i am bulletproof in this department
most people understand this within a very short period of time
i do not play games. i do not respond to those who do unless it's so in my face that it cannot be avoided. it is then that i become a terrible three headed creature with dripping fangs and blood in my claws
yeah
then they leave me alone after that
[MENTION=5662]ENT8[/MENTION];
Not to pick on you (I think you have a very reasonable, if not mature, way of dealing with those bullshits); just a random musing.
What if I said that demanding honesty is in itself a psychological attack?
Not that it's bad; morally wrong, or anything negative;
but as far as warring goes, it has a side dish of "I demand you to go beyond your comfort zone and your safety area so I could engage you in the areas where I have more advantages."
It still affects the battlefield; the opposition party.
It's really funny. <3
-IF- we're talking about warring, the only thing matters is the blows being dealt. Not whether we are right or wrong, justified or not, attacking or defending.
Position matters only when we gain some advantages from it.
So the goal, the purpose is to win?Ahhh... very astute Trifolium. And your ALMOST right... it's really more of a "counter attack" - at least as I set it up (and have used it). It absolutely could be used just as an attack against some people in certain situations.
However, it's really more of an "atom bomb" in that it either wins the battle outright, or it forces out in the open a "deeper nature" about a relationship that if exposed, would show very plainly how wrong that aspect of the relationship is, and such a revelation usually demands some sort of change.
Unless of course the person using it is morally in the the wrong! in which case, it's like building an atomic warhead with a faulty rocket system. Push the button, and watch yourself get blown the F up.
However, it is easier to discuss in a forum than it is to actually employ such a strategy. It takes a certain person, and a certain level of geninue authenticity and revelation that I find most folks would rather not expose. (thus, it's PARTICULARLY effective against "game players" who nearly always use dishonesty in the form of subcontext, sarcasm, and inference to attack). But, the key to using it well is to be able to identify within yourself exactly what your feeling, AND why... while being "attacked"... and being able to keep step with that internal knowledge as they try to manuver their attacks around it.
If one can keep in tune with such feelings, and why they exist, as well as how they really feel about what is being "done to them", and why it is being done.... it is extremely effective. The best i've found so far. But, it's not easy to do this while you are being attacked.
There is a Ghandi quote that goes something along the lines of: "yes, the british have the guns, and the army, fine. So we will engage them on a plane in which their guns and their army are useless. We will engage them in a battle of the heart, of truth... and on this battlefield we will be victorious, because they have no weapon that can defend against it"
I don't remember the exact quote, but it goes something like that. I thought it was one of the most profound quotes I had ever read. I figure "worked for Ghandi...hell, works for me too!"
ENT8
Anyone ever had games played with them? Do you play back?
So the goal, the purpose is to win?
If so, it's particularly effective, yes. And you're not particularly wrong either.
But in perfect honesty, that's still playing the field.
....and again, I'm not judging you or the others who'd done this, neither am I elevating myself above this shit (no sir, guilty as charged) although I am possibly being offending here, and my sincerest apologies (although I'm not retracting my words, so, yeah. Useless? Maybe.);
I'm pointing out the fact (and possibly shattering certain pedestals or two); some people loved the romantic idea of 'being in the right side' (me included, seriously) that we were too blind to realize we're facing mirrors. At least, I certainly did that. Hopefully none of you weren't.
IMO,
These wars are all political.
And honesty is just yet another sort of weaponry.
Honesty and sincerity and truths can still be used for manipulation.
Church-sanctioned weaponry, I guess.
And God, so...many apologies. So many...controversial opinions I just sprouted.
I really should stay away from this topic.
I tend to analyse everyone I know, research their past and find their biggest weakness. While it's been years since someone's tried to manipulate and use me, I'm ready to fight back if they do.
I just think that "I quit; I don't want to play with your games anymore." is different than "I know you're doing this and I'm calling you out. [Insert any additional sentence here]". The way I see it; one is the other laced with aggression. "I'm going to back out from here, but I'm still taking my chances to hurt you and put you in your place."it's not about "winning", it's about recognizing when someone is trying to START playing games, and then immediately demanding a more functional, authentic form of communiction. if they don't choose this, then one simply ends the relationship on that same note. period.
To use an analogy, if someone wants to play hide and go seek, fine. I just tell them I am not playing that game.
By recognize it for what it is, and calling it out, it makes further engagement impossible. Furthermore, it's not about getting ones way, it's about honesty in a relationship.
so, it isn't "winning", because it actually allows the truth to surface for BOTH sides to see clearly, and thus, it destroys any power that EITHER holds over the other gained via manipulative actions/communication.
That's alright. I don't really have an objection towards your way of looking at things, and I apologize if my words (...well, they are quotes, after all) is seen as such.If you want to argue "well, if one person wants honesty and authenticity, and another wants something else...it's still engaging them, because it's what one person wants vs another", well, ok. I suppose we can argue good and evil till the cows come home. Bottom line is it's a way to directly confront such behavior and strip it nude to be seen for what it really is. It either ends there, or the relationship does. This is of course not the only way to put an end to "manipulative behaivor" but is a particularly effective one in my opinion.
all manipulation is about someone gaining psychological power in a subtle way over another. by recognizing this outright in direct communication, it prevents this approach this from being effective... if done correctly, it prevents this for BOTH parties.
understand where I may have contributed
Psychological manipulation on a personal level just to get one's way at all costs to whoever else is involved..................is revealing. Being careful not to judge, I can tell many things about the person and the situation when this is thrown at me. The timing they use is revealing. The subtle veil of innocense is revealing.
When so many things are revealed to me, I cannot help but to distance myself even further from all involved.
When they are trying to make a big deal out of something so....trivial...
maybe something else I am missing. I feel there are those that just like to stir the pot...like casting lots: shake and see what falls out. I believe in leaving well enough alone.
Same here. Never played games, never associated with those who do. When I was younger, if someone tried to play "games" with me... or even around me, I would usually make it a point to publically humiliate them on the spot, at the first sign of such behavior (when I was in public around such a person of course)
I one time stood a girl up who literally was in bed and invited me to join her. The same girl the day before had tried some passive aggressive BS because I was unable to leave work early to make a 6 hour drive to see this person.
After this nonsense showed up, I stayed for 24 hours, as I wasn't keen on making a 6 hr drive a 12 hour drive...
the next day, I think she felt satisfied with herself, and was now willing to "hook up" because she had worked out her immaturity or whatever.
I slept on the couch, much to her confusion and surprise.
I left immediately as soon as I woke up, and I ignored her phone calls, and never again spoke to her.
That was it. One meeting, one evening that she tried to get over on me by refusing to have sex the first night because she was too insecure about whatever and felt shafted that I wouldn't just neglect everything and get in my car and drive to her place earlier that day.
it's kinda too bad, she was pretty cute... but the surprised confused look on her face was well worth the "sacrifice".
And that's about the closest I've ever come to experiencing "games/manipulations/etc" in my personal or social sphere.
over the last 10 years, when one of the very rare occassions comes up and I happen to cross paths with someone foolish and petty enough to try anything remotely resembling such behavior...
I stand them up on the spot, in public, private, or otherwise. I tell them exactly how it makes me feel. and I tell them exactly how it makes them look in my eyes. I tell them that such behavior is confusing and hurtful, and I don't associate with people who are unable to communicate clearly, or are unable/unwillling to interact with those they consider "part of their social circle" in a way that isn't cruel or dysfunctional.
At this point, they usually deny such behavior, and look at me as if I'M the idiot.
I then re-iterate to them exactly what I said... and ask them slowly if there was any part of what I said that they didn't understand... and if need be, i will dictate it all over again to them, if they care to write it down. I promise to go as slow as they need to write it, since they are obviously confused by this.
Now, they generally go into a defensive mode, saying they arn't confused, and i'm the one confused.
and to bring it all to a conclusion, at this point I generally will say something along the lines of "you know, I was giving you an honest, straightforward, heartfelt explanation for my postion. You are choosing to interpret that in a way that it simply isn't. since we obviously cannot communicate with each other very well, as this entire conversation has exemplified, then it's obvious we don't have any reason to waste any more time in each others company. Goodbye"
And then I walk away, delete numbers, forget both faces and names, and move on.
BS people deserve BS interaction from me...which is to say, none.
@ENT8;
What if I said that demanding honesty is in itself a psychological attack?
I disagree with it being "still playing the field". It ends the ability for one to engage in such behaviors. The goal isn't to arbitrarily "win"... the goal is to give them one chance to recognize the manipulative behavior they are exhibiting. And then, if they don't recognize it for what it is, and take a different tact, it simply makes any further attempt on their behalf futile.
If indeed they do not recognize their behavior for what it is, In keeping with this same approach of authenticity, one would simply inform the "manuipultor" that they will have nothing more to do with them. period.
it's not about "winning", it's about recognizing when someone is trying to START playing games, and then immediately demanding a more functional, authentic form of communiction. if they don't choose this, then one simply ends the relationship on that same note. period.
To use an analogy, if someone wants to play hide and go seek, fine. I just tell them I am not playing that game.
By recognize it for what it is, and calling it out, it makes further engagement impossible. Furthermore, it's not about getting ones way, it's about honesty in a relationship.
so, it isn't "winning", because it actually allows the truth to surface for BOTH sides to see clearly, and thus, it destroys any power that EITHER holds over the other gained via manipulative actions/communication.
I just think that "I quit; I don't want to play with your games anymore." is different than "I know you're doing this and I'm calling you out. [Insert any additional sentence here]". The way I see it; one is the other laced with aggression. "I'm going to back out from here, but I'm still taking my chances to hurt you and put you in your place."
But I see your point.
That's alright. I don't really have an objection towards your way of looking at things, and I apologize if my words (...well, they are quotes, after all) is seen as such.
Do you think this method allows people to come clean and apologize, or does it just make them feel stupid and ruin relationships?
Where I'm from, people would say, sometimes people need a taste of their own medecine. Maybe it they felt the hurt and pain of what they're doing, it would make them think twice. Being nice to people or ignoring them doesn't seem to work always, so if they can't handle someone confronting them with their BS, then maybe they'll experience enough shame to avoid continuing the manipulation, at least with the person who stood up to them.
@ENT8, and I always find it interesting when people pretend they don't know what you're talking about when they're confronted with their actions. They are suddenly quite innocent and clueless. It's really interesting and inspiring.
Again, sometimes, people need a taste of their own medecine or else they'll think it's cute to keep on playing these games.