Wednesday, September 17, 2014

Talking Heads and Psychopaths are so Annoying

Hi E,

I am feeling so annoyed lately with all the scandals and with all the talking heads and psychopaths exploiting these scandals. Like the scandal of the football player that hit then girlfriend and now wife and the player that hit his child, so they can sell their books giving advice like the author Mel Robbins in the article in the link below that represses people  all over again instead of helping them face and resolve their repression, but how can they do that if they have not resolved their own repression, but use their sharp intellect to engineer elaborated schemes to deepen their own and others repression. And like addicts that the only thing they change is one addiction for another. The author of the article in the link below might be able to temporally stop some people from beating their children a step in the right direction, but they only change one form of abuse for another and one lie for another, because as long the repressed emotions of the child they once were go unresolved will be transferred into the next generation in one form or another and these traumas will be repeated and reenacted sooner or later. How can I make it clear that as long people keep repressing their emotions with the aid of all kind of seductive pretty lies and half-truths that they will keep being driven by them into the state of repetition compulsion soon or later?
By the way when I told you yesterday about the resident that sent me my book back, I left a little detail out. Inside the book were a few sheets of toilet paper. In a symbolic way, she was saying that my book is good to wipe my ass with and to put it up my ass, but she really was showing me how she was treated as a child and how she treated her children that she made them her poisonous container when they told her the truth. One daughter has all kind of health issues from this poison she took in from her mother. She thought she had me fooled with all her gifts and dinners. But I knew all along she was buying my love and attention to have control over me.  And now she is pissed because she knows I see her clear and didn’t fool me and the control she thought had over me was an illusion of her. By the way, I sent her a thank you card saying: Dear Joy, I got the book back! You are so thoughtful! Thanks, Sylvie" I really wanted to write because her first name is Joy. “I got the book back! You are a joy! Thanks, Sylvie", but I thought would be too sarcastic. She is a psychopath and psychopaths going to hate me because I expose them and remove the masks they wear.  This is just a tip of the iceberg of all the hate that is going to be directed at me.  And you helped me write this book and had the courage to have your name on the cover, so be ready to deal with this hate a little bit too, because people is going to hate you a little bit also for helping me put this book together.  This woman used to tell me that her husband was a good writer and use to be a college professor and could have helped me write my book if he was still alive, he died of cancer a few years ago, I use to think to myself: your husband enabled your repression and the only reason was married to you and took your poison was for the money, so he would not have been a good candidate to help me write my book.
To continue,

Yes E, at least I got a reaction and because of it I sold another book, because I told the story to someone that lives in Seattle that has a house here, but only comes down here once in a while and after hearing the story of what Joy did, they said: NOW I want to read this book where can I buy it? I hope more people like her can’t hold it in and starts reacting to it, because this type of publicity is the best publicity I can get, but it stings a little bit, because I am a feeling person and it doesn’t feel good when people direct their poison at me even if I don’t take it in and give it back to them. 

Talk more soon,


Steve Thomas: Sylvie, I think what might be good about this is that unless I'm badly misreading things, public discussion has really been ignited, and maybe finally gone beyond the tipping point in favor of children's rights. I'm talking not necessarily even about the content of all these articles but just the number of comments and conversations (arguments) the commenters are having between themselves. If it's true that something like 70% of American adults thinks that "spanking" is at least sometimes necessary, then judging from the comment sections, I'd say the minority 30% are doing a fantastic job of sowing doubt. And I think that might be exactly what it takes: a long-term, general and preferably non-organized, discussion. One led by no one and nothing.

My impression is that Sweden's public argument (reactions to news articles, etc.) began pretty much in about the 1920s. 20 years earlier Ellen Key had her "The Century of the Child" published in Swedish but I think that most might have helped just prime people loosen the soil a little. I don't know. But something else happened around 1920 - and I'm sorry I can't think of it - something to do with WW I and the League of Nations seems like from memory. It's said that in the US, child mistreatment wasn't publicly discussed or written about much (or for all intents acknowledged to even exist) until the 1960s. So that's a 40-60 year head start that Sweden had. This place was as brutal as anywhere, earlier. Nothing magic in Swedish genes. I've seen executioner's axes, torture machines and shaming equipment typically set up in churchyards. To go further back (and despite an effort people now seem to be making depicting Viking-era Norsemen as more agrarian and humane), even slavery was common during that time and the Norse plundering warriors were in fact brutal. One guy's friends nicknamed him "the children's man" because he refused to run captive children through with his lance the way all his buddies did.

You're also right to say that there's more to the problems of the world than talking heads can cure by selling books telling people it's wrong to hit kids. I expect that even if the practice were to completely stop tomorrow, the world wouldn't see miraculous overnight changes. Sweden is by no means out of the woods, far as societal ills, despite the 35-year-old across-the-board child battery ban. (Drama of the Gifted Child, incidentally, was published that same year - 1979 - so Miller hadn't been a factor.) A lot of times things are the same as squeezing a water balloon: squeezing it here just mean it squeezes out somewhere else. So you're right that repression (and I suppose suppression) are pointless - and I know you don't need anybody to tell you any of that. But I just wanted to say holy cow let these people talk! I think tons of parents will think twice after all this discussion. And that more will follow. I think it's reasonable to suppose that this outcry is giving more and more of the timid who are in what's still the minority enough courage to speak up too. And that's good.

The articles might or might not help those who are trying to deal with the after-effects of their own mistreatment (I suspect they might) - but isn't that really a different consideration? Seems to me this is a clear win for children who haven't yet been damaged and broken, including all those not yet born - and that is now projected (very frighteningly, imo) to be basically the entire present population of the world - and I mean just in the remainder of this century. I know full well there are ways to poison people that don't involve laying a finger on them. Bad ways. And that, if forced into it either by law, social "consensus" or by both, many people will quickly resort to techniques like that. And I know that that crap can be as damaging or even worse than physical battery. My take on Miller is that she recognized completely that the practice of beating kids was just the visible tip of an iceberg. One thing I'm clueless about is the extent to which she was aware that this thing she'd discovered had, huge and dangerous as it still was (and is), been for some reason spontaneously melting for centuries already (I'm talking about stuff Lloyd deMause, Steven Pinker and those kind of guys have looked at).

I think it's a little twisted and very sad that it took an offender with celebrity to get this particular ball rolling, especially given how much screaming and yelling so many have done for so many years on behalf of the kids of everyday people - just to be largely yawned at and pushed aside. But then again: I don't care. All publicity is good.

Here's a link to some statistics, mostly just for the heck of it. Far as I can see there are no comments.

You keep on doing what you do! It's all great.

Sylvie Imelda Shene: Steve Thomas, I agree with everything you wrote. All the talking going on exposing that hitting children is very bad for children is good and a step in the right direction. But I also like to hear voices exposing the lies and disconnected half-truths that the talking heads are using to manipulate and exploit the public to benefit themselves, like the author Mel Robbins in the article above. I didn’t know who she was, but someone wrote me an e-mail asking: “Sylvie, is Mel Robbins another kind of Oprah? I don't know much about these public figures in the US and wonder if she is real.” So I went and check her out and read the preview of her book "Stop Saying you’re Fine" and of course what I find there is the same recycled BS to manipulate the public with their elaborated engineered schemes to get rich and keep their repressions intact, but really they could care less about children and the suffering of others.

No comments:

Post a Comment