11 Jun 17
Originally posted by dj2beckerI did. I asked for clarification on page 50 (not to mention dozens of pages ago on this thread). So, as you see, I posted it before I posted my interpretation (which was on page 51). You now have the opportunity to set the record straight, unless you think I am right.
Shouldn't you ask for clarification before you post your perceived meaning to be my own words?
11 Jun 17
Originally posted by dj2beckerSo now you want to take on the standard psychological understanding that deprivation is a form of abuse, rather than simply admit you didn't realise deprivation was a form of abuse, and as a consequence, widen your definition? Is that what an adult would do?
I think plaque and psychological abuse are vastly different. What objective standard did the people who gave you your professional training use to establish what psychological abuse was?
11 Jun 17
1 edit
Originally posted by dj2beckerI posted four things: [1] your words, reproduced verbatim; I did not attribute any other words to you; [2] a question: "Why did you mean?" [which has been asked several times already earlier on the thread but you ignored it]; [3] my interpretation of what they mean; [4] repeated invitations for you to correct my interpretation if you think it is wrong.
Why are you asking me what the words I said actually mean after posting other words as my own?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by Ghost of a DukeYou are claiming the standard for psychological understanding is objective when it clearly is based upon the subjective opinions of some people.
So now you want to take on the standard psychological understanding that deprivation is a form of abuse, rather than simply admit you didn't realise deprivation was a form of abuse, and as a consequence, widen your definition? Is that what an adult would do?
Originally posted by dj2beckerNo, the discussion was about whether on not you had been psychologically abused, not whether you felt you had been. A victim is often completely unaware of being subjected to such, and may for years after not only feel that they were not abused, but hold their abuser in high regard.
The discussion was about whether or not I felt psychologically abused.
11 Jun 17
Originally posted by dj2beckerThe opinion of professional people, yes.
You are claiming the standard for psychological understanding is objective when it clearly is based upon the subjective opinions of some people.
Please explain why you, in isolation, believe that deprivation is not a form of abuse. (And please don't refer back to your basic dictionary definition of abuse, but in the grown up understanding that abuse comes in many forms).
11 Jun 17
Originally posted by chaney3The discussion about the nature of psychological abuse, if one ignores some of the repetitious back and forth, might be of benefit to someone. And certainly light has been shed upon the nature of denial. Someone might find it interesting. Who knows. I have.
What do you hope to gain here?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
11 Jun 17
Originally posted by avalanchethecatWell you certainly are trying to enforce your opinion of what it means to be psychologically abused upon me.
No, the discussion was about whether on not you had been psychologically abused, not whether you felt you had been. A victim is often completely unaware of being subjected to such, and may for years after not only feel that they were not abused, but hold their abuser in high regard.