Transcription
You should be or shouldn't be doing this. Yeah, that's not a good voice. So, what's a good voice? You can do whatever. [Laughter] Or no voice. Or what? More questioning and more nuanced, instead of like this pointing finger, like, "You, you should not," and "You should," and "Old," and "Must," and "Or that." Oh, injunctions. Yeah, less of these injunctions and more of a choice. Like, I really like the point of, of heading to values is that's important to me. Um, but my values and not someone else's stuff that's embedded in all these injunctions I'm carrying. So, more choice, more space in choice, more options, more options and more space. And then the credit comes up though. So then you're answering the critic, which I think is probably easier, maybe for me to answer the critic. Yeah, isn't he part of the super-ego? What is that? That's what I think. Well, the outer critic, I think I have more of an outer critic thing going than an inner. I'm realizing just now, this is just recently. More outer critic. Yeah. Is it outer critic? Better you just need to learn how to scapegoat people and make them disappear or pure toxic stuff. Once there's space, Debbie, then the outer slash inner critic appears. Yeah, yeah. Once there's space. Yeah, that's the voice that's probably protecting you from shame, or it's right around the same thing, right around the shame. So, there's a little space and then to fill the space, you get inner and outer critter. What if the inner and outer critic is just a friend to keep you from being lonely? Yeah, it's like a shield. It's, um, it's doing its job. Good job. Yeah, it's a protector part. Yeah, it's protecting the shame, which shame is a shield too. Of shame is this shield? Is it like that 40-pound shield grenade Brown talks about, or is it heavier? It's big. I heard Richard say, "Develop a moral philosophy." That's about the super-ego. I thought that was about sort of healing. Well, that's developing, uh, values. It's not bad. I would usually, when I did super-ego before, I sort of said, "Toxic super-ego is internalized parent, internalized abuser." And the long-term goal is to connect your conscience. But that's hard because if you create a moral philosophy that's based on your childhood wounds, "Never again," then you're still just creating another stuck-in-the-past circle. And I think Granny's angle of choosing a moral philosophy is that you just pick values and then you see what you like. Or I would say, your way of finding your values is you follow your attention and you see where you invest a lot of time and energy excessively, and that will give you a clue on what's important to you. And then you try to tweak your values around that. Or you do a lot of journaling and soul searching that tries to uncover the values that's already in your blood or already part of you. So, what's a toxified super-ego? Toxified super-ego would be so much work. I wonder I was exhausted all the time. It was so much work. I wonder I was exhausted all the time. There was so much work. I wonder I was exhausted all the time. It was so much. So, the challenge of talking about this super-ego is that your super-ego will take it over and make it more work. [Music] Or I could give your super-ego a job to be nicer to yourself. So then you try to be perfect at being nice to yourself because the super-ego is pretty tricky. That's where if you talk about it too directly, then you'll trigger a shame on shame loop and then you'll fall into a pit of despair. Maybe. So, I'm trying to label the negatives in advance to disarm the potential, uh, pitfalls or to let you understand how train wrecks are nice. But what's a toxic super-ego like? Um, you end up having injunctions on injunctions. So, it's sort of like, well, there it is. OCP. They screwed him up. He must be going out of his mind. It's not as if he can just say no. They put all this nonsense into his brain. He has to obey. Take anybody. Recognize the movie? Was it the 80s or 90s? Yes, I think 80s. It's the Robocop. Yeah, that's the one where he's where he's called. Yeah, he's all, uh, airbrushed. This is the second one. Oh, look at that. The higher budget second one. So, Robocop got messed up by having tons of rules on rules. It made him paralyzed. Say no. They put all this nonsense into his brain. He has to obey. Take them out. All of them. Can't be done. Not with this equipment. Are you saying this? Oh, he is prettier. I can't believe that. Well, sure. There are ways you can pull his cranial circuits, which will shut down his life support system altogether. Can run a few thousand volts through him. Pray his insulation holes. Probably kill him. [Music] Damn. What's he gonna do? [Music] [Music] Uh. [Music] No directives found. So, he's able to do a hard wipe. It only took electrocuting himself. [Music] Are we cops? What's bugging you? Mirth. Kane. Kane's bugging me. So, this is the challenge of, um, talking about toxic super-ego is that if you put more rules on top of rules on top of rules, and you're used to having other people give you advice and comfort, validation, fixes all. You know, is to operate from the super-ego. You don't trust any way other way of interacting. So, it's hopeless. My act three will try to give you something to hold on to. But right now, we're still setting up something. So, this is an interesting angle from Sam Vaknin's interview with, uh, [Music] Dr. Dutton. This caught my attention while standing in line at Ocaton for three hours. Very weird comic convention. I'm also clueless when it comes to human interactions of all kinds. Not only courting girls or flirting with girls with women. I'm utterly clueless. And I, I observe people and I read textbooks in order to, to understand or to inculcate in me the capacity to interact with people. But it's second-hand, you know? It's artificial. And it perceives very often as fake. Didn't you have older sisters? Older brothers? People like this? I had younger, younger brothers, three of them, and a younger sister. And I was forced to raise all of them because my parents were both mentally ill. Isn't this a story of parentification? You didn't get that out of his childhood? Then he took on the roles of his parent, taking care of siblings. So, he didn't get a chance to find himself in that sort of adolescent peer-to-peer, uh, period. So, I was forced to raise my siblings on my own. I was parentified. So, I became simultaneously an adult when it came to the parent roles. I became a parent to my siblings. And at the same time, I became a student at the university at age nine. And then he was a student in university at age nine. So, he didn't hang out with school peers either. Could be a brag, but he also talks about the downside. I think the research on what parentification, if that's a term, what does it do? It, it makes you feel inadequate. But in a nutshell, it makes you feel that you have to serve other people, and that you're never doing, you're never, you're never good enough. You're never doing as much as you should. Even Sam Vaknin, it's not just codependents who feel inadequate and are super slaves. So, you become a people pleaser, and you become subservient to other people, and you feel, you have this feeling, knowing feeling that you should serve others. That's the purpose of, that's always on that way. It's a purpose for your existence. Purpose is to serve others. So, this is a challenge with, uh, building a super-ego or having a super-ego that navigates the real world. I would argue that peer-to-peer adolescence, where you navigate and merge into the social world and get outside of a parent-child relationship, that's a better ideal. That's the ideal adult to adult. But it, before you become an adult to an adult, you plan the adolescent to adolescent game. And then as you grow up, as adolescents to older teens and young adults, you develop that social interaction of how to connect. Codependence, cluster B's, you continue with the parental one-up, one-down parent-child relationship. They continue that mask as adolescents, peer-to-peer. Then as adults, you continue that mask. So, sort of, if I give you a device or any of the other advices, telling you how to overwrite the super-ego of another, override or another layer on layer, layer, and that's just waste of time. For I don't see how it's working. So, the key is to go back to the 80s maybe. And since Debbie already opened up us with shame on shame, let's try to unchain shame with some John Bradshaw. Has anyone read or researched or watched any of John Bradshaw's stuff? He was on TPS like crazy all the time in the 90s, right? And then we've forgotten John Bradshaw's work for some reason. And he was just something mobile. Yeah, he was everywhere. And he was simplifying a lot of the Gershon Kaufman and other shame research from the 80s. Now we have a watered-down version. So, let's see if this might make sense. This healthy shame is the permission to be human. It lets you know that you can make mistakes. So, this is what's missing. Your healthy shame got covered up with toxic shame. Your super-ego, your parentification, whatever pointers you want to have. You create a fake false self. And then your healthy shame to explore the world with hands-on learning, hands-on experience, good enough parenting to let you go out and risk and face stuff in the world and come back and recharge. Your healthy shame is sort of stuffed down, thrown out, or lost somewhere. And you have this overlay of your super-ego, all these injunctions. And the super-ego's injunctions are just tiring because it's perfection. It was so much work. I wonder I was exhausted all the time. There was so much work. I wonder I was exhausted all the time. There was so much work. I wonder I was exhausted. It was so much work. So, you just get lost in injunctions all the time. Thou shalt, thou shalt not. These are injunctions. Thou shalt, thou shalt not. These are injunctions. Codependency, top down. You tell me what to think. Codependency, top down. You tell me what to think. Code. It's just order after order after order. It's just poking at your wound. If not good enough, it's almost like people who have mental illness, they go to therapy, self-help, spirituality, and they just open the door like, "Tell me how I'm broken. Tell me I can fix myself more." You're just going to different places to get extra validation of how broken you are, or what else can you fix? It's just chasing after fix after fix after fix. Or this isn't good enough. That isn't good enough. Overlooking may be an issue that your healthy shame that tells you that you're human and it's okay to be human. Maybe that's missing. It's the opposite of any perfectionistic system. A family that has a rule that allows people to make mistakes and understands that mistakes are occasions for learning. My mistakes have been my teachers in life. And if you live life in a context where you can never make a mistake, what a terrible way to live. Mistakes have been stigmatized, right? I absolutely agree with that 100%. That makes us human. That's that makes us all human. We make mistakes and we learn from it. We learn from mistakes. Yes. The toxic shame comes in where society doesn't allow us to make mistakes. That would be subhuman, subcorrect, or superhuman. You try to be perfect to avoid mistakes. That's trying to be too better than human. Or you're just a mistake. One must take and your whole world collapses. Your identity is your failure. Then that be subhuman. Yeah, that would be the two extremes. Yeah. You live in the extremes of too good or not enough. Correct. Never in the middle. There has to be a happy medium. There has to be happy meeting. There. See, so that could be like a nice value system that your super-ego could would be closer to your conscience instead of the toxic super-ego. Would you say perfection? Get better. Always get better. You're not better. Good enough. Or the other side of, you're the worst thing in the world and everything's hopeless. So, that's the two sides of the toxic super-ego. Mistakes are okay. That would be your healthy, healthy shame. See, that's a life without any grace. That's a life of law. That's a loss of rigidity and legalism. Grace. Grace is riding easy in harness. It's like, it's okay to make mistakes. We know that human beings are going to make mistakes. 15% of the time. 15%? Is that a high or low number? I wasn't sure where you pulled 15% out of to be quietly specific. I'll say that I think that's a low number, to be quite honest. To be quite frank, that's a load of 16.2 last time. Maybe if you, you own your shame and you have healthy shame, your mistakes might get less because you guess better. Or you learn. Percentage doesn't matter. It's just that the reframe is that mistakes used to be more tool. Or mistakes had a lot of urgency. I'm not perfect. I must hyper-focus on the mistake. And then if you flip your perspective, that mistakes or learning opportunities. Mistakes are showing you what your limits are, what your skill level is. So, mistakes are helping you learn your boundaries. Mistakes are helping you manage your expectations. Mistakes are helping you guess better. So, you could have an expectation, or I might have an expectation that this is going to be a wonderful meeting. And then my mistake, if I fail, then I'll see my my guess of what it be like versus what happened. That discrepancy is a learning opportunity. But since I don't relate to people who have like a vicious super-super ego that yells at them, I set an expectation that this is going to be a total failure. And then if I come halfway to be less of a failure, then it's pretty good. But I also can watch the video so that I can have an evaluative after I'm out of the meeting to see how it went. And through that iteration of two plus years of doing this every week, I have gone backwards. The first meetings were much sharper and harder. These are all too smooth and comfy or something too nuanced. Back then, in the first meetings, they were just like pure doses of concentrated truth. But people couldn't digest it. So, maybe these are better. I don't know. But the early meetings are amazing for the people who haven't. They were just like harsh. Back to Bradshaw, or who's jumping in now? Yeah, so what made him amazing? I had the in-person back and forth. Okay, we talked about that. Uh, the in-person after party. They were saying that the in-person's a little more chill. There isn't the same drama that happens on Zoom. And they were speculating that sometimes that maybe being on Zoom, people are pushed to posture a bit more because you want to be seen. And also because you're away from the camera, or you're away from the other people, you're not in their physical space, you'll be emotionally braver, or things will get distorted. Because in person, you can feel, you're, you're in the person's face, you're feeling them viscerally. So, you get a full-bodied experience of other people and their emotions. And, and in person, I can be riskier. People can see through the sarcasm, or maybe they can't. I don't, I'm guessing they can because we're still communal beings. So, eating with people, hanging out with people in person, that's naturally disarming. If this meeting was like a hundred people and all of you people were yes men, I might build like a hubris type perspective. And then if there's anybody who disagrees with me, I can just erase you or answer the wrong question, answer a question that I like. It reinforces distance. Doesn't reinforce in-person intimacy. It builds up. It reinforces a super-ego, a false self, a performance instead of being real. Or I'm just getting stupider. They're just different. When a parent acts shameless, they act like they can never make a mistake. They're also spiritually abusing their children because they're playing God. Because one of the healthy things that shame brings you is the realization that you're not God, that you're limited, and that you need help. So, healthy shame is an enormously important emotion. With healthy shame, I know that I need help. I know that I'm limited. I think healthy shame is the source of spirituality. It's what we used to call humility. Humility. I think Robbie mentioned that, right? It lets you know there's a lot more to learn. So, it's a source of learning, and it's a source of creativity. It's also the source of basic sociality. So, right there is a link to my argument that adolescent peer-to-peer interactions, that's something that codependence, that Sam Bachmann didn't learn. Something that Richard Brandon also openly owns that he didn't learn. So, if you're listening to a lot of these narcissism experts who skipped the adolescent basic sociality upbringing phase, their blind spots and their limitations of that, that skill set is going to transfer to you, or it's going to be part of, it's going to be missing in their teachings. I am also not an expert at that, but since I lean on living in two cultures, growing up in the margins of being Chinese and American, and also, uh, having some social blindness on the autism spectrum, so I have more interest in trying to map out the social landscape to fill in the gaps for myself so I can inter-navigate the world. So, then I can try to provide more of that angle to create a super-ego that will actually work in peer-to-peer adult interactions instead of something that you think will work, that'll work in paper, in real-time interactions. You got to keep up with things. If you just run away when things fail all the time, you're never, you never catch up. That's act one. Back to Bradshaw. Welcome, Natalie. One man is no man. No man is an island entire in itself. Each is a piece of a cotton and a part of a mane. See, we're all involved. We all need each other. See? So, how much do you hear that when you talk to people who are promoting boundaries? Boundaries, boundaries, boundaries. Everything's fixed by more boundaries. We all need each other. Your collective self is maybe what's missing. Or first, you need a good enough mother or group to allow you to mess up and stay in the group. If you mess up and then you're exiled from the group because you messed up, because you were too emotional or true, whatever, then that reinforces perfection. That reinforces mistakes means that you die. Written mistakes means you get kicked out. So, you need some sort of community that allows you to make mistakes in real time and then come back and then adjust and adapt. And then as you get better at making mistakes, then you learn how to have 15% mistakes that he was talking about. Then you can dive into a bigger social interaction of the real world, and you'll be able to keep up. But if you expect to just make a jump from your parentified super-ego, jump into the real world where they're playing at full speed social interactions and nuances and judgments and sarcasms, what's the odds of you keeping up? They can't. Then that'll reinforce your toxic shame because too big of a gap. Also, culture doesn't help you. So, angry baby tells you, teaches you how to set boundaries and say what matters. But codependents are conflict diverse. Or maybe American culture is conflict diverse. Or angry, stupid. It took me like two weeks of back and forth with this academic to eventually say, "I think you're angry, stupid." This is all this passive-aggressive languaging and jargon. When you try to get stuff, ultimately, I was able to get him to admit that he was angry, stupid. I was using anger to try to get to the truth of things. And he felt like my anger was like reliving his childhood brother fights, bullying. So, he's using all this academic language to be passive-aggressive and numb the anger, which meant we never got to any points. They're talking like all over the place. So, we got into meta that he was angry, stupid. And this guy was like a Jordan Peterson fan. So, you think they'd be the ones that are ownership and all that bullshit? But so, American culture might be contributing to our conflict aversion. So, here's a comparison between anger culture, anger from a US versus an Italian standpoint from Kelly's recommendation or sharing. So, he did some research for me. This is a good clip. The way in which an Italian will explode with anger is very much like a firework. So, she's gonna compare Italian culture type of anger versus American anger. Will be big, showy, flamboyant, artsy, perhaps unexpected, but inherently non-threatening. An Italian uses the anger as a tool of communication, as a vehicle to say, "This point that I'm making is important to me." However, beneath all of the showiness of this firework, beneath the Italian will always have a logic behind that. The Italian doesn't get overridden with the anger. The Italian uses the anger to communicate. Whereas in the US, what has become socially normalized is to use words as a vehicle to communicate anger. Then it doesn't really matter what I'm saying. All you need to know is that I'm angry, and you need to respect that. Because you tend to socially give value to the feelings rather than the why of these feelings. The end of the day, people don't even need to have a reason behind it. That's why I got so many white US women up in my comments being like, "I feel so attacked by this." And why you look so absolutely threatening is why they tend to communicate, "I feel so attacked." So, she's getting it too. I'm just feeling really attacked right now. She didn't really attack. Right now, I'm just feeling really attacked. And then you have an angle of being angry. So, Western culture is anger. Words are used as a carrier device to send messages of contempt. Richard Grannon mentioned it like, so they're there to get under your skin. Under your skin, laden with contempt. Contempt, picking away your insecurities, picking away your ins, make you have doubt, have doubt, have doubt, make you have doubt, have doubt, have doubt, make you have doubt, have doubt, have doubt, make you have doubt. So, we end up associating anger with hatred, exile, shaming. So, then we judge anger as all bad, conflict aversion. But then when you judge anger is all bad, then you limit your own anger. So, you can't express what matters to you. You can't figure out what matters to you if you can't express anger. And then you can't set boundaries or protect boundaries without anger. So, then you shame yourself for being sucky at setting boundaries. Then you shame yourself by going to self-help groups and other stuff to fix yourself more. So, you end up stealing in more shame because you disconnected from your anger. Unless you're smart and you learn how to just believe people with your anger. That's another way. Repeating the same sentence over and over because that's a stonewalling. So, you just hate a person and stonewall about your crap, your crap, your crap. And you just flood them and run over that sort of press the button, push button, press it, push the button, push the button, press it, push the button, push the button, press it, push the button, push the button, press it, push the button, push the button, press it. Then once you get what you want, then you can say, "The minute that it changes, then life is perfect again." I don't even remember the last 20 hours. 20 hours. The minute that it changes, then life is perfect again. I don't even remember. Which is shame? You forget stuff. You cover over your behavior. So, you're still actively using shame, but it's not to learn. It's to forget. You can use shame to recognize your mistakes and try to learn. At the flip time, you can use shame to cover things up, forget stuff. So, shame is your purpose. You can use it to uncover mistakes, uncover your limitation, or you can use shame to cover up your limitation, or you can use shame to shame someone else to dump your limitation on them. That can work if you're good. When you're fast, so shame is a very multi-use emotion. That's the difference between toxic shame and healthy shame. Shame. Healthy shame is remembering the lesson, remembering the fault, remembering the mistake. Called remembering to remember, or remember to remember. Start there because we usually remember to forget. Where we're trying to forget. So, you just have to remember to remember. They don't care about what they're actually saying. They just care to show that they're angry. But the best part is that once you call them out on their BS and show them that they have no reason why they're reacting that way, they do a full 180 and turn themselves into the victim. So, that's the one-two punch of bullying. I will get angry at you. Uh, make a bunch of a bunch of words, word salad as a carry device to show pure contempt at you. Then if you call me out and I get trapped, I can now play the victim card. And just didn't really attack. Right now, didn't really also play innocent. Just been really attacked. I'm sorry you guys are reading into stuff. I'm sorry you guys are reading into stuff. I'm sorry you guys are reading. Is this supposed to be healing? Is this still saying angry? Healing is supposed to be healing. Is this supposed to be healing? Or you can be demanding. I'm sorry you're not being helpful to me right now. Being helpful to me. What would be healing? Just to myself. Some sort of healing. What would be healing? Just to myself. Some sort of healing. What would be healing? Just to myself. Some sort of healing. What would be like, you're attacking me. Attacking me. Like you're attacking me. So, when anger doesn't work, or you do both, you have the anger and you play the victim card, and you try to evoke pity. Another person that anything they say is harming your fragile, whatever, and you cry for safety. She has a nice framing of it. I think you call them out, ask for accountability, and they say, "You're telling me I'm a horrible person." And just lay flat on the ground. The reason why it's frightening is that the person from the US who is angry, you have no idea what's gonna come out of their mouth. What they're gonna do. If they're gonna throw hands. You have no idea because all logic out the window. An Italian, no matter how angry, will so Italian is a model of maybe more integrated anger. How does an Italian anger work? Always leave room for a compromise because their end goal is to reach an understanding. The end goal of an angry Italian is communication and understanding. But the end goal of a white US woman who is angry is to get whatever she wants, even if it's unreasonable. They don't care about what they're actually saying. They just care to show that they're angry. Actually, that's a good point. So, what's the end goal of anger? What's the end goal of how we teach boundaries? Someone crossed your boundaries. Communicating, you feel bad. You say, "Boundary crossed. Stop doing that, or I'm gonna leave." Isn't that a simple way of how most boundaries are taught? Set a boundary and then get compliance. Where's the understanding there? Boundaries is just anger and shame. That's toxic. That's how boundaries are being taught. Step back, comply, or I'll leave, or I'll get angry at you. They'll say communication. They'll say all the other stuff. Expressing needs. But how much energy are you taking with your anger and you're setting boundaries to actually understand what their perspective is, what your perspective is, and how to get to the answer of the confusion? Like, we're both rushing to get this last piece of chocolate. And then we, we can frame it, me or you, chocolate. Then we can fight to the death and have a boundary. Whatever, you're my obstacle. I want that chocolate. And other person said, "I'm the obstacle." And then we just fight for that. Or we could talk out our anger and say, "Oh, how much do you want the chocolate today?" Or we can trade. Or you say, "Do you want to split the chocolate half half right now?" Or you say, "You can have the chocolate now. I'll get a coffee." Or I'll get some ice cream. But if I just stay at my boundary and say, "Fuck, I want the chocolate." And you stonewall and say, "Fuck, I want the chocolate now." And that's all the conversation is with the anger. Who, who gets the chocolate? Who gets their boundary meant? It's unnecessary conflict because you guys just can't talk out the need. Maybe it's not life or death. Maybe it's not some boundary giant thing. Maybe there's no danger. But that would be boring. Maybe chocolate wasn't the best example. So, what do we cover? What's the time? 8:15. Okay. I can try to, I still have time to dig us out of whatever we went to. Who's followed? Who's confused? Who asked questions? Give me some feedback because I'm getting lost. Help my shame of failure. You co-dependents rescue me. Anybody or throat in the chat? Give me something. Going great so far. So good. Yeah, that wasn't even the topic though. It's an important thing. Yes, the next day topic. Yeah. Fact two. Act. Where's your act two? And you're actually right. Yeah, we're in act two. I've talked about angry and shame. It's because of the after party. Gave me a beer, the hoppy, whatever. So, I drank too early. And I'm not, I'm trying not to do what I did in the in-person, which doesn't matter because none of you guys were an in-person. So, I had a different setup for them person. That was, I used all my good stuff then. Okay, let's go with playing God then. So, maybe that'll work. So, the narcissist and the abuser hides behind playing God. And to simplify, God is omnipotent, um, omnipresent, omniscience. So, the abuser hides behind all knowing. I know all. That's usually semantical games. They hide behind all powerful. So, they'll get cheap wins constantly, and that'll create the illusion of always winning or being powerful. Or they learn control techniques. So, they learn reactive abuse. They learn, uh, dog whistling. We talked about that in person. So, they're hungry for control. That's all powerful. And they develop sadistic supply. So, they like beating up on people, and they get supply because it gives them a high. So, they feed off the all powerful. It'll make your mind turn. It'll make your head spin. But for the narcissist, we're sitting there lighting our heads like, "Yes, how powerful am I?" It'll make your mind turn. It'll make your head spin. But for the narcissist, we're sitting there lighting our hands like, "Yes, how powerful am I?" And then the all present. So, how does a narcissist or an abuser use omni, um, omnipresence to con you? Or how do they create the illusion of all being everywhere? They have the tone, talk down, and then they, uh, the perspective of top down. And then the angle of just constantly shifting, uh, perspectives and fragmenting you, taking, turning into a snapshot, a fragment, and then attacking that fragment. A lot creates the illusion that they're everywhere, or creates a feeling. So, all these three things is the shell game. So, the shell game has a has a trap. If someone plays God, they're putting themselves one up. And when you put yourself one up, they have to sort of deliver on all these things. So, they're constantly scrambling to make sure they're keeping the solution up. But the missing element of the solution is consistency and immutability. How consistent are narcissists? They're the most consistent person in the room. They're the most, from what Dr. Romney said, they're the most consistent people on earth. Consistently with their patterns. Yeah. Yes, but their positions are consistently shifting. They're consistent with the goal of, "I need to win all the time." They're consistent of saying, "I know all. I'm never wrong." And then they're consistent, "Oh, I know more than you. I'm everywhere." But in order to keep consistent in these strings, they have to constantly change the story. So, your counter is to get the person playing God to take positions. Call out their positions and their behavior to point out how they're not immutable, how they're not truthful, how they're taking constantly shifting positions because they can forget their old position. Then they gaslight you and say, "I said something different back then." So, then they're consistent based on their gaslighting. But if you call their behavior, their defenses, which are consistent, and you point it out, then they get trapped. This is a tricky point. It's easier to describe in person. But I still have some time. Or, yeah, pretty perfection perspective. I like that framing. But I think I missed the question from Susie's comment. Can a hijacked super-ego cause people to make mistakes? For example, when being watched, I become really clumsy. Is it a way to make sure reality matches with what the abuser/God even when they're absent? When you feel like you're watched, you make mistakes. Your shame gets triggered. Get anxious. Oh, this is good. It's a nice transition. So, if we have toxic shame as codependents or abuse survivors, the abusers also have toxic shame. So, if we're susceptible to the feeling of being watched and vulnerable and make mistakes, if you elicit the same wound in the abuser, then they'll also cave to toxic shame. But you have to be willing to use toxic shame or elicit toxic shame in other people. If someone's playing God, they're one up. If you're not, if you've divorced yourself from condescending and insulting people or taking down or taking the person down a notch, then you have no defenses against somebody one up. They need humility. If you expect the rest of the world to make taking down a notch, they're doing hit and run all the time. They never stick around to get humbled. So, only you who know them needs to do a service to the world by taking down, taking them down a notch, humiliating them, embarrassing them, shaming them. Once you open the door to have the permission to, to do that, then there's different ways of how to do it. But right now, your injunction of saying shame is bad, conflict is bad, whatever rules that you might have, if you don't reconsider that, then you're stuck. But back to Susie's comment about being seen or being watched. The magic is breaking the fourth wall, which is a hard metaphor, but for some reason, I like it. De-individualization by being thrown into a crowd and slapping on some creepy masks. The audience members have stopped behaving in a way that is socially acceptable and instead just acts totally selfishly. You're free to interact with them however you like because you aren't really interacting with anyone. It's just pixels or ink, which is what makes breaking the fourth wall and breaking that anonymity such a bizarre sensation. So, I'd argue and create the metaphor that abusers are hiding behind the mask of moral authority, playing God, or playing God's servant. So, if they're behind that mask of anonymity, then they, they can take sadistic pleasures or make comments on like YouTube or Info or social media. You, you can be more cruel because you're hiding behind the internet, or you're hiding behind the TV screen watching a movie or playing a game. So, breaking the fourth wall is recognizing that even though you're behind the screen, or even though somebody's hiding, hiding behind the mask of playing God, they're still human. They're still seen. So, you have to give them exposure. Give them the feeling and exposure. How does it work with breaking the fourth wall? Breaking that anonymity? Have you ever been doing something really embarrassing, like unironically flossing in the kitchen while you wait on your hot pocket to finish cooking? Only then to notice someone is watching you. Ruin your whole career. You have. He wasn't flossing that bad. That was kind of fun. Don't you want to pass the time by dancing? Someone is watching you. Ruin your whole career. You have felt the sensation of quickly shifting from a state of being inconspicuous and name. See, he was scary before his mom came in, and he was just a little kid hiding behind a mask. You can play a role. You can be scary. But once the mask is uncovered, things change. Less too, very much conspicuous and very much named. Very much named, which totally shifts our psyche all at once, creating that chills down your spine moment. It's not just sudden fear that spooky fourth wall breaks create. It's sudden vulnerability. People behave very differently when they feel like they're being watched versus when they're alone. Have you ever been playing a game and felt a little awkward or uneasy when a character without warning stares directly into the camera? This feeling is due to something called the dual function of gaze, where you look has a dual purpose. One, of course, is to select what you see. But the other is a form of communication. And when there is someone around, you're accountable for where you're looking. Don't you think you've seen enough studies have found evidence that seeing your own reflection or even yourself on camera can affect your likelihood to follow rules, choose not to litter, and even facilitate healthy dietary decisions? These studies have been so influential, in fact, that you've probably seen businesses put up a monitor to show you walking into the store and plain sight at the entrance, or even one of these mirror monitors at the Target self-checkout to discourage shoplifting. And it makes sense. When we see a reflection, it's like we're reminded of what we look like to the outside world, and that everything we do is seen. Or everything we do is seen. So, it's a reminder. What was the reminder? Didn't make sense. When we see a reflection, it's like we're reminded of what we look like to the outside world, and that everything we do is seen. Everything we do is seen. So, isn't one of the tips people give no contact in gray rock and all that stuff? And isn't giving no contact in gray rock a way of not mirroring? But if you want to balance out toxic shame, shouldn't you also have over-reflection, hyper-reflection, hyper-mirroring, in addition to no contact and leaving and not reflecting? And if, if we're labeling narcissists of having no empathy, that means they have poor self-reflection skills. So, that means they probably need help seeing themselves. So, learning how to gradually dose back mirroring and reflection and tweaking it would even the playing field. They also mirror, but they do it more based on power. That be like, uh, this style. I think, I think one of the things that's easy for narcissists to do is mirroring. So, someone brings up an issue, and you respond with the same issue back to them. This is something that I've done a million times, and that I still struggle even today to do that. Like, even like yesterday, like I still struggle to like mirror it back to the person. So, like an easy example, my wife would be like, "Well, you know, you're just not my safety. I don't feel comfortable sharing anything with you." Okay, well, "You're not my safety either. I don't feel comfortable sharing anything with you." Like, this is why we're here. Like, it's, it's your fault for getting us this place where, you know, I'm not safe. I don't feel comfortable talking to you and telling you things like that. Someone is, that's the victim card. So, mirror the same thing, and then pivot back to, "I'm a victim. You have, how dare you do whatever pain on me? Your causes pain." But the mirror allows a pivot to take away the spotlight. Same exact stuff that she would say to me. Like, I'll bring that back up, and I'll put her on the defensive, like immediately. And as a result, it makes her now the, putting her on the defensive, that's where if you mirror them back, you couldn't put them on the defensive. But it has to be slower. They're impulsive. Their upside is speed. Robotic. You're reflective. You process stuff. Try to make sense of it. So, you're a little slower, but you have the capacity to make tiny anchor points to trap them, create a little net to mirror back things. I'll think of an example after this. I feel not valued. It makes her feel that I don't care about what she's actually going through. And it makes me feel justified to be like, "Hey, we're on the same playing field. Like, you're wrong, I'm wrong. We're both wrong." So, how would you mirror back more effectively versus a more abusive mirroring? If someone was coming at me in a very confrontational manner, I'd say, "In a business setting, they're gonna have a problem with my price." And so they might say, "Your price is too high." And I would say, "Our price is too high." Yeah, well, you know, "We can't pay that." You know, "We've got a limited budget." And I might say, "You got a limited budget?" Yeah, well, you know, "We have other things that we have to worry about. There's a lot of things that we're trying to accomplish here." "Other things you're trying to accomplish?" And they, they're going to go on and they're going to elaborate. They're going to give me context. This is what you want. You want context. If the person's angry and they're dumping angry at you, and they don't have the language to actually explain what their anger is about, you want to pull as much info from them to get understanding of what their need or what they're seeing in the obstacles. Get that articulated. But if they're angry at you or anger or whatever, and then you want to say, "My need is more important than your need," then get into a need battle without getting them to explain their position, then the fast person wins. That's their game. You're the slower person. So, be invisible. Hide your need right now. And just keep them talking and mirror back what their stuff is. And just play dumb. Play Columbo. And get context. Get information. Get understanding. Be the bigger person. You'll like yourself more. A little harder at first, but as you end up being the better person, you'll see the world reflects better at you. Interactions will work better. Give people a chance to prove themselves that they're bad or good. And then once they prove themselves as they're bad, stab them in the heart. And they're gonna feel like, "I'm working with them." They're not going to feel me fighting. You know, it takes two to fight. I'm gonna change this wrestling match into a dance. And if I refuse to engage in the wrestling, but I still want to engage, then that changes into a collaboration almost immediately. The next time someone's being confrontational with you, try a mirror. Use a great tone of voice, genuine curiosity. Mirror them a few times and see if they don't change their tone. So, mirroring is a slower process. And the metaphor is to, if you're chasing, you're losing. That's usually a pretty general principle. And if you're over defending, you're over defending to the person who insulted you. And the person who insulted you is playing a power game. They don't care about your defense. They're just making shit up to try to piss you off and get you overreactive. But it is natural to defend yourself. I deal with it on YouTube when people attack me. So, it feels like my character is getting assassinated. But no one reads. No one. The audience doesn't care. And they don't care. So, your energy to try to defend yourself is just wasted energy because you want to be heard and seen by them because they assaulted your character, gave you an absence wound. But if you defend yourself, you're giving them the spotlight. That you want their opinion. You want their approval. So, fuck their approval. Go after their throat. You want their, their air. You want to murder them. Be more exciting. But at first, you have to, for me, I had to try to limit my defending myself for fighting in the points because to them, that's not the goal. They're just making points up to poke and just exaggerating and lying to try to elicit reactive abuse, to get you to overreact, to get you defensive. And then once you're sloppy and defensive, they just poke another wound and poke another wound and poke another wound. And if they've used up all your attention, then they just leave and disappear. And you're still chasing. And they won. They just wanted to mess with you, or they wanted a distraction. So, a metaphor is, you want to, it's like escaping quicksand. This is a more boring example, but it's more complete. The music isn't really perfect. [Music] The cartoon is good. And this could save your life because people have died from quicksand. So, there is a certain way to get out. But if you follow your instincts and you do the natural way, you're going to get stuck. And you might harm yourself, or you might die because it's counter-intuitive. So, first of all, try not to panic. Try to see the bigger picture. Try to remember the video which said it's impossible to drown, though, if you tried really hard, maybe you could. Because I think all you have to do is stick your head down there and keep it down there, and you drown. So, I don't, that's
Kind of a stupid. It's probably hard to drown, but impossible is it though? It's the exaggeration, I'm guessing. I'm not going to prove it unless you give me someone to prove it. So give me someone to prove it. I'll drown them, but then there's consequences. So, fuck yeah, this is you float.
So because of its density, if you remember the pointer, you humans only sink up to the waist. So trust this random video, which might be lying, that tells you you aren't gonna sink to your death, even though movies probably show you sink to your death. Which is right.
Viscosity is the issue. So toxic shame is very viscous. It's very dense. It's very sticky. So if you fight toxic shame with anger and agitation, it makes the toxic shame stickier.
Here's how you get out. You don't want to do this because what will happen will be amazing. If you ask someone to pull, pull you out and they're a super weightlifter, they'll dislodge you and cut you in half, which would be a fun train wreck that'll happen. Wouldn't that be amazing? You should try that. Someone try that in video. Show me.
So we'll go your legs and find your footing or expand your footing. Start there. That'll free up some of the stickiness from your legs and then distribute your weight horizontally. Find anchor points. Mirror back their context. Get your contacts. Have a broader connection with reality. Stop arguing single points. Arguing single points favors the person who lies. It favors a person who has stronger emotions.
So you get horizontal and you get distributed in context, and then slowly you climb out of the trap. Then once you're out of the trap, now you have the contacts and now you can tar baby the opponent. How many people remember Tar Baby? Is it Briar Rabbit? So first, you have to get stable so you don't fall for the trap. And then you can now use humanity, your humanity, your shared humanity to trap them by trying them, trying to play perfect them, trying to play God. It's Tar Baby. How did he spot that Tar Baby? Did he sing out? How do you do, real rabbit? Wait for the Tar Baby to say, "Fine, how are you?" But the Tar Baby, he don't say nothing. And Bear Fox, he lay low. So Bro Rabbit, try it again.
"How do you do?" But the Tar Baby ain't saying nothing. Then Bear Rabbit scratch one ear with his off behind foot and loud, he will find out why he can't get no answer. So if the abuser is trying to pull a reaction out of you, reactive abuse, you mirror back what their position is and you stay neutral and different. Then they're gonna try to keep poking. They're to keep coming back. Then you say, "Says he, what's the matter with you? I said, 'Howdy.' If you all in here, I said, 'Out here.' But the Tar Baby, you don't say nothing." And Bear Fox, healing.
So Bear Fox did the trap. Created a target. Rabbit, now it's up to him to teach the stuck-up strangers some manners. And he's saying, "Look, if you don't say how the time, I count three. I might bust you wide open." But the Tar Baby, he don't say nothing. And Foxy.
But still, the Tar Baby don't say nothing. Where Foxy lay low with the fidgets. Two and a half. Three. And he blow when he ball. But the more he thrash around, the rest off he get till he's so stuck up he can scarcely move his eyeballs. Oh, how do you do? Yeah, you come on. He's wishing he'd never been born.
Well, brother rabbit. So it's a slower process to create a Tar Baby. You're using shame to bring them down a notch into shared humanity. Then as you do all the different points, because they're gonna over, they're gonna overplay. Someone who's playing God is gonna overstep. If you're patient enough to mirror and get them to take a position and take different positions, they're gonna overdo it and then they'll be tired by either you calling them out or you blowing up their ego so that they'll embarrass themselves in public. It's just a matter of time. But if you want to beat the instrument and you're sloppy and you want to get it done fast, then they'll tar you back too. So it's toxic chain versus toxic shame. Which is harder? But as you develop more skills, you can do that. You must remember they have more sliming tools like this.
What? Because they fall back to tone policing. I was policing her language and her own judgment, in her own judgment, and her own judgment. And they're good. They're trying to throw you off the point. Trying to throw you off the point. Trying to throw you off. They'll keep trying to shift it. They'll keep trying to shift it. They'll keep trying to shift it. So you have to sort of stay on point and stay level and slowly set the Tar Baby in the sticky points. Point out their behaviors. Call it hell. Get let reality be the enforcer. Let the collective group be the enforcer. You try to do it yourself too much, too fast, then it's risky. It's dangerous. 8:49. We got 11 minutes to try to make this mix, make this something. What do we cover? We're supposed to cover super ego, toxic super ego. I think we sort of did some of that. Healthy shame. We gave you a little bit of an intro. What are some loose ends? Tar Baby, cutleries, and devour. Okay, so the main plea was trying to get you to be nicer to yourself. So I don't know if this will sort of be a nice exaggeration of what a toxic super ego might be like.
This is it, guys. This is my year. This is the year I finally become more organized and less anxious. Good for you. I think my goal for the year is to stop letting people in. I've got a whole system and it all starts right here. I write everything down in this journal. Everything that might be clogging up the old brain. Ideas, goals for the year, shopping lists. It all goes right here in one convenient, color-coded location. Wow, there is a lot of stuff in here. Oh yeah, don't you worry that the important stuff will get lost. I'm one step ahead of you, Zach. That's why I also have this to-do app. It tells me everything I need to get done in the day in case it falls out of my brain or my journal. Update journal. Oh, see, there's my reminder to update my journal. This thing has really kept me on the ball, especially now that I need to spend two hours journaling every day. Up there, gotta do that too. This all sounds pretty stressful. Yeah, it is. That's also why I downloaded this meditation app. Did you know that just an hour of meditation a day gives me the energy I need to catch up on all the work that piled up while I was meditating? It's true. But isn't that kind of counterintuitive? Yes. It also sends me a reminder every five seconds to breathe. Rest your eyes by looking away from screen. Trap. I gotta be honest, it feels like these systems are stressing you out even more. I thought the same thing, and that's why I bought this fidget cube. Another tool. It's a little tiny cube with a bunch of little buttons that don't do anything and little wheels and gizmos and stuff. It helps me relax. It's kind of like doing work, but it doesn't do anything. How much did you spend on all this? I haven't had the courage to look, but it's all here in the journal. Okay, so it's worth every penny because if I didn't buy all this stuff, then how can I relax after spending money on all this stuff? They organize journals. Ah, gotta do that. It's getting a little out of control in there, guys. I think I gotta rework the whole organizational system. That will help me relax. If you say so. I do say so. I do say so, Zach. I can finally relax because of all these things and because of my calling fragrances in my ergonomic chair. If it helps you, then I guess that's, yeah, what's important. Don't you ever fucking interrupt me. That's what's important. Trap. Do you have cow sam?
Human contact. That's what he needed. Not 50 different tools.
Hi, it's Mike Trapp. So that's just trying to use shame and humor to try to disarm some of the toxic shame. This also is trying to disarm some of it. They refuse to tell you hard truths. They enable, encourage, and say what they think you want to hear. When it comes to friendship, we have a lot of weird messages about what a friend should be. They should have your back no matter what. A good friend won't spill all your secrets. If it's 3 AM, they pick up the phone and help you bury that dead body. Oh my God, you guys. We're gonna get an early start to brunch. Oh my God, mimosas. Bottomless mimosas on me, you guys. Shut up. But I think a lot of the messaging around friendship is just wrong. Contemporary ideals of friendship insist that a friend should be a blind cheerleader, which can do way more harm than good. The cops found my phone at the scene. What should I do? Should I lie? I should lie, right? They said if I'm lent to the crime, I'm facing life in prison. Well, homegirl, you know exactly what it is to be the best you, and that means being who you really are, a murderer and a liar. So absolutely say, "Fuck off to the truth, justice, the consequences of your actions, and all of that." Lie. Live. Live. Live. Live. Go ahead now. Live. Live. Let's fucking see. Blind validation with no judgment. Isn't that what that is? Cheerleading. A cheerleader is someone who is incapable of being a real sounding board. They enable, encourage, and say what they think you want to hear. They refuse to tell you hard truths. So they offer me plea deal if I rat out Melissa. I know I'm the one that stabbed the guy, but I'll only get parole if I say she did it. We look exactly alike, and our fingerprints are the same. So it's an easy out. I should take it, right? Homegirl, if you want to be a backstabbing bitch, you should totes go for it. Backstabbing bitch. Backstabbing bitch. Absolutely compromise your moral ethics, loyalty, integrity, sisterhood, and everything else. Okay. Okay. Yeah. What you need in a friend is a co-historian. Someone who will check you when it's needed. Someone who supports you. This is what's missing. Co-historian that'll help you navigate the world, but also encourages you to take accountability. Guys, I'm gonna be honest with you. It's not looking good right now. Your accomplices to murder with obstruction of justice, if you ask me. You should plead guilty and serve your time. But we didn't kill him, and Anna promised us bottomless mimosas. See that pivot? Accomplice to a murderer got equivocated with bottomless mimosas. What are we supposed to say now to you? Need to bottomless up and sit down. Why do you guys even listen to her? Not only does she just say yes to whatever it is you say and feel, she's the reason you're here. Enabling the cheerleading enables stonewall and watch them try to shame her, and still she holds the cheerleading enabling stonewall. She stabbed him 19 times. Kevin deserved it. Look, if you want my advice, which clearly you do because I have a collared shirt on, so I'm your legal counsel as well as your co-historian. You still committed a serious crime. You chose to bury Kevin Nguyen in that crawl space and toast over his dead body with mimosas. Bottomless. Bottomless mimosas. Hey, shut up, Anna. I can't listen to you anymore. You don't care about our well-being. You don't care about helping us. All you care about is cheering us on, no matter how detrimental it is. We could ask if we should do math, and you would probably say yes.
That's what I'm talking about. We can't be friends anymore. We don't need a blind cheerleader. We need a co-historian. Someone who will tell us the truth, even when it's hard, and who wants us to live our lives with integrity. She looks shamed, right? Will she own anything, or will cheerleading stonewall continue? Who gives it to us straight, and who isn't a murderer? I understand. And our friendship. And our friendship. Hey, and our friendships. Enable, enable, enable. They enable, encourage, and say what they think you want to hear. So if you're in an environment where people are enabling weakness, enabling avoidance, cheerleading nonsense, cheerleading insights that aren't skills, you're being reinforced to go nowhere. And if you're also one of the people that are giving blind cheerleading, that might be a social strategy, but it's only going to go so far.
So here's some tips, or here's some pitfalls, and then we'll end with that. As pitfalls, what makes a jerk a jerk? Our free society is a moral free-for-all. Everyone policing everyone else's jerkiness, but to no clear standard other than you offend me or get the hell out of my way. So when people are moral policing you or other people, hold them suspect that they're just trying to get you out of the way or get what they want. They're not actually genuinely virtuous. They're just getting social credit by virtue signaling or trying to shut you down through moral outrage. What are some traps they do to shut you up? And what are some traps that you might do to play the same role? True jerkiness is part of human. So the comeback is what you don't like in others is your projection. So if you make a criticism that's bad, well, that's just your projection. You're just that too. You're dumping your shit on me. I think someone did that in the YouTube comments for me. Oh, it's my lack of self-reflection. Then I challenged her, "Prove your self-reflection. Come back to me." Then I'll go, "I can, I can do a self-reflection battle." And she didn't answer. KDW, I think that was her name. In nature, it's in all of us. Still automatically assuming that if you spot a jerk, you're the jerk, just enables them. Jerks respond to every challenge with variations on, "I know you are, but what am I?" You don't want to feed that. That's the argument. "I know you're what am I?" It's just a playground. By saying, "Yup, it's me," after all, you shouldn't be judgmental. This is common. Don't be judgmental. Common in spiritual circles. It's self-judgment. And funny, you never hear, "Don't be judgmental" when people are complimented. There's no escaping judgment. You just want to judge well. And sometimes that means judging someone to be a jerk. Yes. If I don't give people blind validation, then they start judging me or giving me hints. Where is my cookie? Where's my cookie? Where's my cookie? More hypocritical advice. Since name caller is Nick, don't name call. But that's name-calling the person trying to calling them out for name-calling. Their name-calling. So name-calling. Funny, too. You never hear, "Don't name call" when people say you're a great person. There's no escaping name-calling either. You'll do it aloud, under your breath, or in so many words. No, you just want to name-call accurately. That's the point. In getting careful about how to decide who's a jerk, is it fair name-calling? Is it close to accurate name-calling, or is it smear or slander? If you're bothered by someone, it's automatically half your. This is what uh Ben Taylor was doing. Conflict. It's your half too. You're in the game too. So you must have contributed. Didn't matter if I started it, and I've done it 20 times. I'm gonna pick something where you sort of did it one time out of a hundred, and I can say it's equal your fault. Call it a tie. Is slavery half the slave's fault? Nah. Again, it encourages jerks and bystanders too, who ignore oppression, saying the victims are equally to blame. Sure, it's good to walk away or just ignore jerks when you can't. This came up in person. One person, "Oh, I'm just supposed to walk away. I just walk away. I just leave. I just leave." But you sure as hell can't always live and let live. Works great, so long as you don't have to live with them. A jerk relative, colleague, boss, or a dictator, you can't just walk away. Onto the trapdoors. And I would add on that, if you're always leaving, then you're giving up territory. You're giving up your interest. Then you're feeding self-hatred because you're a fucking loser because you're always leaving. Your conscience is not going to like yourself. By constantly avoiding and leaving life, leaving life, you're gonna fuel depression and self-despair and hatred. Make it all about them. He's a jerk because he did this, that, and the other thing. Listing your litany of grievances focuses on symptoms. Do they add up to the person being a jerk? Maybe. But how? That's the question. You just this or that person did one thing, therefore they're all about demonizing them. That's the other side of uh superego projection where someone's too perfect. You can also just say one bad thing, they're all bad. Inside, someone's a jerk because they lied. Well, we all lie. Lying, which goes by other names when we like it, being tactful, diplomatic, keeping secret has its place. Or try, she's a game player. Again, we all play games. We say, "I hate game playing" when we're annoyed with games that hurt us, but that doesn't mean we don't play them. We're all quick to call something a fatal flaw, but we also live by these supposedly fatal flaws. A narcissist, a psychopath. Such terms make our subjective impressions sound like objective medical diagnoses. So this is the modern thing of psychologizing and then using different labels as high-level name-calling. But the people that might tend to do it faster, just calling a spade a spade, it's not that simple. Yes, there really are narcissists and psychopaths, but far fewer than diagnosed. Indeed, being quick to diagnose unsatisfying people as narcissists is just what a narcissist would do. In getting serious about the, there's danger everywhere. I see narcissists and bad people everywhere. Those are always fun new people. Question: What makes a jerk a jerk? What makes a jerk a jerk? That's another way of saying seek understanding. Seek context. Seek communication. Every mistake is an opportunity to learn, to grow, to connect to your healthy shame, to connect to your shared humanity. You connect to your shared humanity. Your shared humanity will guide you to healing and growth, and it's a great counter to someone who's playing God. I'd rather take the side of, "I'm human. I'm broken. I might fuck up. I'll let you be perfect. I'll let you do all the hard work while I throw tomatoes and laugh at your problems, or just give you more challenges because you want to be, you want to play God, you want to decide." Okay, I'll let you tire yourself out. I'll let you embarrass yourself. That's easier role. I have time and patience on my hand. You might get the cheap ones now, but you're just going to end up falling on your face. Just a matter of time. How do we end it? The time has come for this cookie. Bye-bye. We're not just blindly accepting the self-report of the examinee. We're not just blindly accepting the self-report of the examinee. We're not just blindly accepting the self-report of the examinee. We're not. I have a guard up for sure. I have a guard up for sure. I have a guard up for sure. We're not just blindly accepting the self-report at the exit. Shamed for being curious. Shamed for being curious. Shamed for being curious. Shamed for being curious. Shamed for being curious. Shame. Shame is okay. How do we neutralize shame? Shame tells us that we're human. I don't have a good positive shame. Me, do I? Oh, maybe this is it. Why do we get so insulted? Why do we get so insulted? Why do we get so insulted? Why do we get so insulted? Why do we get so insulted? Why do we get so insulted? I just say, "That's right. That's right. Delete myself out of the equation." They're trying to set up. That's right. That's right. Delete myself out. Out. That's right. I just say, "That's right. That's right. Delete myself out of the equation." They're trying to set up. That's right. Junction. Don't get into the game of control and counter-control. Don't get into the game of control and counter-control. Don't get into the game of control and counter-control. Don't get.
What we've got here is failure to communicate.