|Subject:||The issue of boundaries and the LDS faith . . .|
|Date:||Sep 15 09:14|
|I think that one of the most important things in life is to respect
another person's boundaries. To cross boundaries is, IMO, wrong, immature and often
The LDS church is about breaking down your boundaries. They want to know everthing personal about you that other normal, polite people would not even ask, look into or, quite frankly, care about because they have a life to live.
When church going, game playing people break boundaries, they find it acceptable. For example, we had a neighbor boy who was a peeping tom. He went under my window one night when my husband was out of town and scared the cr*p out of me. I called the police, but he was gone. I recognized the boy, called him up, and told him that he was going to get shot or something if he kept it up. So, I ended up the a**hole according to the ward. After all, the attitude in the ward was "boys will be boys."
But if you are not a game playing LDS member, they will act like bullies and create cr*p to say about you so that you look bad. Again, they break boundaries.
Missionaries, home teachers, visiting teachers will often come by without making an appointment, and they think they have done nothing wrong. Again, boundaries are broken.
I can go on and on and on about how the LDS break boundaries. It is, I think, about breaking down your personal power and trying to make you part of the collective.
But to have your boundaries trampled upon is not much fun. You really have to be strong with these f*cked up LDS people.
p.s. Funny, but if you take a stand when they have been rude and broken boundaries, they turn the tables and say that you are "mean" and persecuting them. Oh well, as long as they leave me alone.
|Subject:||I ABSOLUTELY,ABSOLUTELY resonate with what you said about....|
|Date:||Sep 15 10:11|
|...the disrespecting of boundaries! ESPECIALLY the thing about the
stupid, stupid "visiting at random".
I don't know if you want to hear a horror story, or not, but I will give you a thumbnail sketch of that very thing happening to me in my experience.
I found myself single after a very long marriage (more than 20 years). I just wanted "to spend time alone, for the most part", and "heal" in my own way and according to my own thinking. I perceived the "local-brethren busy-bodies" (from the prior ward and community) to be part of the reason for the break-up of myself and my spouse.
So, I asked the "new bishop", directly, to "send someone from the high priests' group to home teach me, on an appointment basis (to keep them "at arm's length"): because of their known stupidity at "disrespecting boundaries".
This, I believe, is what you identify with.
That stupid, red-neck, wet-behind-the-ears, greenhorn, little bishop took it upon himself to ignore my simple request and visited my home, himself, at random, "anyway".
I was not home. He did it again! (for an additional 5 or 6 months, always at random: even after I told him, directly, by telephone after each "attempt", that I did NOT want to be visited at random---what an obtuse, obtrusive jackass that moron was!)
When I complained to the stake president, then we had a situation that budded (grew) into "collusion" (or, what I cynically like to call "a modern-day secret combination"):
the more I insisted on being shown "basic decency and respect" (for my rights as a free adult), the more that those bas**rd, Gestapo freaks wanted to conduct a witch hunt.
The "onus" (or, burden) seemed to be on ME, to "prove to them" that I had the right to "have my privacy as a human being".
The "funny" thing is that the General Authorities have a right to request home teaching on an appointment basis: so, you can plainly see "hypocrisy-in-action", here, I think.
You must be guilty of something for wanting to have a life: especially a life outside the "damnable oppression of a repressive morg-borg mindset."
May both of those "co-conspirators" (throw in, also, that despicable little high priest group leader creep, who was the biggest "gossip and tale-bearer of them all") ROT IN HELL for what they did! [The "gossip" was mainly his snakelike insinuations that something must be wrong with ME for making such a "demand" that I did: and thus attempt to "cripple" people for being the head of their own homes instead of "empowering people"]
"We recognize you as head of your own home, Mrs.(or Mr.)Brown."
Where's the justice? Can one appeal to (and receive) social justice? Is this just a rhetorical question? Or What?
Can a person sue for harrassment? If not harrassment, for "invasion of privacy"? For what, I wonder? (I hope to get an answer, as I am not prepared to "just let the matter go away".)
PS: Do not suppose that this is "a recent thing, here, with me"--some time has passed (not enough to outrun a statute of limitations, though, I think!)
|Subject:||It's Toxic Shame At The Root of It All . . .|
|Date:||Sep 15 14:04|
|In the late 80's--early 90's a whole lot of great stuff was coming
out of the addictions/co-dependency field by authors such as John Bradhsaw, Melody
Beattie, etc. They pointed out that shame-based people ignored boundaries and were
pathological in the control they attempted to exert on others. Powerful stuff . . . .
Beattie in Beyond Codependency offers a powerful illustration of the accompanying denial, describing how she willfully refused to look at her victimization issues until they became overwhelming.
My experience was similar; driven by a horribly neurotic fear of rejection that fueled an anger I barely felt conciously, I was demanding and controlling while viewing myself as the epitome of easy-going open-mindedness (sheesh, this is embarassing to talk about, even now). Eventually I was able to process and release the fear on my own (while active in 12-Step groups for codependency), but getting at the underlying shame required the help of a very knowledgeable therapist. The experience eventually brought some monumental changes in my life.
For those taking that path, the pitfalls and dead ends can seem to be never ending. Shame causes us to hide from ourselves, and one of the power of groups is seeing ourselves mirrored in others. I really didn't like the people I was in these groups with because they were far too much like myself, but I needed them.If you're truly sick and tired of doing the same thing over and over and over and over . . .
Sadly, such groups seem to be on a downswing in membership, at least here in Utah. I can understand why; it's probably easier for a psychiatrist to reach for a prescription pad or a social worker to lie and say "It'll be all right," than for us to confront our own demons.
One of the deepest insights I acquired was a realization of how personal the battle to overcome one's dark side has to be; no one can do that work for you. I think this gave me some understanding of the shortcomings of others that had been lacking. It also became a useful fire blanket for any Messianic tendencies I might've had, something I sorely needed. As an agnostic today, I'm not certain of the existence of an Almighty, but I've learned to quit impersonating Him (or Her, or whatever).
|Subject:||a good movie rec for you...|
|Date:||Sep 16 12:46|
|Have you seen the movie "28 Days" with Sandra Bullock(sp)?
I highly recomend it to you. It gave a good insight into recovery but is geared more towards alchohol and drugs. But still a good watch.
I really liked those CODA groups but heard they were on the decline. I think there were some built in problems with them though that might have lead to their current decline. One of the worst things I saw was people coming to them perpetually as an outlet for their "poor me" rants.
Thats unfortunate too since I also saw alot of people working very hard to change their lives. Sometimes I would like to go back to one of those groups for awhile, since I often feel like there are things in my life that I really want to change and have feedback on.
Anyway, take care
|Subject:||Last Week Was 22 Years . . .|
|Date:||Sep 16 13:28|
|Who needs Hollywood when you've got real life? I also worked in a
28-day inpatient treatment center for three years. Great places to get sober (even though
I did it on the streets I'm very pro-tretament); lousy places to work.
Seriously though, thanks. I'll look for it if I get a video bug. Funny thing, I don't think I've had a video bug since I started hanging aroung this board. Hmmmm . . .
|Subject:||They desperately need you to believe|
|Date:||Sep 15 14:33|
|because when you reject the Church it makes them uneasy.
Their insecurity drives them to override your wishes.
They cannot let doubt creep in. If they see you believing
then believing is easier for them.
It is for their comfort, not yours, that they trample your
right to privacy.
How to fight it?
Responding in any way is seen by them as a good sign or "progress". Running or hiding emboldens them because your actions are seen as guilt driven.
Formal letters, in legal language, written
by a lawyer if possible, should be the most communication
you have with them. They should be short and to the point
with specific penalties if they disobey.
|Subject:||I like what you said: your ideas are refreshing n/t|
|Date:||Sep 16 08:24|
|Subject:||Cult is another word for "bully."|
|Date:||Sep 15 18:49|
|I am an expert on bullies. Trust me on this one issue.
Bullies are cowards. Cults give license to bully. Mormons tend to band togesther against the world and sometimes each other. They bully people over food, clothes, sex, underwear, liesure time, lifestyle, anything you can name.
Here's the part I'm an expert on: bullies love the thrill of dishing it out. I saw it in the classroom and playground for will over thirty years.
The only way to deal with bullies is to stand up to them. Remember, they are cowards. So they will back down. If they intrude on your boundaries, you must draw the line.
Use, crisp, assertive letters, police action, retaliation, or a garden hose. Wish I could help each of you the way I helped hundreds of students.
Draw your boundaries. Stand firm. It's good for you and surprisingly it's good for the bullies too. They learn about the real world outside of mormonism.
|Subject:||Cheryl, I think that you are brilliant and I appreciate your advise. . .|
|Date:||Sep 15 18:59|
|I did write at the bottom of my original post that I think this is
because they are a "cult." But then I deleted it.
You are right! They are bullies and they do run and hide like cowards. They must be deep down very insecure. Is that not what makes a bully? Insecurity?
Any way, you are right, the only way that seems to work with them is to get the law involved.
|Subject:||What do you recommend for.....|
|Date:||Sep 16 08:35|
|retaliation if, after these people send assertive letters, they are
met with "stonewalled silence". Have you ever witnessed any young children
stonewalling each other with silence? I haven't: it is, to me, the "especially
heinous dirty-deed" of a "demented mind" bent--not on achieving any good,
but--on the "fulfilling of their own self-willed, selfish, self-centered,
self-directed objectives and desires".
What kind of retaliation would "jerk them puppies" out of their "silent reverie"? Got any suggestions?
|Subject:||I HATE Passive-Aggressive Stuff . . .|
|Date:||Sep 16 13:50|
|No doubt because I've got tendencies that way, and it really messes
with my control issues (since I can't indulge in them). I understand the best way is to
escalate the passive-aggression, i.e. "Okay, I appreciate the silence since I've got
what I want, which is to be left alone. Bye!"
I've said this before, but it's worth repeating: It is impossible to set boundaries and take care of feelings at the same time.
If you occasionally lose it, it's not the end of the world (they'rethe one ones who'd tell you you'd blown your shot at the CK, and you're going to buy into their bullshit?).That's what this board is here for. Expressing legitimate anger and outrage at having one's personhood violated is perfectly healthy and appropriate; abusing someone is what's not appropriate so it's wise to avoid namecalling (except in the private sanctuary of one's own car). Besides, well formulated process comments are much more effective and insulting.