The problems with defences…

pictures from today's walk.

Spontaneously: A lot of thoughts (and emotions) on the walk I have just returned from. Eskil is still peeing blood… It is not fun mildly said. And maybe this is also triggering things… Experiences?

Addition in the evening: Chose the title to this posting very quickly... Maybe I should have chosen another? But there is so much in my head and mind now...

I also came to think of people denying their needs, thoughts triggered by a posting I did on my other blog this morning. Also a posting I have thought of writing a long time. Having everything in check and control, and maybe also looking down on other people, “weak”, dependent ones… There is a psychiatrist here David Eberhard whom has written a book “In the safety addictions-land”. He means that it can be too much safety and security! Till it becomes an addiction!

These denying their needs are often (but not all??) resonating in terms of:

“I can manage! (why can’t you then too?) What weakling are you!”

And this is plainly said contempt for weakness?? Contempt for the small child one was once?? See Bosch on the Primary Defence. And on the False Power Denial of Needs, False Power Anger – and False Power Hope…

Women often resort to False Power Hope Defence and adds it with False Power Denial of Needs Defence she means… They (we) think they (we) can change the state affairs and this can be added (and is often added) with denial of needs, we think the more we can deny our needs the better, the we will get love. The less needy they (we) are the more respected they (we) become – they (we) think at least!?? In general. But she underlines that this is a generalization and that there are (a lot of) exceptions.

And men generally combine Denial of Needs with False Power Anger, which gives them a (false) sense of strength, a strength they don’t need in the present situation (most often), but needed to defend themselves with as small boys to survive (and not experience how vulnerable and power and helpless they were then, denying this fact with a belief of, false, power, a power the small boy actually didn't have, but as he grown up man now most often have).

But denial of needs doesn’t mean one doesn’t have any needs and what's more important that the person doesn’t act on his/her needs? Trying to fill them in different ways, but maybe this is more or less hidden or visible/invisible both to themselves but also to others?

Unfulfilled needs which have become, what Stettbacher calls them, perverted?

And filling these perverted needs are always (more or less) harmful? And the ones that are denying them the most are causing most harm?? The less aware are causing most harm? The ones most in Denial causes most harm? Or the ones most in denial and with most power cause most denial? And maybe these persons also need power the most to defend themselves? And need exercising power most, need having power the most to hold the truth away?

Yes, psychohistorians are right about backward psychoclasses here?

And the ones admitting to their needs or who got their needs filled the most as children, or wo have been able or got help processing their early history the most and best, are causing less harm and don’t have to fill their needs through other people?

The worse is though when one tries to fill ones early unmet and denied needs through children (ones own or other people’s) and the ones under in power or less strong. Compared to filling them through other grown up people equal to oneself...

See earlier postings on authoritarianism.one of my favourites, picture taken 4 hours ago.