Confronting Fear Without Minimizing?

[scout86]

Technically, I think of myself as "bullet proof and invisible" so I like to minimize the use of the word "fear" as applied to ME. But..... this is kind of a long story. I'll try to condense it as best I can.

My T has commented that he's "not sure I could dissociate if I wanted to". I've had an event or 2 that I'd definitely call a flashback, but even then it was like being in two places at once, not like being someplace else. He's also said that it seems like most of my memories are stored and re-experienced as first person events. (He says that most people, when they "remember" a normal event, "see" it kind of like watching themselves in an old movie. I thought he was making that up, but have asked a few apparently "normal" people and their version matches his.)

So, I'm looking at a piece of property just down the road. Went over there over the weekend, with a friend, to walk around and look at the land. We came on a planted bunch of pine trees that I didn't know was there. My friend was headed towards walking through them....... I had seen something VERY much like this woods in the past and it wasn't in a good situation. I stopped walking and there was a few seconds there of "remembering", and knowing where I was, and that this was a different place, a different time, and a different situation but.... Definitely creepy! (But I could have gone in there if I'd wanted to, I just didn't want to right then.) We changed directions and went on.

But, I thought about this afterwards and decided to send my T an email about it. Not a big deal, but I thought he might find it interesting and thought that maybe, for a change, I'd let HIM decide what he thought was relevant.

He had a lot to say. He does this "parts" stuff, that generally makes me roll my eyes. His idea is to have a meeting of these "parts", talk the situation over, come up with a plan, and the collectively make peace with the woods. More or less. He says it can be fun. (He may be blowing smoke!) I asked if he was really sure that there actually ARE parts. He, emphatically, said "Yes!"

OK, I know I can do this, as long as I don't take it seriously. After all, we're just talking about a bunch of trees. I know I can bluff my way through it, because it's not THAT big a deal. I kind of get what he means about the "parts" stuff, but I'm not real enthused about it. (What if they don't like me? THEN what do I do?) Am I crossing a line into minimizing, in the process of taking this approach? In a more general sense, how do people over come fear, with out minimizing it? (Not that I'm afraid of a bunch of trees, mind you!)

 

[Deleted member 1860]

It sounds like he is taking an IFST stance to parts as opposed to a DID stance to parts. It can be confusing! I've done a bit of parts work and it can be very revealing. And its not about your parts not liking you since its not a DID concept of parts. The parts are all your feelings and thoughts, etc. I don't know how helpful it is going to be to go and talk to a bunch of trees before you have even identified your parts. Identification is usually one of the first steps of parts work, and then you make a tree of how they are all related, and then they can all associate with one another. I'm sort of skeptical about you just going out into the woods and thinking the parts work is going to suddenly reveal something seeing as you haven't done the foundation work yet, but that's just my thought on it all.

 

[joeylittle]

It sounds like he is taking an IFST stance to parts as opposed to a DID stance to parts.

Just curious - do you mean Internal Family Systems vs. Dissociative Identity Disorder?

(He says that most people, when they "remember" a normal event, "see" it kind of like watching themselves in an old movie. I thought he was making that up, but have asked a few apparently "normal" people and their version matches his.)

This is fascinating to me. I cannot remember things from any other position than first person; I've tried, because it would make some memories more manageable - but I really can't, with any event.

OK, I know I can do this, as long as I don't take it seriously. After all, we're just talking about a bunch of trees. I know I can bluff my way through it, because it's not THAT big a deal. I kind of get what he means about the "parts" stuff, but I'm not real enthused about it. (What if they don't like me? THEN what do I do?) Am I crossing a line into minimizing, in the process of taking this approach? In a more general sense, how do people over come fear, with out minimizing it?

I don't think you're minimizing, I think you are showing a healthy skepticism of a process that you don't quite buy into 100%. In other words, you're not making your fear smaller, you're making his suggestion smaller. I've never been able to conquer a fear of something by mentally minimizing it (and I'm a big minimizer!) - just the tension of trying to tell myself something isn't a big deal while my amygdala is giving me completely different warning signs - well, it just doesn't work, and I'd question whether you'd actually be able to overcome fear that way. I think you could force yourself to tolerate fear that way, but those are two different things.

I think no matter how you do it, the only way to deal with fear is to go through what you're afraid of; and you can do that very gently or very aggressively. But once you've done the thing once, assuming you had some choice in the doing of it, the second time you do it it will be at least marginally less terrifying. Or almost not terrifying at all. Depends on the thing. That's my two cents.

Edit to add: I don't know if this is the same for fear of flashback, specifically, not fear of the content of the flashback. But it seems to me like flashback and dissociation is not a thing one "chooses" to do, and in the straightforward confronting of fear, I profoundly believe that the individual does have to have choice in the matter. If someone forces me onto a roller coaster I will be more terrorized. If I choose to get on the roller coaster, I might still be scared out of my wits, but I don't think it will make me worse. I might not perceive getting better, but if I went on another 5 times, same coaster, it would get better.

 

[arfie]

Another invincible one here... At 60, I still seldom have enough sense to know when I SHOULD be afraid. I fear no evil in the Valley of Death for I am the meanest female dog in the Valley... :devilish: Approaching the ability to see the humor in it...

An example from my personal experience down this road is my light trigger. I was never afraid of actual security lights still proliferating in my suburban paradise, but I was terrified of the memories they were bringing to the surface. Not a small trigger here in the Light Ages...

My own approach is to begin with non-judgmental awareness and observation. E.g. When I first began triggering out of control at night lights, I honestly did not know what fears were being pulled by them. They had been repressed for a very long time. Insufficient data. Through a long process that might or might not be similar to your T's "Parts" analogy, I uncovered the root memories and found them fully valid. One of those bodies of things we SHOULD be afraid of. Once the root fears were identified and validated, I can now keep them separate from the old guy building his light show across the street in the here and now. The children living through the same horrors today deserve someone being aware that we SHOULD be afraid for them. Child pornography is still proliferating... Not all old guys dressing their perfect lawns in hot, harsh lights are child pornographers or pedophiles. Now I can even act like it.

Don't know if I am making sense, or not, but for sure I want to offer you support while you sort.

 

[Jane.l]

Would love to say something mind shatteringly helpful after all your support - but don't really know much about the part thing and yes talking to the trees doesn't seem terribly helpful but who knows? - it's ok to be skeptical - I did read/see/hear something that sounded helpful on the parts thing - will see if I can remember . Will get back to you if it's mind shattering :)

 

[The Albatross]

Okay, what's wrong with minimizing (rationally) a fear? I do this often.

 

[The Albatross]

Did you mean bullet proof and invisible or bullet proof and invincible? I bluff my way through uncomfortable situations as a matter of course, giving more credence to the present situation than my comfort level and how it relates to a previous trauma. My mother tries to use invisible and it does not work.

 

[Hashi]

I've had an event or 2 that I'd definitely call a flashback, but even then it was like being in two places at once, not like being someplace else.

I wouldn't call this a flashback. I'd call it a memory. I'm not sure of your reason why you would definitely call it a flashback... what definition are you using?

I know I can do this, as long as I don't take it seriously. After all, we're just talking about a bunch of trees. I know I can bluff my way through it, because it's not THAT big a deal.

Not take it seriously, bluff... why bother? You'd only be faking it.

In one way I think there's minimising here, but it seems a very conscious sort of minimising. Usually minimising is a subconscious process. You seem to have a lot of awareness of doing it. Which makes me wonder, like with flashbacks, what your definition of minimising is?

If I'm very honest, there's minimising and there's avoidance. I suspect it might be worth putting the idea of minimising to one side and considering defensive avoidance a bit more.

 

[scout86]

@Hashi, flashback what I THOUGHT a flashback was is experiencing (in this case seeing) something from a past event like it was happening in the here and now, when, in objective reality, it isn't. In this case, I know for sure I was the only person present who was seeing what I was seeing.

As far as being aware of minimizing, what I'm aware of is that some of the way I interpret some some events other people define as "minimizing". For example, a couple of weeks ago, I got kicked by a horse, hard. She just missed my knee and left a huge bruise. In relating this story, I commented that I was lucky, because I could have gotten hurt. (I was relating this to my T,) He waited briefly, like he was expecting me to say something else, then said, "Well, you DID get hurt." I disagreed and said it was "just a bruise". He said that, while it was true that I could have been hurt worse, it was also true that I got hurt. He said bruises count. I get his point, I guess, but I still think I was lucky I didn't get hurt. The way I see it, I have a choice there between looking at it as a big deal and looking at it as "nothing but a thing." I pretty much always go with option 2.

@The Albatross , I meant invisible. If they can't see you, they can't get you. LOL

@Solara , you've got the right idea on his approach to the "parts" thing. He says he's actually not sure that DID exists as anything other than an extreme extension of "the parts of your personality". I can see where the lines between some of this stuff amounts to how you chose to define things.The "talking to the trees" deal wasn't something he said. That was me, mostly being frustrated because I don't quite get the "parts" thing, but he seems to think it's not only real but important. I emailed him a couple of questions and got a reply. Here's part of what he said,
"This isn't some event to get over with. It is a process of information processing you want to become a thinking /planning /experiencing skill."

I HAVE been thinking about this and I have a plan. I don't know that it has anything to do with "parts", but I have a different way of looking at this now and can hardly wait to get a chance to go back and see it this works. Among other things, he'd like me to be able to "visualize" things. By that he apparently means close my eyes and see actual pictures/movies of stuff I plan to see. I can't do it (he would want me to add "yet"). If I could, I could practice this sitting at home in my chair. I can't, so I've practiced about as much as I can without going out into the real world.

So, here's the plan. I can anthropomorphize pretty much anything. Like trees. Maybe they're actually nice, friendly trees. They obviously have nothing to do with my past, they aren't the same trees. Even if they were, for all I know the original trees might have been totally on my side. But, they couldn't do anything to help me, even if they'd wanted to. They're TREES. They can't walk and they can't wack someone over the head, you know? So, I going back to see if they might be friendly trees after all. Besides that, I've been paying attention the past two days, there's something really different about the way these trees look. I'm not sure what it is and now I'm curious.

I think this is going to make the trees into a none issue. But, I don't know that it accomplishes that "way of processing information" I'm supposed to be developing into a skill. And I still don't know that I think there are "parts".

@Solara, did you have any trouble sorting "parts" out? How do you go about identifying them? My T makes it sound like they just show up. Honestly, I find the idea kind of creepy. (Which might be part of why I have trouble with it?)

@joeylittle , I'm kind of glad to hear someone else has the same experience. What you said about being able to do otherwise being helpful in managing memories is exactly the point, I think. I still have a hard time believing it's for real when he talks about being able to "watch yourself" do stuff. But then, I can't "watch" stuff happen if I can't "visualize" anyway. Can you close your eyes and "see" things you want to see? Like your car, or a flower, or something? If I can do it at all, I get totally random images of things I've never seen. He's asked me to try to visualize one of my horses, who I've known for years and I can't do it. Other people tell me they can, so I guess he's not making this up.

 

[The Albatross]

Hmmm. Try as I might (and I do at times) I have yet to be invisible. Our problem though, typically isn't minimizing... it's magnifying. Hope you get what you need Scout.

 

[scout86]

I did go back to that bunch of trees. What I found wasn't what I expected AT ALL. It looks nothing like what I "saw" the week before. Well, there's SOME resemblance, I guess. There ARE pine trees, planted in rows. And it IS dark under them. Wrong kind of pine trees, wrong everything else. So, I followed my original plan, sat under a pine tree for awhile, listening to the wind, and smelling the smells, and contemplating the strange nature of "reality".