Log In
Home
9:32 am
September 30, 2010
Offline
Hello, all --
Thewall, you wrote on another thread: "last time i checked, this was not a debate websight."
I feel like I need some clarification about what kind of site this is, exactly...I've been involved in various sorts of sites, some more "supportive", some more "debate", and some "whatever" (just chatting, hobbies, etc.). My original reason for posting here was to ask what modality of counseling would be best for dealing with a certain problem. I was warmly welcomed, but no one seemed to have any feedback toward that end.
Healthy debate is great, but when people degenerate to "all gays are this" and "all Muslims are that" and assorted personal attacks, it's my feeling that the site becomes an unsafe place to ask for support and talk about scary, painful and intimate things. I am guilty of the attacks as well, on the gay thread. The Guest and Tez thing is downright spooky to me, as allusions have been made to knowing about each other in person. I know someone who was found by an online enemy in real life and it's scary shit.
Even the support side can be judgmental. More than once I've seen people unjustifiably diagnosed as codependents by their peers after just one post and told what to do. I'm not perfect and I know I've been guilty of doing this too, if not here than elsewhere.
I don't really know where I'm going with this or what I'm asking -- I think I'm just wanting to explore how a "safe place" can run parallel with a site where people argue over issues. Is it possible to do? I hope I made some sense and that others will share about this.
9:51 am
September 29, 2010
Offline
SpecialK,
"Even the support side can be judgmental. More than once I've seen people unjustifiably diagnosed as codependents by their peers after just one post and told what to do. "
I (and others)have protested against this for years....sometimes nicely, sometimes not so much, all to no avail.
Unfortunately there will always be those that think they know the answers for everyone else and nothing anyone else says or does is going to change that.
I know for me, this site was a blessing. It helped me more than I can express in words. My best suggestion to you or any one else here is to "take what you like and leave the rest". Keep the focus on yourself and your recovery. Allow yourself to hear the truth even when it hurts or feels unconfortable
(which contrary to what some believe the truth CAN be told without judging, shaming, diagnosing or dictating) and always remember that recovery is a journey, not a destination.
Good luck to you. I hope you find the answers and healing you are looking for.
Lolli
10:10 am
>> I think I'm just wanting to explore how a "safe place" can run parallel with a site where people argue over issues. Is it possible to do?
Really good question. I'll say that people will always have different opinions and biases and they'll all come into play even on the Support side.
A safe place for me is where personal attacks are not made and where two adults can discuss things without taking it personally.
>> More than once I've seen people unjustifiably diagnosed as codependents by their peers
What goes on subconciously in these people's mind and what they would/could never admit is:
Its the "I'm an addict but I have 2 years experience under my belt dealing with it. You're a greenhorn and you're new to the game, I'm better than you. Sit here now and listen to someone who knows more than you"
Its the classic "I'm better than you" thing that everyone including perhaps me likes to do. Another less critical way of looking at it though is: its easy for people to label someone co-dependent when support is expected from them. Its a quick fix for that expectation. Its harder to individually evaluate everyone.
Personally I dont believe in this Co-dependent label at all. To me its an invalid term. Its just a group of behaviors and all of them stem from low self-esteem. Thats the root problem.
11:47 am
September 30, 2010
Offline
Special K good point. I believe that expressing oneself is one thing, Discriminating against an entire group of people is another.
I believe that discrimination violates the judging guideline and putting guests nick name out their in the name of soliciting negative comments is an attack.
As far as the co-dependent thing is concerned if you are here then you probably are.
11:58 am
September 30, 2010
Offline
guest-guest- I agree folks here are in all stages of recovery. Some choose not to recover they are simply exploring the possibility and some are recovered gurus.
Some want to take what ever worked for them and insist that it can be applied to everyone else.
Diagnosing is legally only in the scope of a professionally licensed person.
I have gotten a lot of help here. Especially in the area of overcoming denial and learning what this thing called co-pendency, drug addiction and alcoholism was all about.
3:57 pm
September 29, 2010
Offline
marypoppins
13-Apr-09
The SC wrote:
site coordinator 13-Apr-09
"...But in truth, I have been hoping for years that GG would learn and grow out of this ‘trashing everything’ point of view/state of mind, or whatever it really is. I honestly don’t know, and it doesn’t matter. The resulting crap is the same.
GG – I’ve asked you to stop the negativity and horse-beating of threads and ideas that has become not only common practice with you over the years, but now, it’s 99.9% of what you do on these threads.
I don’t like it. It’s not healthy for you, these boards, or anyone who comes here. Myself included. I want you gone for me and the sake of the site. No one should be asked to tolerate you or stay in spite of you. In my opinion, you have defiled good sense and healthy dialogue far too long."
We have to trust that the SC has a vantage point that we don't have. Perhaps we believe we "know" something, based on our experiences and interactions with certain posters, but not one of us has the perspective the SC has.
The SC seems to want this site to be a healthy place. I don't always know what's healthy and what's not. I don't think it's going out on a limb to say that a lot of us developed a high tolerance for craziness growing up.
I trust that the SC knows more about recovery and health than I do.
Mary
4:04 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Thanks, Lolli. I'm not sure I'm going to find what I need regarding my childhood abuse here...but there's a lot of good discussion around here. Some of the spiritual threads especially look so interesting -- I wish I had more time in my life to really digest them...
4:15 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Guest -- I definitely believe in "codependency", but I do NOT believe in the disease model. If CD were a disease, science would be lookin' for a cure. I learned how to settle for less and I can learn something new, though it might take awhile. I went to Al-Anon/Coda and believe that the meeting aspect offers a "quick fix", "one size fits all" approach that is in large part surfacey and does not stick. I denied myself for years going to those meetings, sat in a room with my sponsor who wanted me to date her husband's player friend and gave her my fifth step, in which I listed "defects" such as "reads too much instead of going out" "thinks too much" "can't forgive her mother for allowing her to be abused".
Counselors have credentials for a reason!!!
4:16 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Well, Destiny, I agree with your first part and not your last. Why do you think everyone here is codependent?
4:22 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Mary -- thanx for your post, not ignoring you, just gotta get some things done before i leave work. Maybe I'll post more tongiht if I have time...
Thanks all for sharing
7:12 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Special K- In my opinion most people that come here have a problem that they are looking for an answer to. They need help, request help, seek help, help others. Obtain help. From my perspective the people here depend on others to solve their problems or on other peoples problems. Maybe labeling the person with a generic term is inappropriate cause it doesnt take the individual into consideration.
8:56 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Hi, Mary --
I can see the site cooridnator having a vantage point as far as running the site. Sometimes indeed it becomes necessary to ban someone, etc. I don't feel that she necessarily knows more about mental health than me, even though I definitely experienced a lot of craziness growing up. Maybe I would think so if she participated more in discussion, but since I haven't seen her posts I really can't tell that.
It's not hard for me to understand why someone who was fighting as Guest has been was banned. Sometimes there's just no choice when people are fighting and the admin just has to call it if he/she still wants people to come to his/her site. What is harder for me to understand is why the remarks comdemning gays were allowed to stand and why people are free to tell others they're going to hell or that they are codependent, narcissitic, etc...
I don't want to keep on beating the drum and whatnot. Site is what it is. I'm just sharing my piece.
Thanks to everyone for sharing...
8:57 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Thanks, Destiny... 🙂
9:26 pm
September 27, 2010
Offline
SpecialK,
Yeah - I too have wondered - like you said.....
"What is harder for me to understand is why the remarks condemning gays were allowed to stand and why people are free to tell others they're going to hell or that they are codependent, narcissitic, etc....."
Couldn't agree with you more!!!!!!
Double-standard here - perhaps?????????
Maybe?
Makes you wonder - doesn't it?
(Hell - makes ALL OF US WONDER.....you know?)
Shaking it up.
Stirring it up.
....shaking it ALL UP......upside down and right-side up and all the way around......our own belief system(s) - turned upside-down and right down there to the very itty-nitty-gritty core....as it were!!!!!
The real story..........
(shrug)
Who cares so long as the 'status-quo' continues.....you know?
Just don't muss-up too much the status-quo.
Personally, I have always thought that this site had more integrity than that........
Maybe I was wrong....
(Certaintly wouldn't be the first time, afterall!!!!!!)
tBt
11:20 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Tbt,
Actually, I have thought the fighting that was allowed to go unchecked at this site was the status quo. I was surprised at and consider the decision the SC made today to be shaking things up.
1:56 am
September 27, 2010
Offline
Special K, I too was wondering. "why the remarks comdemning gays were allowed to stand and why people are free to tell others they're going to hell or that they are codependent, narcissitic, etc..."
It down right shocked me. Is that the norm for this site?
2:14 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
Y'know what occurs to me...
If we all, each one of us, stayed in the "I" -- "I believe" "I feel" "I think" I venture to guess that a messload of hate n' discontent would be avoided...
2:31 pm
September 27, 2010
Offline
AMEN!
2:59 pm
September 29, 2010
Offline
how about no more, "the bible says..."? the bible doesn't make anyone more credible than another or anyone more right than another
Mary
3:20 pm
September 27, 2010
Offline
Mary, if your post was in reply to my amen response, I meant amen as, so be it, or you can say that again. If you were not replying to my post, (totally possible) I am sorry to have read too much into what you were saying.
3:36 pm
September 29, 2010
Offline
So they say,
No, I meant it to anyone and everyone. Seems quite a few arguments come about because someone quotes the Bible - as if he/she has God on his/her side, so that makes the person right. It doesn't.
The Bible may mean something to some people but nothing to others. Therefore, using it to give oneself more credibility is meaningless.
If people are interested in truly open and honest communication, they keep the discussion in the first person and they keep it secular, as we should in society and in the workplace.
Mary
4:19 pm
September 30, 2010
Offline
ITA Mary!
5:33 pm
September 29, 2010
Offline
Mary,
Maybe it would be better to use a better way of communicating as you suggest in your post first person, "I think", "I feel" rather than pointing the finger and saying "you". Those who believe in the Bible find it difficult to keep it secular, but I agree there should not be any judgements and I can see how some posts come across as being better than, however in my heart of hearts, I hope that I have not offended anyone by my belief system. And I do have to say this though, your statement about those "using the Scriptures to give oneself more credibility is meaningless".. reminds me that the same was referred to Jesus. It gave Him more credibility to people who followed Him, but was meaningless to everyone else. Don't take offense, just sharing a brief epiphany. 🙂
5:44 pm
September 29, 2010
Offline
OMW,
I can't afford to live in that kind of bubble. That's what it would be in my life. I work with people from different cultures, countries, religions - I couldn't be so alienating. Whether I find it difficult or not, there's a public persona, a separation of "church" and "state". You'd likely feel uncomfortable with a Moslem who was compelled to refer often to the Holy Koran and treat you as if you're either part of "chosen" or out of the loop. That person could claim to just be so full of Allah's happiness that he HAS to share. How comfortable would you feel in that environment? It seems selfish and indulgent to me. Self control.
Unless someone works in a religious place, religion needs to be kept out. It's common courtesy. No need for drama about it. No need for talk of persecution. It's just tolerance and separation of "church" and "state" and respect for others, in my opinion.
Mary
31
1 Guest(s)
