to earn grace.
 
Being valuable is not  something you missed out on-
it's something you create, on tap, on demand, however much
a situation requires that you possess self worth, that's how much
self worth you generate.
 
When your right brain is performing the task of
Observation, powerful forces are put into play...
 
Your left brain incorrectly assumes that nothing valuable is
going on, your left brains unit of measure, it's meters to record
success or failure are incapable of registering observation.
 
Your left brain wants to fix something, from it's perspective
Observation is the equivalent to stopping the car on the freeway,
it  will say, "why are we stopped?" "There is no traffic?"
 
Observation is healing on the level of Being
 
the left brain operates on the level of doing.
 

self esteem is past, self worth is now

The more I think about it, the more I see that self esteem is a left brain thing, it's an ego thing.
 
Since the ego likes to DO stuff, (that is it's area of responsibility), then assiging the Ego the task of working
towards self esteem is useful
 
The right brain, however, can conjure up self worth in the present moment, it can do so "on demand", it*has* self worth "on tap"

Wednesday, July 14, 2004

Self Destructive Behavior; Rapid Repair Manual

Writing that ebook consumed me for months, I've got to find out why
this blogger isn't archiving... I'll bet it's the ftp path

My ebook is being turned into a text book for re-certification
for social workers (L.C.S.W)!!

Self Destructive Behavior; Rapid Repair Manual
is going to help counselors learn how to teach boundaries!

This is amazing, it's also source energy helping me do the 12th step.

I've got to add a test so the readers can see if they learned what the
ebook says.

It will become course material, the neat thing is that this is what they
call 'distance learning', therapists are allowed (in most states boards)
to earn up to 25% of their credits for re-certifying via ecourses or
online learning- they are hot to trot to get out of having to take a
class at a 'brick and mortar' institution

They Want My ebook!!

also the feedback about my ebook, Self Destructive Behavior; Rapid Repair Manual, being written in the vernacular of the people who need it
... not in the college speak of academia

and the 'messages are given in short bursts, not lengthly orations

more later, I'm still driving a truck and have to get up early
Peace
(funny thing for a Republican to use to end a message with, but it fits)

Sunday, July 11, 2004

therapists are buying my "Repair Manual"

From my ebook

===============
When I started learning about boundaries and recovery from
A.C.O.A issues/ Codependency issues one thing was glaringly
apparent- Every thing I found went into excruciating detail
about how we got this way.

After reading books and listening to about the 60th audio
on the topic I felt:

"Enough Already!"

"I'm 40 years old, don't keep telling me about what I
missed from my family of origin, just tell me how to fix
the damn thing!"

"I agree with you, something is broke, just tell me where
to put the #*@! wrench!"

This "Rapid Repair Manual for Self Destructive Behavior" in
ebook format is a quick study guide to fix what's wrong!

Each topic is a stand alone, easy to implement strategy for
"Rapid Repair" of what 12 step ideology calls- "Character
Defects"

===============

I'm very flattered to get favorable reviews from therapists:

===============

Testimonials from satisfied readers:

I am a group and individual therapist/psychologist/rehab
professional living and working in Dublin, Ireland. I
constantly search for information that will help me help my
clients/patients to learn and understand boundaries in
their lives.

I usually seek information in language that does not go
"over the heads" of my client group. My base is in-patient
psychiatry and I alternate my working week in community
care psychiatry.

I often find I work with people from disadvantaged
backgrounds who have experienced extreme abuses and as such
they are void of an understanding of boundaries for
themselves.

What I loved about your site when I found it was the
language which was easy to understand. Messages were given
in short bursts rather than lengthy orations and this suits
the short attention span of some of my client group.

Also each piece is complete in itself. I am also familiar
with the work of Pia Melody, John Bradshaw etc., (I
actually did a workshop with him when he was in Dublin some
years ago)

Your site draws together the best of many people in a
wonderful concise way. Mary Cantwell, Dublin Ireland


===============

More Later

Monday, July 05, 2004

Created Free ebook to go with paid one

Ok, now I'm offering a free download of an ebook called
Healthy Boundaries and am still working on my paid ebook
called "Repair Manual for Self Destructive Behavior"


The ebook is zipped up, so readers will have to have winzip or similar
file compression/ decompression software.

That step was necessary because people at work will probably not be
able to download a copy due to a company firewall.

The ebook is encapsulated in ebook compilier software.

I'm allowing both private individuals and organizations (churches, 12 step groups
companies and others) to freely distribute the ebook- "Healthy Boundaries"

More later
happy 4th of July- Independence Day

Wednesday, June 09, 2004

Repair broken codependent boundary systems

From relistening to Pia Melody and John Bradshaw tapes and
just as importantly from the process of life itself, I've
come to some startling conclusions...

to wit:

I've long known that to repair broken codependent boundary
systems and replace them with functional boundaries clears
up everything else...

what I'd missed was this:

The function and purpose of healthy boundaries is to
protect one's sense of self

Ok

If you're self esteem is trashed and you find yourself self
depracting...

then you have nothing you're interested in defending

Not only that, this boundary/ self worth (self esteem)
stuff is also Catch 22

If you have broken boundaries, you have no container to
hold a boundary in

If you have no context (a system of boundaries), then
you're perception of self worth is going to be worth less to you

worthlessness begats being worth-less

Sunday, May 16, 2004

Spiritualiy for agnositcs

Here are some things to try on for size:


the idea that we are physical beings only and our minds are merely bio electrical
computers that do not consist of anything outside ourselves has the following problems-

When you change your mind... who or what is doing the changing?

Your ego is NOT who you are, what you are is *a space for events to occur in*

Without an ego, we would be like the character Dustin Hofman played in Rain Man.


In order to give up our ego, we've got to have a healthy one first-


See www.software4yourmind.com/right-brain-healing-the-jesus-nature

More later, I'm working 70 plus hours a week, driving a truck and fixing it as well
to pay off child support and debts I ran up the last time I was self employed

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...
best?
works?
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:

agnostic

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

======

atheist

Date: 1571
: one who denies the existence of God

======

Self-will

"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 http://yahoogroups.com
and is primarily a sexual addiction self help group

More Later
David

Wednesday, August 20, 2003

Book review- A Question of God

Buy from barnesandnoble.com now

Synopsis
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 barnesandnoble.com 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 barnesandnoble.com now

Wednesday, July 16, 2003

If the world were a village of 1000 people

STATE OF THE VILLAGE REPORT
http://www.questconnect.org/global_citizen.htm


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

The Global Citizen May 31, 1990

Donella H. Meadows

STATE OF THE VILLAGE REPORT

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://www.empowermentsources.com/info2/theglobalvillage

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 http://sustainer.org. The specific website address for the memorial plans is: http://sustainer.org/meadows/memorials.html

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


============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.

http://victimbehavior.com/codependency/index.html

http://software4yourmind.com/victimcharacteristics/index.html

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-
http://software4yourmind.com/change.html#enchantedworld



===============
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
addiction

(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?


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

Literature:
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
too.

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
say.

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


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 group...like 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
efforts).


> 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.

http://ssl.adgrafix.com/cgi-bin/checkitout/checkitout.cgi?
slaafwsSTORE:home


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 http://yahoogroups.com/group/astarttorecovery/

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)

Hello...

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
death.

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 verbalabuse.com 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 look...is 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 while...you 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 http://stopbeingfired.blogspot.com

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