Mechanics Of A Taker!

[ladee]

I may totally be misreading some of this. I feel for many of us, there is a fine line between expressing our self, venting, and sharing, as opposed to 'labeling'. It is human nature to put a label on something we need to avoid or something we truly enjoy... Skull and crossbones is universal label of letting people know this is poison. Because someone took the time to label it.So we know to stay away from it.
I feel sometimes it is simply 'semantics' , ways we express our self or our situations. I don't feel,especially with the majority of people here on this forum,that we throw labels around. We are simply expressing how others have done damage to us, knowingly on our part or not. And we 'label' it to warn or enlighten others.
Without 'labels' to identify what has the potential to cause harm, how do we know what to look for? How would we learn to untangle our self from these people.
I am a 'giver' by nature. Surely a great part of that is to justify my taking up space on this earth. My core belief is that I am "worthless". In all the work I have done for over 25 years... I always end right back at that belief. Real or not, it is what it is... and 'takers', did the harm and the twisting of my mind to make me so in their world. I was too young to say NO... even if I had, no one was listening. Because it did not fit their agenda..
Like anything else here on the forum, we take what we need and leave the rest. We can't share how we feel or see the world without using 'labels'. I don't feel we are saying all takers have a specific 'label'. We are using words that are available to us. My son is a 'taker', and God knows thru the years I have tried to put a label on him so I could have a starting point to understand what I needed to do to take care of myself in this situation....
So with all this rambling, my point is, we are human first. And if a 'label' helps us to help our self , then great !!!
At the end of the day, we are responsible for our own interpretation of anything... be it visual, heard, or internalized. But I do need help identifying the dragon I am trying to slay.

 

[Nevermore]

People really just need to be aware, and if you get taken, WHO is really to blame?????

In my humble opinion, the one with the bad motivation, the taker is to blame for
1. Having bad motivation
2. Causing yet more distrust and disillusionment in a world where there is already too much of both
It's sad that we have to learn not to trust other human beings.
It's the truth but I personally have no respect for people who perpetuate this.
At the same time, I too have learned to be very discerning with people and trust very few.
Still the world would be s better place without those who prey on the naivety or good will of others.
I could never say the one who gets hurt is to blame for not being mistrustful or wary enough - and in many cases, as has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, a simple "no" has not been enough to stop another from taking what they want through force.

 

[Deleted member 34535]

Again, I will say that you can not be used unless you allow it. "No" is a complete sentence. What I thi...

She Cat, I think that your point needs to be clarified. In asking the Question, "Who is to blame, the giver or the taker," and in asking the question a number of times on your thread, you infer that it is the giver's responsibility for giving to the taker. I think you are 100% correct if we are acknowledging that the giver is fully aware that they are giving to the taker and keep on doing it. However, in my own situation, and many others, we are not aware of what we are doing. As I explained in the original thread, I gave ceaselessly because my anxiety as well as the rest of my mental health diagnosis made it impossible for me to actually see what I was doing much less process it logically. Many of us like myself had anxiety so high, it felt as if we were plugged into a 220 volt socket. For myself, prior to age 50 where i obtained the Drug Lithium which slowed me down enough to see things clearly, I had no idea I even had such high anxiety of any anxiety at all. I lived my whole life this way, so I just thought this was the way things were. Once I took the Lithium, everything was as clear as a bell for me.
And once everything was clear for me, I did exactly what you inferred would be the correct thing to do. I have gotten rid of 3 DNA family members. I will not have anything to do with these losers ever again. You did fine She Cat in your explanation. I just think you should have stated that those who are aware that they are being used have to take the bull by the horns and not allow these creatures to do this to them. But trust me, there are many others who are not aware. This was the entire point of my making this thread. If I could jog something in someone's mind so they would recognize some of the traits of a taker, then maybe they would see it and act on it accordingly. Blessings to all!!

 

[Deleted member 541]

@crc53liamt In my opinion...... Anyone that willing gives to someone really can't turn around and the blame the taker. Believe me, I have given, given and then given more. But honestly I can't turn around when I finally figured out that the person I gave to wasn't really worthy, to then blame that person. Mental health issues or not, I willingly gave. So in my opinion, then I only have myself to blame.

 

[Friday]

..... Anyone that willing gives to someone really can't turn around and the blame the taker.

Yup. Otherwise it wasn't the taker being manipulative, it was the giver. Only willing to give IF they get the response they wanted to make happen by giving.

Being nice for the sake of being nice? Neutral.
Being nice so someone else will be nice to you? Or for any other return? Manipulative.
Getting angry that your manipulation didn't work? It's own set of problems.

The easy end run around being used? As you've said; Only give so much as you're willing to with no return. If there IS a return? Awesome :D Bonus. If there isn't a return? No skin off your nose, because you weren't doing XYZ in order to get something else, but because you wanted to be doing it.

Both givers and takers can be (negatively) manipulative.
Both givers and takers can be direct, or passive aggressive.
Both givers and takers can be abusive.

IME it isn't the give&take. It's the demands&intent&methods.

 

[Deleted member 34535]

Shecat and Friday, nobody here is talking about blaming the taker. The goal is for givers to recognize who takers are and to stop giving to them so they can stop being taking advantage of. And if anyone is going to attempt to equate that givers and takers are on a level playing field and deserve mutual respect, than you are on a different universe that I am on.

 

[Friday]

And if anyone is going to attempt to equate that givers and takers are on a level playing field and deserve mutual respect, than you are on a different universe that I am on.

Quite possibly. I believe very strongly in social services; education, healthcare, disability, grants, fellowships, charitable organizations, food banks, homeless shelters, and other programs & investments where people in need take, with absolutely no guarantee of return to the giver. If your belief is that everyone needs to look out for themselves and never take anything from anyone, or they aren't deserving of equal respect as to the people giving to those programs? Givers to be lauded, takers to be scorned? Completely different universes.

 

[GrayOwl]

Recipients of social services accept that which is given.
We're discussing "takers" who step outside of socially accepted behavior by using deception, lies, intimidation, force - other generally unacceptable acts - to "take" what is not theirs to take or have.
A nice balance on "give and take" a nice relationship doth make. It's that imbalance that puts some of us here and gives us much to talk about.

 

[Nevermore]

Hmmm I'm not sure we're all talking about the same thing! I thought it was about people who are all about themselves and people who are actively malicious, how to recognise and avoid them.
If I give to someone it's because I like them, no other reason. If they turn out to be a different person than I thought they were, I don't feel like giving no more.
That works for me

 

[Nevermore]

Quite possibly. I believe very strongly in social services...where people in need take, with absolutely no guarantee of return to the giver. If your belief is that everyone needs to look out for themselves and never take anything from anyone, or they aren't deserving of equal respect as to the people giving to those programs? Givers to be lauded, takers to be scorned? Completely different universes.

Who is saying here that anyone is giving with and perhaps expressly for a return??
That's a whole different thing!! Called manipulation
I strongly prefer givers to takers - but each to their own!!

 

[Deleted member 541]

@crc53liamt I am a bit confused! You said that no one here is talking about blaming the taker, and yet in your original post you called takers.....CREATURES, EVIL, PARASITES, and you said that they abuse people and they turn you against others......

So are you just name calling or are you placing blame??? Because if we're doing that, then I guess that the people being used by the takers are weak, pathetic, useless, and they deserve what they get.

Seriously I'm confused and I think you need to clarify exactly what this thread is all about....

 

[Deleted member 541]

@FridayJones Agree with you 100% and if I could like your post 1000 times I would have.