Pity Parties

[doc leda]

There are also so many, all of differing views. People choose a developmental theory/s based on what clings to them best. What feels most comfortable with them.

What ever happened to just talking Doc? What ever happened to just expressing yourself, without trying to analyse what the other person is saying? Support is just that, support. Life cannot be a constant analysis to the nth degree when listening to others. The "others" would soon no longer be listening, and instead opting for someone to just talk with them, not analyse them.

Don't get me wrong doc, you're obviously a very intelligent person, just saying... when does academia take a back seat to common-sense and honesty!

Wow, a lot in there and a very thoughtful line of enquiry.

What clings to them best and feels comfortable can be either healthy or unhealthy. The opportunity to change what has clung to yourself begins with understanding the healthy and unhealthy things that have clung and to strive towards a healthy goal or outcome. Is there a benefit, a time or a place where it is helpful to learn to be analytical in how we think about ourselves and others? It is ok to accept criticism and punishment, and to not be allowed to express ones emotions because that is what we have known, what is familiar and what has clung to us? Is this healthy or unhealthy?

If we do not learn to analyse our own and others reactions there is little that can be understood in a conversation because we become consumed by words and unable to look beyond them. Learning to analyse oneself and others has a time and place, and much of this in real life becomes non-verbal and subconscious. Without analysis and understanding that others have been through a development stage themselves and have attributes and behaviours that also cling to them, then talking exchanges increase and arguments are less heated and the end outcome of healthy thinking for both parties can more achievable.

There are many styles of talking. These may include discussion, argument, venting and the list goes on. Support is as complex as the many talking styles. There is further complexity when we have different relationships - a relationship with a therapist, a partner, family members, a friend, a group and a community. Maybe others can help here to create list of what is required for talking and supporting, there are needs and wants as well as what others can feasibly provide. The end result is a negotiation of compromises to achieve a healthy outcome or goal for both parties.

What would happen if life did not involve some level of analysis? In the case study of Jill and her husband, expressing themselves was thwarted by a lack of analysis and neither had the opportunity to honestly express themselves. The outcome is unhealthy for both parties because of limited appreciation for and understanding of the constrains of development.

Has academia taken a back seat to common-sense and honesty? I see academia being brought to the fore in this discussion and I believe academia involves theory, reasoning and logic, as does early development. Understanding past behaviours and its influence on people enables us to relate, common-sense helps us to anticipate the behaviour of others to make decisions, guide interactions, and regulate unhealthy behaviours. Attached is a document by Chris Moore about common-sense in development academic thought.

I love the Peanuts cartoon (page 3) and wonder whether kicking someone in the bum is a form of behavioural modification although the worse Peanut will experience from the exercise is a sore bum. I will pull out a quote which I find interesting in relation to children recognising others psychological states ‘they also start to recognise the perspectives of the mind – that the way people see or think about the world may differ – and that these different perspectives may lead people to act differently if the objective circumstances are the same’ (page 10).

I have to agree.

Nicolette, can you help us to understand why you feel analysis is about meeting others needs and limits self expression? If you have an example that you can provide where this has happened, it would help others to better understand the limitations that may exist.

Is it more important to always say what you truly mean or think, regardless of the outcome or boundaries of others. How many friendships have succeeded without a little kindness in our approach? If we are talking about being given the opportunity to vent, then that is allowing oneself to express themselves without consequence.

Venting is more single sided than a discussion. When venting the last thing someone needs is to be told that they need to be fixed, consequences assigned and venting cut off. Sometimes, what is needed is ‘your boss is awful, I can’t believe he isn’t respecting your opinion, what a doosh’. If that venting was directed at the other party in the discussion, the likelihood of an argument eventuates. Without, going back to that argument and both parties being permitted to re-express, be listened to, acknowledged and apologies made, the dysfunction of the conversation leaks to other aspects of life and behaviours. Just like the case study presented.

Is it easy to say what you truly mean or think and express yourself fluently and be understood at all times, while being open to what others are saying without some form of boundaries?

 

[doc leda]

Personally, I found, with regard to transactual analysis... that it fed my sense of victimization, and gave me a false sense of "control" for quite a few years.

I am sorry that this was the outcome. I attached a document to Meadowsweet that reiterates what you are saying. Being stuck in one mode of any model is not a helpful place to be, because we are confined by the window. I think you did very well expressing yourself and it is very complex indeed.

Oh sausages, that's a lot of writing, I do hope I have not missed anyone! My apologies if I have.

 

[Muzikluvr]

Is it more important to always say what you truly mean or think, regardless of the outcome or boundaries of others.

Is it friendship when one person is constantly asked to wallow with the other, holding their tongue and offering only support indefinitely? At what point do you switch your sympathy to the supporter and decide that the supporter needs also to protect themselves from their friend's unrelenting self-pity and imposed need for pity?

At what point do you argue that the wallower is doing more harm to themselves than good. At what point do you decide that the better friend is the one who opens up the person to that awareness, even at the risk of ending the friendship?

How many friendships have succeeded without a little kindness in our approach?

How many friendships ended because friends drifted away without saying anything negative or trying in any way to bring their friend back around to a mutual, equal, engaging friendship? How many people try being nice and hoping for the best, until they can't anymore because they need to protect themselves... and then leave and say things like, "I'm really busy." "I'm sorry I can't help you right now." "I hope you feel better soon" The friendship is trashed, the friend who was all consumed gets better, and can't remember why they lost touch with their friend.

I don't think Nicolette was talking about starting with "I think you're just having a pity party." I think she was talking about ending with it. In the end, a friend who was wallowing will get the chance to look up, step out of their own misery, and see what they've imposed on their friend... then, choose. Is it worth saving the friendship to bring myself out of this self pity stage? Is the friend a good friend? I mean, at least the wallower gets a chance to recognize that they're losing a friend because of their behavior... and gets the chance to decide if they can break the spell of self-pity. It seems like a very honest and courageous friend who can speak up before leaving.

If we are talking about being given the opportunity to vent, then that is allowing oneself to express themselves without consequence.

This isn't possible anywhere. Not even in therapy. Especially with someone like yourself, who is constantly analyzing what is being said. There are always consequences. If your patient vents in your presence, they will have to account for it later. They will have to show growth over the course of your therapy, or you will diagnose them with whatever their venting and other behaviors indicate.

No friend can be expected to listen to venting without consequences, especially ongoing, repetitive venting which rejects every logical interjection from the friend to help put the wallower at peace.

I mean no offense in calling someone a wallower. I have wallowed in my own self pity enough to have been told I'm wallowing and I need to stop. It is a part of the human condition, it is familiar to everyone. Most people have done it, I would guess. I just use the label in lieu of creating a scenario involving made up names, to make my point.

These are the issues with censoring oneself, IMHO. Maybe no one felt bad about my using the word wallower, but now I've drawn attention to it. Also, when I'm censoring myself, I sometimes spend hours to say something that could have been posted in 10 min... if I'd trusted that people would receive it as intended or ask me about it before blowing up at me. I think the forum needs an atmosphere of respect, not censorship. People use words and phrases all the time, colloquialisms which don't translate to others properly. Respecting others isn't just about choosing your words wisely, but also in asking for clarification before jumping down someone's throat or hurting oneself because of what was said by someone else.

Let us support one another here, without choosing which phrases are acceptable and which are not, ahead of time. The fact is that many of the people who replied to this thread about the words Pity Party have heard it in reference to times when they were in crisis, and not having a pity party at all. That's part of working out their traumas. Avoiding words that remind us of trauma isn't really helpful. Dealing with the fact that the people who called your crisis a pity party is much more useful in recovery, than asking people not to use the phrase.

doc leda, I will admit that I didn't read all of your psychoanalysis of Meadowsweet, but I read that she received it well and feels better. I wonder at why you're asking Lucycat to explain her fascinating use of the phrase pity party in her recovery. It feels to me, like you have an agenda. Personally, I'd prefer you explain it, before catching a member in a trap.

Did you want to solve the thread? It seems there are many other threads out there which are personal in nature, and the OP clearly wants some psychoanalyst to help them understand their own mind... and you would be very good at that. You may help a lot of people that way. I just wonder at the amount of time you've spent creating things to argue about here... including, discussing the pitfalls of "Agreeing to Disagree". You make a very good point about it, but is that what was happening here? I mean, in a situation where we aren't dependent on each other as much as we are in real life with our families and friends... a member tells another member "we may have to just agree to disagree" and you feel the need to point out the power in that statement if it's not mutual. I think we need to choose our battles, and if my dad says that to me to end a discussion, that's a lot different than one member opting out of a very active discussion thread.

At what point do we accept our own perception and reject another amicably? My point for that may be reached before yours is. Does that mean I have to stick around until you are willing to acquiesce to my decision to let you disagree with me instead of continuing to try to convince you that I'm right?

 

[Nicolette]

Muzkiluvr interpreted my comment correctly Doc.

Thank you for your contributions Doc. Some psychoanalysis is interesting; to me the thread and topic has been overwhelmed by it and I don't feel that I have to reply to satisfy your requests. I actually feel you do have an agenda, being to convert us to a way of thinking and quite frankly I'm not interested as I'm not here to obtain an education or be coerced into another's way of thinking by being overwhelmed with theory and academia.

 

[Meadowsweet]

I wanted to show you how very smart you are in your thinking Meadowsweet. So, I have attached a document that helps to explain what you are talking about the complexity of the triangle, switching of victim to persecutor and denial.

Doc, the triangle is there for anyone to see if they are inclined to analyse. I don't learn well from lengthy intellectual studies. I learn from reflecting on myself with people, real lives, or sometimes fiction or drama.

But I find I can only take on board what is meaningful to my own psychology at that particular time. The rest seems like too much extra baggage to carry to be honest with you.

If Jill was able to analyse the husband and determine that there is something more she needed to know about why he feels the way he feels, Jill would allow him to vent. Venting can alleviate stress. If Jill explained how she felt about her childhood, there would be understanding and emotional openness in the conversation where an exchange of boundaries can be applied to form a healthy outcome in the future for both people.

Here is the problem. If you analyse others without sharing your self-analysis, then you put yourself in the leader/protector/teacher role. When you do so with overt praise or criticism, you are perpetuating the others opposite role to that. It has the potential to create a dominant/submissive relationship.

The quote I've used above might apply to sombody's life. But it isn't relevant to how I've experienced life. So if I was to learn from it intellectually, without being able to apply it to experience, it has the potential to be detrimental.

I have PTSD, I have an awful lot of issues. The intellectual side enables me to keep going and to live. But it only heals what's on the surface. As far as I'm concerned, emotional healing comes from talking, letting the emotions and fears surface and having somebody there to facilitate and validate the experience.

It is simple feeling, and I don't think it needs complex theories.

 

[Lucycat]

Lucycat, what you have said is very interesting.
Is it possible that using the term pity party on yourself, you might be able to create some distance between yourself and your emotions that enables you to play with them, move them around and address them with less harm to yourself than feeling them at that point in time?

I started from a point very distant from my emotions. T said I was describing what had happened to a stranger rather than myself. I have had to learn emotions, and have had a rapid lesson in 'growing up' and feeling and behaving like the adult I am. I guess I relate the 'pity party' term to me behaving somewhat like a child again. Looking for comfort and somebody else to 'solve it all', which is unrealistic in adult real life, but likewise I never got as a child.

Was there a time when you felt you needed to feel what you were feeling to own those feelings and does this come before or after objectively placing the feelings at a distance?

Yes , I have done a lot of work to feel those feelings. To acknowledge them, understand them and be able to name them. I never understood or felt them before so being objective was not part of the game.

How will others know that what you need is a kick up the bum as opposed to compassion, listening, kindness or something else? Is the kick up the bum help you immediately reach the goal of getting out of your funk, or you do resist for a bit and then later choose to get out of your funk?

This is harder to answer. I tell it like it is for me. If others don't recognise that I am needing a kick up the bum, then so be it. I am not asking for them to consciously make that judgement or decision - just that if they do see it, and want to tell me - then go ahead. I wont be offended. As for how long it takes me to get out - well it is not instant. But it depends on the circumstances. However just acknowledging that I am in that state does immediately make me start to feel better. It is the light showing at the end of the tunnel. A reminder that feeling so dreadful is not indefinite.