Macho ideals and the state of the world…

Jonathan Cook.

Gordon Gekko.

Patrick Bateman.

More voices in Sweden about the current states of affairs in the world:

One writer, Maria-Pia Boëthius, writes: An economical tribunal ought to become established. Not for imposing a penalty, but for making clear for the people around the world what has happened and who carry the guilt actually.

Such a tribunal should be sent directly over the web and in the public service channels all over the world. What we than got to know wouldn’t be dependent on the Medias’ reports and filtering of news because the Medias – the big – are also guilty to what has happened!

No of these bubbles would have been possible without the Medias’ eager cooperation and collaboration. But when the responsibility is to become claimed the medias always try to run away, only for to become the money-world’s obedient weapon in the next bubble.

The truth is that the media earn great money on that these bubbles are built, with the help of advertisement, PR and trademark building. The media and its owners have all interests in puffing the consumption up, because they seldom live on our direct buying but on the advertisements and the trademarkings’s (the making of trade marks) distorted message.

See about the British journalist Jonathan Cook here and here.

And read about ”The Intellectual Cleansing” part one and two here (Part one with the title “Keeping the Media Safe For Big Business”). Quotation from that site on what Media Lens is:

“Media Lens is our response to the unwillingness, or inability, of the mainstream media to tell the truth about the real causes and extent of many of the problems facing us, such as human rights abuses, poverty, pollution and climate change.”

The world needs an unbiased tribunal where even the Medias’ have to answer for their actions she thinks.

Another writer writes about our short sight needs and a sick system, something our politicians haven’t wanted to accept, and they haven't wanted to accept that they are responsible for a lot of what’s happening either. If we don’t see, hear… we have no responsibility? Yes, that about being in denial...

This writer writes about more and more advanced financial instruments in the financial world and thinks a financial system ought to see so the resources there are in the world are where they are needed. That all people ought to get their basic needs met. All financial institutions ought to account for what they do in this respect.

The earth has limited resources. All financial institutions ought to account for how they reduce the consumption of resources and leave space for other species to live.

All systems need time for reflection (thoughtfulness), even the financial systems. But the ones working in this system wants oscillations (?) because they earn money on differences. And are driven by mania??

But the instruments shouldn’t be there for the instruments' sake! Creativity ought to become encouraged too. Regular controls of the financial instruments so they don’t loose their transparency are needed.

A great part of this crisis is due to the fact that the politicians, put there to regulate these markets, in fact don’t understand those instruments.

We need to find a system where all people can live. We should need to steer the society in a transparent, fair and ecological direction.

A third writer (Martin Halldén in the Swedish magazine ETC) writes that it’s a sick man’s ideal behind the crisis! And I think that's really true! A CEO (VD in Swedish) for an investment company said a couple of years ago something in the style that:

“Buying house shares is like buying women. You don’t want to buy a cheap whore if you can buy an expensive whore.”

But this statement isn’t strange the writer thinks. Because in the financial world a sick man’s ideal rules he means. And has even contributed to the global financial crisis. Young men with Gordon Gekko and Patrick Bateman as models are competing about taking extreme risks and the climate in those circles favours lack of consideration - and has quite musty values.

Stockbrokers are mostly men working on workplaces dominated by men, and the financial market has become a reserve for young, aggressive men (yes, what are they playing out and what do their actions cause and have they caused?).

It is this sick macho culture that has created the decisions we now see the results of – when the stock markets now are falling all over the world.

Read Barbara Ehrenreich on Positive Thinking!!

The Swedish journalist Jan Guillou also wrote the other day about Blackwater and “Murder as Business Idea – Jan Guillou on the privatisation of the war – and Blackwater’s notorious mercenary soldiers.”

On a bike ride I came to think once again about what the American neurologist Jonathan Pincus writes about societal approval. And that's exactly what we see, societal approval and scapegoating. Here the politicians and media use scapegoats (unemployed, people on sick pay etc., claiming they are misusing the system) to put the blame on to steer the society in a direction they wouldn't have been able to steer it in otherwise (or not so quickly, without this it would have taken even more time than it has actually taken), and they have become accepted targets for people's needs to act all sorts of things out (probably childhood experiences in the bottom)!!! I react a lot towards this.

A control-society...

more pictures here.

In a chronicle a journalist wrote that “Big brother decides if you have nothing to hide” or as we say “if you have clean flour in your bag”(om du har rent mjöl i påsen).

She writes about the routine screening for Phenylketonuria (PKU) since 1975 on newborn babies, under the excuse that it saves 35,000 people from the disease Phenylketonuria (in Sweden). The tests are then saved with the promise they are going to be used for research only. But the police got access to this register to capture the murderer of the Swedish politician Anna Lindh.

These tests are so far voluntary, but the author of the article felt a pressure saying yes to it last year when her daughter was born, but managed saying no to it. When her son was born 1996 she didn’t oppose. How is this test for a small child?

She writes that when the purpose sounds good we don’t protest, but who protest when the purpose is dubious?

She means that the control-society is carried out with the help of fear, consolation and disinformation. Yes, see Naomi Klein and shock-therapy. Such as:

“Your child can get a deadly disease! You can get burst or broken into pieces. Assaulted in the subway! Leave the supervision in the hands of the state for your own good. Practical and simple!”

And right and liberal government aren’t less prone than left in this respect it looks??

She means that a control-state neither deter, prevent not protect from crime. A spiral of fear and an arms race is rather built. Something happens with the soul when one builds a prison of self-censoring.

The human factor always leads to misuse she thinks. Those who have a passion for the FRA-law for example, she writes, mean that it won’t affect any average Swede having nothing to hide, only terrorists with full beard. Always this “we and them” she thinks

The one knowing his Kafka knows that it’s never you yourself who decide, but always the one in power judging how much you have to hide or how clean your flour is.

I want to write about poisonous pedagogy and politicians/politics too later… Or very soon.

Wanted to add some passionate music-pieces... Played by fantastic pianists. Want to share this.

Addition in the evening:
A female Norwegian blogger wrote:

“But the control mania of the citizens’ private-life as we see nowadays seems quite simply morbid. If individual citizens had been as paranoiac as the politicians are, they had been locked up long ago.”

Yes, I think this was quite well said!

Censorship or to censor…

shall one pick seven meadow flowers and put under the pillow tonight? :-)

Thinking loudly this Midsummer’s Eve… Of some reason it struck me once again: what does (or can) censorship mean (on a forum concerning childhood-experiences for instance)?

Also came to think about trusting ones gut feeling. Doing this really reliably you have to have as little as possible unprocessed? At least if you are in a role as responsible and/or with power?? As teacher (in my case), as therapist, as another authority-figure where people are dependent, as moderator etc.? Then you need self-awareness, and need to work on it continually the best one can… Tricky if one has to do it on ones own…

It’s something different in other relations? When the relation is more equal? Then one should trust that gut feeling more? A feeling of uneasiness?

But back to circumstances where one discuss childhood issues: the healthiest leave? If they are rejected once and again, and can’t get through, if they can't get through with for instance their messages and support to people? And it can be those that become rejected too? If the moderator has unprocessed things, of a certain kind, maybe can’t deal with or stand competition? But of course such an explanation and accusation can be used too, against healthier in moderator-positions!!

The most damaged easily get stuck, and maybe more stuck in worse circumstances.

Critics (even honest, fair) of the power can get rejected. And if the rejections aren’t followed with any explanations, what can that cause? Of course there can probably come a border when there is no idea with more arguing, and it can probably be difficult drawing that…

I have also wondered about the thought it’s easy like that to seek oneself to healthier environments. The more hurt and harmed you have become the more difficult that can be. Isn’t it similar to what Miller has written about Helga for instance??? Some also avoid circumstances and relations that would be good?

And of shame (over how one has become treated) you keep quiet… And this only plays he perpetrator in hands. The perpetrator can be quite safe. Horrible.

Trust ones gut feeling, yes, maybe… This is tricky…

What is one censoring?

But all these things can become misused, to manipulate… Too... Yes, Stettbacher is right about protecting the watcher's of life in children, i.e., trying to avoid so the child has to suppress feelings, and thus their ability to see clearly and avoid being used or to use...

my grandma holding one of her grand-children, but how?? It doesn't look comfortable at all for the child!! And my grandma didn't mind being photographed at all - on the contrary! On this picture I think she is 66 years, and on the first in her seventies, or maybe almost eighty? She died in her ninety-first year. My grandpa was 5, 5 years younger he died when he was 85...

Censoring, support…

five cute girls in a willow in Luleå.

A forty-five minutes bike ride in rain…A fifth posting today? Actually not so happy… I met a man on roller skis with a helmet, so I didn’t see his face properly, and not his hair. A tall man. And wonder if it was the father of one of my pupils, a man I met for the first time on Wednesday. He has been totally invisible until now. And I have had his daughter for almost seven years I think. He is a businessman, one of the wealthiest in this county I think. Of some reason this triggered something… Was the drip on something?

Thought on my first posting today: you need support of some kind to confront people, phenomena? You need someone you feel confident with and someone you feel you can rely on, who won’t abandon you… If you feel insecure in many areas of your life you maybe have almost no margins bringing things up. You need at least to have a partner, family, or friend that stands there beside you? But if you don't have any of this, what do you do?

And you need support the more delicate the matter is. Of course you can think that the matters you want to bring up are much more sensitive than they really are. And isn’t it very sad (and can be tragic even) if you don’t challenge this and realize that the topic wasn’t so "hot" as you feared? Oh, I don't find a better expression, don't find the words really!!

Thought about censoring too out there… I was encouraged once by a male therapist not to censor things. My interpretation: not censoring anything. He left the interpretation of what he meant by this to me. And as I didn’t ask about more specified information he didn’t give me it either. And you can imagine maybe what the clever girl did? Started to inform about “everything”. Was it like this with the small girl once? Not allowed having anything secret? Being like an open book to her mom?

I thought about my blogs again and commentators there, including comments I have read on the net since I discovered the blogs and commentator-functions…

The topic censoring by rejecting comments for instance. And doing it with no motivation maybe. Compared to rejecting postings on a forum that is therapy-like…

Thought of what I have read about verbal and emotional abuse, in "What is Abuse?"… And once again what Miller has said and written about the Wall of Silence surrounding an individual by silence and not informing her/him about why what se/he wrote was rejected, what it was that made this… About the possible consequences and outcomes of this.

And what stood in the article “Narcissistic Authoritarianism in Psychoanalysis.” Where it for instance stands:

“Supervisor 2: I was presenting a patient, in my final year of training, whom I liked a great deal. I was speaking of a struggle I had been having with listening to her, connected to my sense that she was defending against a great deal of shame. As a result, she seemed to use at times a very contrived, theatrical persona when she communicated with me, a persona that stood in sharp contrast to what seemed like another aspect of her which emerged in some sessions, a more related, reflective, alive version of her. My patient and I had begun to be able to talk about this, and I was relating this to my supervisor. I repeated a remark I made to the patient, to the effect that I found myself more engaged and connected to the real person than to the theatrical persona. Without waiting to learn how my patient reacted, my supervisor colored, stiffened and said quite sharply, in a tone of rebuke I don’t think I had heard since about 7th grade: ‘And who do you think you are to have said that to her?’ [Addition April 13: I don't really believe in his approach as therapist though; trying to change the client, I want to underline! But that's the psychoanalytical approach, just analyzing, and this is supposed to lead to changes? Through greater awareness? But I think the risk is that it adds self-blame...]

I was a fourth year candidate, and tired of being afraid of my supervisors, no matter how much I was depending on their support, so I raised an eyebrow or two and looked quizzically into my supervisor’s eyes, as if to say, ‘you aren’t really taking that tone with me, are you?’ After a tense momentary standoff, he softened. The supervisor went on to be less reproachful and more facilitative, but we did not return to or try to work through what happened until the following week, when while reporting on the same patient, I let my supervisor know that I was aware, during my session with the patient subsequent to my supervision, of imagining my supervisor negatively judging all of my interventions, including ‘uh huh’ and ‘mmm hmmm.’ Without hesitation, my supervisor said that he was having a stressful day the week before and that I should go ahead and work without imagining him disapproving of me. Although I was the one initiating all the processing of what had happened, I appreciated his concession, and we got on pretty well from there. And yet, I would have to say that my trust was somewhat shaken from that point on.

This supervisor was willing to be accountable for his shaming, intimidating behavior, but only after I brought it up, and only nonchalantly, and with no apology. It is of course entirely expectable that one might slip up and err as a supervisor by being too didactic, or reacting hastily in a shaming way. This can and does happen with most supervisors, sooner or later. But as I see it, the supervisor then has the responsibility to process with the supervisee what has happened, and to repair the disruption. In the absence of such willingness to process, the supervisee, who is likely to be vulnerable to a shaming and intimidating supervisor, may develop more anxiety about disapproval than would already be normally present. His work as he presents it could then become organized around receiving the supervisor’s approval, around meeting supervisory requirements which are subjectively biased toward the supervisor’s particular theoretical and technical preferences, and which are shaped by the supervisor’s narcissistic concerns. The supervisee learns to develop a ‘false supervisee self’ based on compliance. In my view, this also greatly increases the chances that the supervisee will go on to elicit similar results with his patients.”

I can see parallels in other circumstances.

Now ironing some clothes to the concert... Raining even more. Or now it looks like snow mixed rain.

PS. I would actually want to swear (something that usually don't exist in my vocabulary at all!!!). I am so fed up with apologizing for my whole existence. For being so clever, competent and managing despite everything. Positive, glad, understanding, thinking of... And in other occasions I am lousy... Apologizing for that I haven't really broken down yet? Of some reason been standing on my feet, and keeping up a facade?? Apologizing for my background, keeping it secret, hidden. Excusing for all and everything?

It's this with a nail in the foot again? What I have sacrificed - do anyone see this? (does it matter if anyone do? Should it have to matter?) Have been hiding it? Have been able, cleverly, to cook soup on a nail as we say... Satisfied with nothing? Cheerfully smiling?

Actually a student reacted once when I sat there behind the Grand during a very long rehearsal with a choir, patiently...

Am I in the mood for going on the concert, socializing?

In a long article about our grade system and proposed changes in it (again) it stood about research in this area. They wrote about studies that has shown that grades influence the self image: If you get high grades/reports this makes the self image positive and you stop making your best because it isn't needed. If you get low (poor?) reports or grades your self image is affected in a negative way and then you stop trying because it's no idea. So according to this research grades don't stimulate neither those with a positive self image nor the ones with poor. And on top comes self fulfilling prophecies. They are taking it from the wrong angle I think really.

And what is in the bottom of these reactions actually?

Kvinnan tige i församlingen...

Paul the Apostle in the eyes of El Greco respective Rembrandt.

När jag satt och skrev om annat kom jag att tänka på begreppet "Kvinnan tige i församlingen"... Enligt "Bevingade ord ur Bibeln" är detta citat hämtat ur 1 Kor 14:34.

---

Loudly thinking… More about womens' voices (and all people 's voices in the lengthening???).

When I was writing about other things I suddenly recalled the mode of expression and what Paul said about women’s’ role in the church (congregation?), not allowed to raise their voices, they should keep quiet… With this followed renewed thoughts about silencing and censoring forces… And the methods for censoring and silencing… And who let themselves be silenced? And censored? Who don’t care? Who gets the encouragement and support?

“The cat on the rope…” An (un)conscious need to exercise power? To protect oneself against shame-feelings – and the underlying pain? But whose responsibility is that? And how do one handle those things? Especially if one has been silenced and censored , and kept on silencing and censoring oneself? You have to do a hard and tough work? And try to face the pain..? Not easy...

And women behave in this manner too against each others... Women silencing and censoring other women... Maybe not least the last am I thinking of. What triggered this blogpost actually. Quite sourish.

I grew up with two brothers and three sisters... Boys were valued higher I think... (very quietly).

I see a child exploring language, trying new words, using expressions wrong and the reaction in her parents, a look of shame and contempt (contempt for the child and its imperfection, "ofullkomlighet", "icke perfekthet" in Swedish)... Which the child noticed... And experiences like this held the child back step by step? Till it was a doll, as superficial as a doll too!? But intelligent enough to play her role so many got fooled? That about masks... Putting on a mask. Not being ones true self, not being allowed to be ones true self, not good enough if one was ones true self!!?? And still one isn't good enough if one is ones true self? What one true self is?

Miller writes somewhere about parents shame for their children...

It starts early?I am probably blind to a lot, but I come to think of a 6-year-old Emelie... And her look sometimes, of wonders and shame, or what? She plays with a small boy, a boy fixing a lot of things (with two elderly brothers and ambitious parents and grand-parents), a boy fixing more than small boys use to fix.

"Am I good enough? Do I fix this as fast as I 'should'?"

Of course she does. And she is firmly resolved?? :-) Her mother said after she had taken part of her first mini-concert this fall (after only around 6 lessons) that the parents wonderedif she should want (and dare) to play. Oh yes, she should play!! And she did! Bravely! Was in a class of her own when it comes to age. In a room filled with people, more people than I had expected!

And I am also thinking of all sudden side-tracks! :-) What they have done at school, a tooth that is about to get loose... :-) The eagerness to tell (and??? :-)).

What am I mirroring? Her and/or me??

I can also see the small intelligent child being laughed at, and imagine very, very weakly how that felt... Not being taken seriously. Not being good enough. The humiliation...

See further (in Swedish) here and here.

Using the voice you have. What voice you have. And it was a time when we didn't have any words at all either... What did we do then? And it was a period (over several years) when we conquered he language; how was this done?

Why have I chosen this work? I could have gone in my dads path... I am interested in that too... What is this interest for all and everything about too? Is it the true me? And it also struck me again; dad took lessons in singing when he studied to agronomist...

I got the language early!! Started to talk early it is said... And learned to read with no difficulties, and spelled right early. Read and wrote a lot. Together with a lot else... So it isn't a matter of lack of that sort of language!?

Now a cup of tea and a walk in a wonderful winter-day with presentiments of spring!?? And then some work! Hmmm...

PS. Back after a nice walk; told how to dress, how to have it at home, that the photos she has taken was a bit unsharpened, told this and that... From some. I was good at drawing once, I thought of being architect (and also got a place on that program, despite I didn't work hard at the gymnasium)... And when one later doesn't think one is good enough, than that's wrong too... Strange...

Quite ironic...

Defences...

I have been thinking about the topic gurus and power the last months and thought of blogging about it and yesterday I started to search in my books what stands there and found something else (or not?) in the revised edition of Miller's first book "The Drama of the Gifted Child" in the chapter "The vicious circle of contempt [for weakness, for instance in the client in therapy, not recovering as fast or at all as he/she ought to. The, still unconscious, contempt for the small child, not handling things better than it did!!]" (or how is it translated in the English edition?).

At page 151 (in the Swedish edition) it stood something that triggered some thoughts, something in the style:

“The human beings whom had the responsibility for us in our childhood made it impossible for us to develop our awareness (consciousness?). They wanted to prevent (or stop) this because it threatened their defenses.”

I thought further: And it is deplorable if the development of our awareness/consciousness is hindered in our therapies by our therapists because it threatens their (the therapists) defenses. Miller writes that therapists have learned about conscious manipulation, but they aren't always aware of the/an unconscious manipulation...

And it is the latter that is so problematic... If I have understood her right.

An unconscious manipulation neither the client nor the therapist is aware of.

And this is also the problem in other circumstances and relations!?? One example is the relation teacher-pupil, where the teacher (more often than we believe or are aware of) doesn't want to know something that would threaten her/his defenses... There are probably other examples on this... I also came to think about the conception power imbalance, Kirkengen for instance has written about this. And the power imbalance between in first hand physician/doctor and her/his client. About power abuse...

The conception "censoring" also struck me all of a sudden... What is this about? What are we censoring, in others and ourselves, and why? What is actually important and what matters actually?

Quite silently: Hmmm, and that about women's voices... Do they have anything to contribute with or come with? Are the worth listening to and respectfully be met as equals? In a real, genuine exchange on similar conditions, with mutual respect? Where the message is important, more important than how it is said...

But I guess; if you are truly interested in an exchange the form matters less or maybe not at all!!??

There is (or can be??) a lot of competition among musicians... And it isn't so unusual that people say very critical things about others playing for instance... Quite contemptuous things... But who are the most contemptuous? The ones that knows "most"? Who are the most generous and maybe less critical? I don't know if I am unfair now... An maybe is it so that the ones that knows "most" also can afford to be more generous?? I don't know...

I have taken lessons for pianists like Janos Solyom, Käbi Laretei etc. Been in master-class with the Swedish baritone Olle Persson and the Swedish pianist Matti Hirvonen (as 46 year-old woman!!!! Curious on everything, still trying to develop things. That I was accepted for this master-class a summer in the north of Sweden was unbelievable for me...). I have cooperated a little (very little!!) with the singer Erland Hagegård etc. To mention some... All these well-known in music-circles here... And other teachers during my educations...

And I have seen others in action... And of course seen both good and bad things, and probably been blind for things (maybe many things)... And in a way (maybe many ways?) I probably have a lot of respect for some, maybe too much respect!??? Too...

But I don't aspire at all to be well known myself, I am satisfied with how it is. If I had any opportunity to that, any more...

The last fifteen years have been about plain surviving, to different degrees (for ten years it was almost a question of surviving), for keeping the nose above water, despite all supposed (???) advantageous'... Not for developing any skills whatsoever actually... (Including not for developing my English or for communicating on that language). But I kept on working as the clever girl; both on work-things and on personal things (not my English!)...

"Oh, you must have had support!!!"

No, I hadn't, people disappeared... I became very lonely... (blowing my hair in the middle of writing).

Someone wrote to me recently:

"...these matters can be very painful. But having faced them we become stronger."

In the context this was said (actually written) these words didn't feel especially caring or empathic at all. Excuse me, but what bullshit!!?? It doesn't automatically make one stronger. You experienced this for your own good, for to learn!!?? You deserved this, or?

When I was showering now I came to think of blind admiration too... See above, about having too much respect maybe. I have wondered and reacted over woman I have had contact with for a long time, actually a woman in my mom's age (a mother-figure??), over how she resonates and reacts over people in certain positions, how shall I express this; as if they have no faults (or blind spots), as if they are perfect, not really human beings!? One isn't allowed to question them or criticize them!? One of them is a former head for a big company here in Sweden! A man she has had some private contact with, I don't know... Oh, I react so strongly when people admire "fine people", seeing like some sort of superhuman beings, of some reason... Has something to do with my background?

This woman (actually retired teacher!) grew up in a crowd of seven children as the one in the midst, on a farm in the middle of Sweden that has been in the family for over 400 years, fairly wealthy I think. They never starved, and they had opportunities to go further in school-education (opportunities my mom didn't have, coming from the working-class, the lowest working-class too)...

I have tried to imagine how it was, how her (my friends) parents were (my think I learned to know my maternal grandparents to that degree that I can imagine how they were. I was 31 respective 33 when they died, grandmother 90 years and grandfather 87)... How her father was... From what I have read (not least from/in Miller's books). I see an authoritarian father, maybe even totalitarian... And I wonder how her mother was too, actually?? Not so little authoritarian too? Yes, that about growing up in better conditions...

This woman married a man, colleague to us, and they got two children (in my age, or a little younger)... Her husband was alcoholic (as his older brother), but this wasn't something we spoke of at all. We haven't done it at all, not even today we do speak about it (so vital things!!?). And this was some kind of secret at work too!!?? When I came here I was a 23-year old woman, not so secure and not seeing things... Her husband died in cancer (due to his alcoholism, in organs which use to be damaged if you are an alcoholic) when he had just passed 60.

My father could have developed a totalitarian regimen too? But he couldn't really? I try to imagine how it was... There were moderating factors? Mom didn't really allow him?? But she couldn't really protect us!?? She in turn had been beaten (and probably also been exposed to emotional abuse, and maybe even sexual??), her self-esteem was (and is?) very low... But I don't want to idealize her either...

With the years dad changed I think (seen from the child's point of view)... He became more democratic, less strict, in a way?? And much more anxious for things, for us, when we were on the road home for instance, which made me very astonished!! Now he allowed himself to let things to surface more? But not the really vital things??

No, I must do something else than writing... Many threads and sidetracks here?

Giving voice…

And when people at last start speaking up, are trying to use their voices, her/his language, how do you meet her/him? How do you react? On the content? On how it is said, the manner, the form?

Yes, of course, if that person says things in a bad manner and says bad things… Then you react, maybe have to react!!?

Not least my dad had high demands? We should know and manage things at once, immediately!! His patient was limited, and maybe even hardly existing?? We should understand things that possibly had no idea about before and manage things immediately, as for instance when we should learn to cycle... I wasn't old and I had a big bike... Not a child's bike.

That summer we were at my aunt's home when mom and dad where in Germany (but that was the only time they were abroad together), and there I learned to cycle. When mom and dad returned I should proudly surprise them with coming there cycling. I had my aunt's bike (also a big bike, which still stands in an an outhouse where she lived!??). Came down the road, but drove out into the gravel near the ditch and fell. I broke my collarbone and we drove on fairly bad roads to the nearest doctor, 40-50 kilometers away...

When we came home again I helped my aunts husband with throwing firewood down in their cellar, despite I was hurt... The clever girl.

Hmmm, are they better with children who are parents??? Does this automatically make one better with them? If I have no other examples I have my dad??? Father to six children…

And later when you asked for help, had questions, clear; when do you use this expression and when this? What’s the difference between this expression and this? Nuances in language etc. You didn’t get any real answers… That’s really strange! Because the one that got the questions last believes in the ideas of giving children a voice!!!

Was this only (or mostly) rhetorical?

I saw a TV-program long ago, a café-program, where they interviewed a "laugh-therapist", quite sceptical I listened to it… This therapist was an older woman, maybe in her sixties… But in the end I thought she was quite likeable!! SHE was, but I am still sceptical to laugh-therapy and different methods and concepts… She said one thing, that made an indelible expression (!!??) and that was that she admitted that she maybe didn’t live as she learned always!! At that time there was someone in my life that couldn’t really do this? So filled with his own enormous importance (and probably very insecure?) I think. So it was so liberating to hear her, a mature woman saying this!?

And by the way, I think my dad was a little like that, he couldn’t admit wrongdoings?? And treated us as we were dull and not knowing, as there was no idea to really discuss with us... He was educated agronomist, educated at Ultuna, belonging to the University of Uppsala. Now I see that this education is only 4, 5 years! I thought it was 5!! A brother and a sister are agronomists too, and have one year pedagogy on top of this! This means that I maybe have more academic points than they! I didn't believe I had!!! (and we the oldest have the longest and/or prestigious educations of six siblings! A male therapist said something ironical that I mentioned the ones that was "best" educated first, a sigh! But I took us in order... And what does this say maybe? About demands, high demands? But our roads has not been lying there straight... We haven't walked from success to success... And we are all hard-working? A sigh. Not taking a lot of space? Or? Doing our best? I think)

Came to think of “The Tao of Pooh” by Benjamin Hoff, somewhere there it stands about the very quiet voice as you hardly can hear in the beginning, the trick of following it?

It stands something about Hoff that as interesting:

“Hoff grew up in Sylvan, Oregon, where he acquired a fondness of the natural world that has been highly influential in his writing. /…/ Prior to his career in writing, he worked as a tree pruner, antiques restorer, hospital orderly, investigative reporter, photojournalist, recording musician, singer, and songwriter. In his spare time, he practices Taoist yoga and Tai Chi Chuan.”

His website. There it stands that he is not a promoter of his own work!!! And in an essay here he explains why he is leaving his authorship?

Earlier postings on clever child (both in Swedish and in English).

Pippi...

A reflection all of a sudden: Pippi, the rebel, meant a lot for Tommy and Annika?? The two well-mannered children. With her attitude of questioning things, her way of living, her whole appearance... Stockings in two different colors, the shoes and cloths, the red-hair... Slept with her shoes on and the feet on the pillow... Let her horse walk into he house. When she should clean the floors in her house she put the brushes on her feet and skated around there!!

"Can one really do like that???"

Look at the picture below! Tommy and Annika peeping over the fence, with big eyes and dropped chins!!

But how was it actually for Pippi? Under the surface? Did she hide something? Did she sacrifice something? Was she allowed to express everything or only certain things?

"I have my monkey and horse and the house Villavillekulla, and a lot of money..."

Strong independent... Not needy... I wonder with a lump in my throat..

PS. And the grown up world found themselves in this? That a child lived alone in a big house. No, they tried to put Pippi on a children's home, even tried to force her there with the help of two constables, but Pippi refused to be taken there. The constables couldn't handle her. Pippi was so strong so she lifted them up and threatened them with throwing them away. Or did she actually throw them away? I don't remember (how many children wish they could do that or something like that? That they had the strength to protect themselves? Even if it isn't verbalized or thought in real thoughts?).

Of two bad things she choose the less bad; to have the (relative) freedom living in her own house, with her monkey and horse...

And if one should take this further to real life and real children!!?? Struck me...

PPS. And that about women's voices: are they needed to be heard, or...? You can really wonder... Do we need them at all?? Do women have anything to say? Do they have anything to contribute with? Or do only some have something to say? And what is the most important: what you say or how you say it, seen formally...?

When people raise their voices it must be done in a certain way? And even more if it is woman raising her voice? Then she must do it perfectly??? And not so seldom she has these demands on herself too?? Even if she dares to put them aside, or challenge this by nevertheless raise her voice and try to communicate and speak out loud, despite if how she says it isn't perfect seen to grammar etc.

How many voices have been silenced on the road?

And who keep on raising their voices? Not troubled of the impression they make? Who are more bothered an concerned about the outer appearance even if one maybe don't think they do??

Silently wondering... In fact not so gladly...

It has been things on this road, so now it is soon too much???

But my wish and need to express things has been greater than all self-criticism, and it still seems to be a little greater than this criticism... Because after all, I don't think I am totally stupid?? That I don't realize my limitations at all... Because I do? Or don't I?

Once again, concerning my work, research has found that women have more problems with stage-fright than men... What can this mean? Even there women's voices have become silent?

And it's not only talent or capacity that are the prerequisites for a career as musician, I think I read this recently in a book I have referred to on another forum, that you need someone on the road believing in you and supporting you.

And in the music-history men are dominating... And they are still dominating... Even if things are better" there today. And, of course, men also can have handicapping troubles with stage-fright!!!

Who gets (the) support, and who gets less support???

Strikes me now about my youngest brother, during summer-vacation from his education (to medical engineer at college) he worked at hospital. He in fact reacted, with a smile (a little ironic??), that he thought he got differently treated than the young women...

But I am not at all striving for any career in this work!!! I am satisfied with how it is... Sometimes it feels as I would like to move out into nowhere and disappear...

Harshly beating myself, you stupid, lousy, bad... No, not so glad, no...

Working and working, tired to death!!! With this not said that anyone is forcing me! Of course it is "my own fault"!!!

I wonder what this is triggering: people talking above my head, as if I didn't exist? And had nothing to say? As if what I have to say is so shamy?? And the way I do it is too??

Struggling with this, and in fact challenging this side!?

The "funny thing" is that a female physician (psychiatrist and gestalt-therapist), I didn't visit as a client in therapy though, said to me that I should dare to do things less perfect or how I shall express it!! In a similar manner as a young woman sick-paid for exhaustion was encouraged to deliberately spell words wrong when she wrote, to challenge her perfectionism, allow herself to be more human or something like that...

And, what is behind or beyond (??) these perfectionist demands, or the rebellion against them (which doesn't exclude blushing cheeks)? Who help one with this? Who want to know about them? Maybe last of all a physician (the clever girl or boy)??

Astrid Lindgren's Emil, among her all other strong children-figures (many a bit rebellion!?), got a fairly high position in society... A position with societal power... Noone else of her figures did?? Pippi never grew up?? What happened to her?

Earlier postings on disobedient child (both in Swedish and in English).

Boundary violations…

But what is she doing??? (the first meeting?)

[updated January 21 in the end]. Now in the morning I came to think about the topic limit-setting of children of some reason. And thought further on boundary violations and Kirkengen.

Boundary violations take place everywhere!? And have different expressions? Some are visible right away and others are very subtle?

How do we handle them when we meet them, if we meet them? For instance: how do we as grown up protect ourselves? I believe we aren't as helpless and powerless as children are concerning this... Except if we don't land in a deep crisis... Then it can become tricky... I have the book by Marie-France Hirigoyen on mobbing and stalkers. It stands about her that she is (was) nun and that she is psycho-analyst now.

And that you see in her book I think, that she is psychoanalyst I mean. She hasn't shaken this off. Is so brain-washed with Freudian concepts. My gut-feeling is that I doubt she can really contribute to solving what's actually the causes to mobbing and stalking.

I see some parallels to the American neurologist Jonathan Pincus and his research on serial killers, he hasn't shaken all old ideas off entirely either.

But he feels less moralizing than Hirigoyen?? And reading him feels better.

But none of these two say that the criminal, mobber or stalker don't carry responsibility for what they do or have done.

Now back to the original thread: There’s a lot of talk here about limit setting of children… And among grown ups the ones with for example exhaustion-troubles are said to have to learn to pose boundaries… And to learn to know their limits… A bit ironically... (Things are made individual problems. But that’s another discussion). Why do people have problems with boundaries? To pose them (and thus protect them,selves) and/or stepping over others boundaries?

I came to think of the Norwegian doctor Anna-Luise Kirkengen and that she has written about boundary-violations and their effects (if not immediately so later), and the concept revictimization.

There were several references to boundary-violations in her book “Inscribed bodies”, and in the first the concept bio-medicine was mentioned too.

At page 2-4 she writes (my italics):

“Those human conditions which are embedded in interpersonal relations, societal values, and culturally constituted meaning, are, through the very logic of biomedical theory, made invisible. The logic of the dominant methodology also renders them incomprehensible. Finally, they are deemed ignorable or irrelevant since values and meaning are non-issues according to objective science. The result is that the power implicit in social rank and the humiliations of human beings due to abuses of power are turned into non-medical logics, making medicine, inevitably blind to the adverse effects which abuse has on human health [the results of abuse isn’t ‘only’ psychological ill-health to different degrees!]. This becomes even more the case whenever the practice of such abuse is either societally legitimized or culturally taboo./…/

As medicine is a respected societal institution, and in its guise as a science, the normative character of biomedical epistemology accrues crucial influence. It effects central decisions with regard to what is, and what is not, to be considered relevant in drawing medical conclusions. Purporting to apply objective scientific knowledge while actually applying societal norms, medicine as a practice maintains the mandate to define the categories of ill health and malfunctions. By defining these categories, medicine has the right to include any conditions which meet the categorical criteria. Thus, according to the rules of formal logic, medicine also has the power to exclude those conditions which fail to meet those criteria. This distinction between ‘proper’ and ‘improper’ states or conditions plays a role in every medical decision. The norms of biomedicine are embedded in the practice of any medical examination and treatment, and affect every living person who addresses a medical institution in the role of a sick patient. Through application of these norms, distinguishing the ‘proper’ from the ‘improper’ within a formalized societal context, medicine has the power to stigmatize people who ask for help for ‘improper’ conditions. While acting in the name of giving help, medicine may, in fact, violate a person’s dignity. But even those who present apparently ‘proper’ conditions may risk stigmatization if presumably appropriate medical interventions prove ineffective. According to objectifying medical theory, such measures ought to result I a predictable outcome. If they consistently do not, the most probable question is not, ‘what is wrong with medical judgment and medical theory?’ but rather ‘what s wrong with this patient?’ Failures stemming from the foundations of professional judgment, namely medical knowledge acquired by applying rules requiring objectivity, are more likely to be attributed to those whose conditions fails to improve. In other words: Medical norms exclude, marginalize and then stigmatize.”

Side-track: is this the case even more today, with doctors’ limited time with each patient?

And in school: shouldn’t we all try to improve the school in general, together, isn’t this our common concern?

I have cooperated with class-teachers (grade 1-3) as preparation for the music-school. An offer from the music-school, as a way to reach all children, not only those having support from home… To give all children an opportunity to experience the joy of singing, dancing, playing… And maybe make them want to go further, and learn to play an instrument. (I want to add: during all my work life there has been discussions round instrumental education; genres not least, to use the music young people listen to, and to use all the new techniques when it came: synths, computers etc. etc. etc. I am a bit tired hearing about this, as the very ambitious person I am, working and working and trying and trying. Hearing ‘you should this and that!!’ And those saying this, what do they actually know about what I, or we, do?? Quite sarcastically to be honest!!). With the ambitions t give all children an opportunity to become active executors not only passive consumers… Does this sound idyllic, and unrealistic, a stupid dream?

And back to the question limit-setting: why do children and young people have problems with boundaries? How do we handle this?

The best would of course be if we did something as early as possible… The best would be before the child was born; informing about a child’s needs (if we know which they are? For this we probably need to have access to our own history… Which would probably demand a tough, hard work on ourselves, and how many are interested in that?).

I don’t know what is actually possible at school: but with a child acting out on others and in the class-room, what should one do? And what is done actually?

I don’t believe in “obey and keep quiet”! The authoritarian, totalitarian method…

Are grown ups afraid of hearing about actual truths? And/or afraid of having to deal with something they don’t know how to handle? The method of solving this is sweeping this under the rug!???

Is it possible to talk to the child face to face, in person, and explain to it, calmly and not moralising that you can’t do this or that, and at the same time be open to listen??? And to hear!!?? This would probably also require that this grown up has support from other grown ups in the environment, so he/she can keep the professional, empathic stand he/she ought to have??

The sad thing is that this I probably so much easier to talk about than to do… Just because I think we all have experienced things we don’t want to be reminded about…

But from some professionals we are entitled to demand more in this respect: not least from psychologists, therapists of all kinds, probably also doctors and at last people in school…

Silently: personal development isn’t highly regarded or rewarded though… At least from some bosses… I wonder if a more seeing co-worker also can be a little dangerous!!?? The more aware and enlightened this person can see other things and question other things and that is “a bit” dangerous… (or very dangerous straightly said!!??).

So children are at risk of becoming revictimized already in school…

I see parallels to what Kirkengen describes in medicine to the conditions at school. But I don’t work in the “regular” school, only in its outskirts.

Another sidetrack: research has shown that the ones that are more empathic are at greater risk of being burnt-out…

What am I taking on my shoulders? To change the whole world? What is my responsibility? Is this only my responsibility? Can I do this on my own? And what shall I do on my own? What can I do? The first step is to articulate things? To say it out loudly? Test the thoughts in that way? And by this also process my own personal things? Discover what is actually driving me, and by this maybe also deal with things more constructively? Not burdened with a lot of own unprocessed, unconscious stuff? Which can make me behave and handle things maybe both self-destructively and destructively, i.e., harming myself and/or others even if I don't want to do that (which I perhaps do)?

And things I meet: what is about me (and are things I should do something about) and what is not about me, but the other person actually??? What am I to blame for, and what I am not to blame for?

PS. It's convenient with people taking the blame on them, with people blaming themselves?? That about defences... Which are actually protections against old pain Bosch and Jenson mean, and they cause problems of all sorts in grown up life. I think Bosch even writes that they can be life-threatening.

On the label "the Primary defence" (blaming yourself). And the label "defences".

A sigh, how pretentious is this? Escape out on a walk, out into the nature?? Disappear? Become invisible??? As I wanted in my teens... Didn't want to be seen, be visible. So when I got new cloths I didn't want to take them on in school!! Wanted to stay like a gray mouse!? Why?

Hmmm, somewhere when I had passed 30 I started to dare to dress much more personally, with more colors... And here I also started to awake with anxiety! Scary to show who I was? To go out there in life thinking I was someone? I have also noticed that my hand-writing changed somewhere here! I use to write my name on all my music-books also dating when I bought the book in question...

And I wonder if I have a dash of Body Dysmorphic Disorder??

PPS. And, yes, I have done a cosmetic operation (pure cosmetic), a big one (no breast or something like that). Being photographed is something I dislike enormously, and being recorded when I am playing, singing or talking is awful too. I can stand it if I don't have to listen to it... Is this something genetic maybe, as suggested in articles about this disorder? Or how was that child mirrored and viewed? With dislike even ranging to disgust sometimes? The musician Sinéad O'Connor in fact mentions this in an interview!!?? Does she suffer from a slight variant of this disorder?

I see people around, have seen and amazed wondered; what's the difference: all these people having relations, and not seeming to have any problems with this... Despite this and that. And I think it may be so, that it doesn't have to have anything to do with a child's intelligence, brightness, beauty what concern parental love. There exist parents capable of loving a child hpw "faulty" it even may be. And this child grows up with this natural belief that it is valuable, and doesn't care at all about how talented or god-looking it is!? But this is probably fairly rare, that a child is treated i this way, that the parent doesn't need of for certain purposes or for filling her/his needs?

And it also struck me now, when I was to the grocery store (and in no time at all did what I should there, very effectively, with a sigh!), that: is this some sort of competition? Who is most harmed and who is less? Who has had it worse? So the one "more harmed" is in a position where he/she and/or is allowed things the less harmed isn't?? Can it be so? "What do you have to complain about??? You who...!!!"

In a similar manner as the father was excused for this and that, because of his lousy upbringing??

"What do you have to complain about; you with your back-ground, all the opportunities you got and had!!??"

Just this fact, does it give others permission to mistreat? And isn't this fairly contemptuous?? Too!!? What have I done to that person? Just the fact that I exist is enough?? And that I exist as the one I am? I have to take this humbly, full of shame for who and what I am (as if what I am, how I live etc. is something to be jealous about at all!!!). Bow my head and just take it?? Shall I?

And have I done that person something? What in that case? Wouldn't it be better I was told that first??

Deemed beforehand, because I am this and that?? As piano-teacher you are..., as teacher you are..., with your background you are...?

And in fact, I have been very quiet with my middle-class back-ground, with educated parents and all siblings, at work etc. (as if it was something so fine or fantastic!!!), where I come from, about the family, what we had, what we did, what we do...

And this background was no bonus either round 1970 and further... (quite ironical. I wasn't mom and dad!! Was I? I hadn't chosen parents as little as anyone else! And what did I experience? I don't know, surrounded with a lot of hypocrisy!!?? People seeing up, blindly admiring, not imagining what could occur in such a family and with such highly regarded parents? So I wonder if things had to be even more suppressed maybe? And the Denial bigger? In a way? So, I don't know, who has had it worse? As if that give anyone some kind of discharge from liability, quite ironical!!! So discrimination what is that? All my life having to excuse and apologize and hide...? And frankly, those who don't understand this can take them in their asses!!! I try the best I can, have always done, and tried not to make any differences on people, whether I have succeeded or not!! And I stand on the "weak's" side, and have always done, but today I do in another way, hopefully?).

I bought two bouquets of tulips in the store... Now some tea and then a walk. When I return home some lunch. Thought I should bake root-crops in the oven, but the oven has to get warm first... A late lunch - again!!

Addition: as if the "more harmed" has rights the "less harmed" don't have!!?? How one measures this actually? And is this some sort of competition either, or? But grown ups between; both have the same rights and responsibilities?? And you ought to be entitled to demand the same treatment, a similar respect etc.?? Or?

Addition January 21: see earlier blogposting on empathy deficits and biomedical scientists.

Master suppression techniques...

In another circumstance I searched on the Master Suppression Techniques and found this, translated to English:

"The Master suppression techniques were a framework articulated by Berit Ås to describe five means by which women are or were subjugated in Western patriarchical societies.

The techniques are:

• Make Invisible [surround that person with silence for instance, as if she/he doesn't exist?]
  
• Ridicule
• Withhold Information
• Damn If You Do And Damn If You Don’t
• Heap Blame and Put to Shame"

The roots to this, to this need (whether it's conscious or not)? If I had time I would refer to things Ingeborg Bosch has written I think... The need of bullying (spela översittare).

But I want to add that Ås has pointed out that the use of these techniques can occur not only men towards women, but also women between etc. Used when someone need to exercise power, maybe feel more powerful and knowing, put her/himself above whether it is conscious or unconscious...

What legitimacies bullying of any kind? How big or small, even the most subtle... Can one blame early childhood abuse? And who is responsible for that early abuse actually? And later: is that early abuse to blame for what you do or say, for your actings today? Some small, silent wonders...

Hmmm, that about being well mannered... And what is actually done for my own good? Of real care? Of real concern? What matters and what is important actually?

PS. I have written a blogposting about "Women's voices"... About singing-technique and being able to raise your voice (even technically), even if singing is something I just slightly touched upon in my two music-educations. Over whose voices are dominating, everywhere, even on the net (and who is listened to and seen and heard?).

And it is a bit funny that I have been method-trained in teaching singing... I don't think I know much there... But enough to reflect on these topics (do I know anything about anything I wonder silently?).