A nail in the foot…

I have started to read a book about Social Grammar. There it stood about people replying that it was worse 70-60 years back (during the depression) in the work life, if someone is complaining about the stress and press today.

The author writes that he has never understood these arguments. That people today aren’t allowed to complain about how they have it today because people had it worse earlier.
For the first this is no sign of social competence – always comparing with someone who had it worse.

We have a classical and famous sketch here about a “nail in the foot” ("Spik i foten!").

“A nail in the foot!?? During the French revolution people would have been glad if they had had a nail in the foot!!”

The author thinks that the principle must lie steady: Each human being has her/his right to her/his suffering, irrespectively of how many there are that have had it worse. If it wasn’t so it would only be one person on this earth (and during all history) who had the right to complain, and that is the one who had it worst.

But this social competence includes wondering over in which situation and to whom I am complaining.

But I think it is "similar" with Social Competence as with Emotional Intelligence… The Dutch therapist Ingeborg Bosch writes in her book at page 82 about Daniel Goleman and his concept Emotional Intelligence:

“The reader should be aware that many of the ideas on emotional development put forward in Mr. Golemans book are contrary to PRI [Past Reality Integration therapy] ideas. In PRI it is not considered as desirable for young children to control their ‘socially undesired’ emotions or feelings such as fear and anger. When this sort of behaviour is desired by adults of children PRI regards it as poisonous pedagogy.

/…/ Also, many of the behaviors that are considered by Mr. Goleman to be essential elements of ‘emotional intelligence’, are considered by PRI to be defenses (False Hope and False Power Denial of Needs) employed in order to avoid feeling pain. The general profile of Golemans ‘emotionally intelligent’ person fits the PRI idea of someone who is quite defensive, albeit in a socially desirable way. This might therefore lead to social success, while simultaneously sacrificing contact with the True Self and inner autonomy.”

And Jennifer Freyd writes at page 195 in her book:

“For a child dependent on abusive caregivers, lack of internal connection can help maintain some sort of external connection to necessary others. But I disagree with those such as Daniel Goleman (1985), who suggest that while truth is generally a good thing, some times even privileged members of our society are best served by living with ‘vital lies’ in which the truth is best kept from oneself and one’s intimate partners.”

From today's walk. It is icy everywhere. It snowed yesterday... After my fall yesterday I still feel it when I am coughing or laughing...

Eskil suddenly threw himself down into the snow and started scrubbing himself, first on one side, so the next!! He needs to get trimmed or cut?

Before and after that he ran here and there in the wood, behind me and in front of me... Awoke on the right side today!? Despite the weather. He is a weather-dog, when it's raining he doesn't want to go out! He senses this before he has even stung (??) his nose out!!! And he isn't a morning-dog, which suites me fine!! :-) And suits many here fine too!!

He also likes when there is people in the house?? That's fun?? :-)

Now I am going to bake bread, and hopefully practice piano for some hours, so vacation I have... Need it.

Baking bread and listening to Ann-Sofie von Otter… This music is so passionate (at least to me trained in it) and she is singing so well… Practicing piano while the dough is rising (used cold water, so this took a couple of hours). Look forward to a cup of tea with honey, still a little warm bread with butter and cheese…

See earlier postings under the label EQ.

Bosch on the creation of "safe places"...

calm and peace, photo taken June 15, 2007, on a bike-tour back to town.

Reposting an earlier posting (without editing it though)...

Bosch writes at page 99 and forward in her book "Redisovering the True Self":

“Many therapists also use the strategy of creating a ‘safe place’ when working with traumatized clients. The therapist helps the client to think up an imaginary place in which she feels completely safe where she can retreat to whenever she feels overwhelmed by her feelings.

Although this might sound nice to some readers, why would we need to have an imaginary safe place? We would only need such a place if we were not truly safe in the present and we were unable to change our situation. Such thinking implies it is possible that our feelings cold really hurt us, and that we could actually be overwhelmed by our feelings.

Both these ideas are explicit in the concept of the ‘safe place’. The ‘safe place’ concept prevent us from giving in to our worst childhood feelings while knowing that there is no actual danger, and therefore it takes away the opportunity to come out on the other side of the feeling unharmed [and the possibility to experience that this is actually possible. And possible again and again till we don’t need it any more, as many times as we maybe need. And the possibility of experiencing that it for each time gets a little bit easier and is a little bit less frightening].

Knowing that it is safe to feel all old feelings, that we won’t be devoured by them, that they will pass by eventually, and that they are not too much for us to feel, is an important part of the healing process. It can be painful and unpleasant, but we will come out unharmed and one step closer to being healed.”

Clients have been scared and thus hindered in their healing during history??? This is awful I think! And this because of the therapists, psychologists and psychiatrists and other helpers own fears for their own truths? Bosch means, and writes, that these fears is actually a defence the child once needed against the truth, defences adults doesn’t need any more, adults can survive those feelings even if it doesn’t feel so. These defences aren’t necessary any longer. The harm that we are so afraid of has already been done and can’t harm us any more. But it doesn’t feel so; it feels as we are in danger here and now… But nevertheless we can survive them… Many clients have been scared instead of helped to overcome this fear, and scared for their own truths… Even more scared instead of less. And have used a lot of energy on controlling these feelings and hold them in check, energy they could have used on much more constructive things!!!!!

She writes at page 98:

“Quite a few therapeutic schools reinforce this fear of feelings we carry with us. Most therapists do not recognize that the belief, about feelings being potentially harmful, is actually a defence we needed when we were children.”

No, they don’t even recognise this for themselves?

See also what Freyd has written about healing. That she doesn’t agree with Daniel Goleman (see that blogpost).

---

Bosch skriver på sidan 99 och framåt i sin bok "Redisovering the True Self" (min snabba översättning av texten):

”Många terapeuter använder också strategin att skapa ’säkra platser’ när de arbetar med traumatiserade klienter. Terapeuten hjälper klienten att tänka ut en inbillad/imaginär plats i vilken hon känner sig helt säker och dit hon kan dra sig tillbaka närhelst hon känner sig överväldigad av sina känslor.

Även om detta kan kännas trevligt för vissa läsare, varför skulle vi behöva en tänkt ’säker plats’? Vi skulle bara behöva en sådan om vi inte var verkligt säkra i nuet och var oförmögna att förändra vår situation. Ett sådant här tänkande låter oss förstå att det är möjligt att våra känslor verkligen kan skada oss och att vi verkligen skulle kunna bli överväldigade av våra känslor.

Båda dessa idéer är uttryckliga i konceptet ’säker plats. ‘Säkra platsen’ konceptet hindrar oss från att ge efter för våra värsta barndomskänslor samtidigt som vi vet att det inte finns någon aktuell fara och därför tar det bort möjligheten att komma ut oskadad på andra sidan av känslan [att verkligen få uppleva att det faktiskt är
möjligt. Och möjligt igen och igen, så mänga gånger som vi kanske skulle behöva. Och att få uppleva att det för varje gång blir en aning mindre skrämmande].

Att veta att det är säkert att känna alla gamla känslor, att vi inte kommer att bli förtärda av dem, att de slutligen kommer att passera och de inte är för mycket för oss att känna, är en viktig del i helandeprocessen. Det kan vara smärtsamt och otrevligt, men vi kommer att komma ut oskadade och ett steg närmare att bli helade.”

Klienter har blivit skrämda och på det viset hindrade i sitt helande under historiens gång??? Detta är fruktansvärt tycker jag! Och detta på grund av terapeuters, psykologers, psykiatrikers och andra hjälpares egna rädslor för deras egna historier?? Bosch menar, och skriver, att dessa rädslor i själva verket är ett försvar som barnet måste ha en gång mot sanningen, försvar som vuxna inte behöver längre, vuxna kan överleva dessa känslor även om det inte känns så. Detta försvar är inte nödvändigt längre. Skadan som vi är rädda för har redan skett. Men det känns inte så, det känns som om faran finns här och nu. Men vi kan överleva dessa starka känslor. Många klienter har blivit skrämda istället för hjälpta att komma över sin rädsla och rädda för sina egna sanningar… Ännu mer rädda istället för mindre. Och har använt en massa energi för att kontrollera dessa känslor och hålla dem i schack, energi som skulle ha kunnat användas på betydligt mer konstruktiva saker!!!

Hon skriver på sidan 98:

“Inte så få terapeutiska skolor förstärker denna rädsla för känslor som vi bär med oss. De flesta terapeuter erkänner inte att denna tro, att känslor är potentiellt farliga, faktiskt är ett försvar vi behövde när vi var barn.”

Nej, de erkänner det inte ens för sig själva?

Se också vad Freyd skriver om helande. Att hon inte håller med Daniel Goleman (se det blogginlägget).

another calm and peaceful place in the north of Italy, picture I got from my youngest brother today, taken and sent with his cell-phone.