Content note: general discussion of abuse, social fall-out from talking about abuse, and rape (no specifics)

Most of the caring people I have known rely on the same tool to manage any conflict: compassionate conversation. This is a fantastic tool for many interpersonal conflicts, and it can be life-alteringly good if you had previously only experienced antagonistic or competitive conflict.

However that tool is not a simple one and it simply will not run without all parties contributing respect, a willingness to be wrong, ability and willingness to put in effort, and a desire to create an outcome that is positive for everyone.

I recently got to listen to someone speak about restorative justice, as a concept opposed to punitive justice. I absolutely believe that punishment does nothing good, and that most harm can be best addressed with a focus on healing and providing solutions to the problems that created problematic behavior in the first place. I think there are too many times when we rush to discard a person rather than coming together as a community and explaining the harm they caused and guiding the person to safer behavior.

However, when we discussed it, all the solutions that were mentioned relied on the person who caused harm being willing to acknowledge that harm and work on a solution that would reduce future harm to the victim.

Unfortunately there are many cases where the person who caused harm does not care about the victim, or doesn't care enough to admit to fault or change their behavior. In these cases, a restorative justice approach will often result in further harm to the victim, because rather than doing the work, the abuser will lash out at the victim. They will call this person a liar, and often make up offenses to try and paint themselves as the victim. This happens so often that it has a name: D A R V O: deny, attack, reverse victim and offender.

Which brings me to another practice in social justice which can be skewed to cause harm: believing all victims without checking for truth. I am NOT suggesting that we EVER dismiss a claim out of hand. However, we need to do more than zero checking because if we don't, abusers get to control every situation. All they have to do is make up some shit about actually, they hit that person because the other one hit them first, etc.

When I say check, I don't mean for forensic evidence. I mean, talk to all parties who witnessed it and ask them to tell their version of the story. Then make your own decision about who is dangerous and who is not.

I once was told that a friend of mine, Cliff*, had raped someone. I was not at the place where this happened and I didn't know the victim, but a mutual friend, Mac*, told me (with permission) that this had happened because I had invited Cliff to a cuddle party, where consent is extra important. I was horrified that my friend Cliff might have done this but I also know that consent mistakes exist, and I hoped that there was some kind of explanation or at least remorse and reform.

So I reached out to Cliff and said hey, I have heard about a consent violation you did, can you explain please? Cliff then explained sort of vaguely and made it sound as if something relatively innocuous was all that had happened, and asked what exactly I had heard. I got permission from the victim via Mac and quoted the thing that the victim said that Cliff did (unambiguous rape), and Cliff did not deny it, but asked to move our talk to in person or via phone. I can't hear on the phone and I didn't have the gas money and time to drive to them so I said no.

I asked them to explain themselves further and they didn't -- they just stopped responding. (it didn't occur to me until later that they probably reacted this way to protect themselves legally) From this interaction I decided that Cliff was not a safe person and that it was likely that they did commit rape and then try to pass it off as something else when I confronted them. I waited several months, still hoping they would follow-up and have something worthwhile to say but they did not, so I unfriended them. Later I learned that they were not informing their sex partners about an STD they had, which I believed partly because they now have a history of consent violations.

Which brings me to my suggested community solution, which is listening to all stories and checking to get as much information as possible, then taking protective action if necessary. Whenever there is abuse, it almost always has happened to more than one person. In my opinion, patterns are the best evidence of someone being an abuser, but you can't notice these patterns without checking. And of course, in the meantime ask what you can do to support the person who has told you that they suffered abuse, and do what you can.

Then, when someone has been confirmed as an unrepentant, unchanged abuser, they should be removed from the social circle of the victim if that is what the victim wants. People don't have to stop interacting with the abuser entirely, but any gathering of the victim's social circle should not include them. This is not a punishment, but a protective measure to prevent the victim from being harmed further, and to protect others in the community.

What happens more often is ostracization of the victims, where people other than the abuser are continuously cut out of the social circle because it has become traumatic for them. Abusers should not get safety at the expense of their victims. We have to make a choice to remove the abusers so that we don't remove the victims by default.

*(these names are fake)

Disclaimer: the ideas in this post are just my own philosophical musings, not facts.

For most of my life I felt constantly hungry for love. Even while someone was being loving to me I would feel desperate for more. It wasn't until I was 27 that I even had one moment where I was receiving love and felt satisfied and like I didn't need more -- would enjoy it, but didn't need it. And it wasn't until I was 33 that I ever had that sensation on a regular basis.

I have this theory that until a person reaches a saturation point with loving nourishment, they can never feel relaxed or secure in any of their relationships. This one experience is so pivotal that it is like a stage of development, and a human's life perspective is profoundly changed once they have this experience. Parents are supposed to give this experience to their kids so that their kids can then enter adulthood ready to meet others as equals. Instead most parents don't, and most people enter adulthood still desperate for love, wanting to get without having to give, feeling like there is never enough. Like starved children we snatch at any nourishment offered and many times spill it everywhere.

People who felt fully loved as children often can't relate to feeling insecure or needy without logical cause. These people are put off by the expression of those feelings, thinking of them as irrational or silly, but I think feeling "full" of love is a real human need as powerful as the need for food or air. For me at least, having food in my hand is not comforting when it is not going to fill me and I doubt any more will ever come. We scarf it down as quick as we can so we have our hands free to grab the next scrap. Or we "save" it for when we will need it more, which is a day that almost never comes.

There are so many harms that can spring from this. Perhaps the biggest is that people who have never experienced saturation (I will call them hungry, for lack of a better word) are willing to accept all manner of ill treatment along with love because they are starving. It is ridiculous to expect people who have never had enough food to ever eat slowly or turn down crappy food.

In the same way, it makes no sense to expect people who have never felt fully loved to ever be satisfied with an easy amount of love, and it makes no sense to expect them to be able to say no to people who offer love as an appetizer to abuse. So many hungry people raised by abusive or selfish parents have absolutely no way to tell what is real love and what is bribery.

Many times we choke out our opportunities for real love because we get so desperate and cling so hard. We can delude ourselves, magnifying small kindnesses and minimizing all negatives to try and trick ourselves into feeling nourished; this prevents either person in the relationship from learning and growing. We can lose ourselves, becoming so desperate for the other person to keep loving us and not leave us that we compromise more and more of who we are until we are just a reflection of the other.

The worst part is that often, someone has to have experienced saturation themselves to be able to give it to someone else. A hungry person can't purely focus on nourishing someone else because as you feed them a part of you watches jealously, wishing you were the one getting that care.

I recognize it so easily now and it always makes me ache and feel an urge to throw out my whole life and dedicate it to making this person feel loved. But I can't do that, and it wouldn't be a good way to spend my life, pouring myself out endlessly for people who literally can't give back. That's not remotely sustainable.

Other than meeting one of those lucky ones who got saturated with love in childhood, I think we can only hope to find someone who wants to get love in the way we are inclined to give it, and wants to give love in the way we want to get it. I think other than basic ethics, this is the number 1 most important thing in a relationship.

I'd advise my former self to ask, first and foremost, as a precursor to close friendship and/or romance, "think of the three closest people in your life. What do you think they get out of their relationship with you? how do you bring them nourishment and joy most often? most easily? most happily? and on the other hand, what actions of others make you feel nourished and contented?" and then I'd consider whether I could feel nourished by the same things, and if I could nourish them in the way that works best for them.

I do a lot of explaining myself as a queer, demisexual, agender, trans, relationship anarchist, vegetarian, eclectic pagan Quaker with ADD-PI (attention deficit disorder - primarily inattentive) and CAPD (central auditory processing disorder). My communication methods can be alarmingly rude on accident (illustrated by my lack of understanding of why others appreciate empty words like "hi") but my goal is almost always to create the best understanding for the most people. If I have one main function, it is to explain: explain people to each other, explain systems to people, explain myself to those I care about, explain how things work to my own self, explain to others how to practice skills I've learned.

My primary motivation is compassion, and for me that is very complex. In a simple, wholesome world compassion is just being kind to the people around you. In a world of structural injustice, compassion takes much more work. It takes learning about systems and about anyone who is different from you, because otherwise you will hurt people no matter how wonderful your intentions are. So I spend a lot of time trying to learn about people who are different from me and trying to help others also learn, so that I can reduce the amount of suffering I cause and hopefully ripple out to reduce suffering in general.

I want to connect with living beings in a mutually nourishing way. I've learned that if a person wants to reduce suffering enough to do work for it, we will probably nourish each other and be great friends. My hope in life and in writing is to create more understanding that will allow for more nourishing connections.

compassion:
valuing others' needs as much as (NOT MORE THAN) one's own.

evil:
valuing benefit (especially luxury benefits) to oneself over harm (by neglect or direct damage) to others.

Question from a friend: ...our culture actually encourages thoughtlessness and poor self-awareness and poor other- awareness. And yet, you have honed (and continue to grow) these skills better than anyone I've ever known. Did anything set you on that path? Was it just innate? A combination of things?

My self-awareness began with the church, I think. I went to a revival when I was 11 and promised God I wouldn't lie or steal any more (which I had done a lot before then). I stopped, and through monitoring my own actions I became aware of what led to them, slowly over time. But it also stalled out for a while because I shut down to everyone and everything to survive living with my parents and living in a city full of terrible painful energy. Later I started LJing and met Hannah, whose wonderful prying questions helped me open up to myself and others. When I started going to therapy for the sexual abuse I experienced as a child, I became self-aware more acutely and I became aware of others in a deep way.

I realized that every hurtful action came from a hurt person, and that people didn't hurt you because they were just nasty people but because their experiences led them to think that their behavior was an appropriate response. It wasn't until I was with Kylei that I realized that most of the time, people don't realize the pain they are causing. Kylei and I loved each other so deeply and yet often caused each other terrible pain, never intentionally. I came to understand that my reasoning is just my point of view and that another person could have a positive intention for an action even when it seems to me like there could only possibly be negative intentions.

The biggest help for me with learning other-awareness is asking questions instead of deciding for myself what someone's motives are. Nowadays forgetting to check is the outlier, but it still happens. The biggest help for me with self-awareness is writing often and having at least one chunk of alone time per week. Self-awareness is a privilege, because it takes free time (at least for me) and free time is a privilege. Another thing that helps HUGELY is people asking meaningful prying questions, which is part of why I take them as a gift.

And reading people's introspection helps a great deal with both self- and other- awareness, because I realize new perspectives that others have and I realize my own perspective, in contrast. It helps me to notice the air I'm breathing, so to speak, to notice my ways and thus be able to engage with them deliberately rather than through habit. This is a huge part of my love for LJ.

Also, I think there is a part of my awareness that comes from my neuro-type; I see things in pieces rather than as a whole, especially people. So I notice small shifts that signal meaning, more often than I would if I was considering the whole. And lastly, part of it is a reaction to trauma. As a kid I learned how to avoid pain by paying close attention to my parents' moods and reacting accordingly. This is some intense training in reading emotion, in being aware of others. The harder to learn has definitely been self-awareness, for me.

Memes are like microbes. They can survive the most hostile environments, they reproduce endlessly with the slightest encouragement, and they transfer from person to person without the person even noticing. A meme can reproduce simply by indirectly mentioning it: for instance, asking someone to put their name on a test can reinforce the impact of gender stereotyping (if, like most names, it is gender-specific). That is ALL it takes.

As someone who is invested in social justice, my main focus is stopping the reproduction of oppressive memes. It's about as hard as hunting microbes one by one. They reproduce faster than anyone could ever wipe them out; people have to develop individual immunities to them. But there is only one kind of immunity that I have found, and that is compassion followed by many rounds of education. In order to resist oppression, you have to understand it, and to do that you first have to give a shit about people different from yourself. Education is never the first step; a person has to care before they can be educated. Compassion alone is also useless: owning a machine will do you no good if you do not know how to turn it on.

Maybe some people have learned about the suffering of others and THEN started caring, but I haven't seen it. What I have seen is instances like a white person becoming friends with a black person and then caring about racism, or a man loving a woman who ceaselessly, patiently explains how his behavior is a problem and because he cares about her he reconsiders his actions, or a cis person seeing their trans friend suffer and starting to care about how transphobia harms people. In all these cases, if they didn't care about the person experiencing it, they would not even notice/acknowledge the oppression much less care (and doing something about it is completely out of the question). Love for an individual does not always create compassion, nor is it always necessary, but for most it is the quickest route to learning compassion that extends beyond one's own group.

The only way to begin inoculation is by teaching people to relate. This will not happen when differences are held up as innate or inevitable: if a man thinks that he is inherently different from a woman, he will not empathize with suffering from sexism, any more than he would empathize with or even notice an ant getting stepped on. Instead he will rationalize it as 'not that bad' and thus not worth effort. Intellectual understanding of the indirect effects of oppression is not a strong motivator because privilege is an excellent shield from those effects. There are countless strains of oppressive memes, but the deepest and most powerful meme of oppression is the idea of inherent and/or inevitable difference. If I had a choice to eradicate only one meme from all of humanity, the fallacious concept of inherent and/or inevitable difference would be ruthlessly eviscerated.

What are your core values? I would love to know. I figured out a trick for learning what they are: you get really upset when someone else does something that violates them, and feel deep regret if you violate them. Thus, I might like being vegetarian, but if it wouldn't make me feel regret to eat meat, then refraining from eating it is not a core value of mine. Considering it this way, I have come up with my core values:

Justice. I know this to be a core value because nothing upsets me more than the enactment of the idea that hierarchy is good or necessary; that's disrespect on a grand scale. Beyond the visceral reaction, I act to dismantle/resist oppressive structures around me and work to uproot all of the hierarchies implanted in my brain by society. It is imperative to me that I die having demolished some structures of injustice, even if I am only successful within my own brain. Unquestioned privilege is a great enemy of justice so I attempt to question my privilege as much as possible.

Respect. This one is closely tied to the first, but is more micro-scale. I define respect as: being careful not to manipulate the will of others and being careful not to hurt others, whether deliberately or through carelessness. This means only leading, touching, or otherwise intruding upon people if they have consented to it, and learning about people who are different from you so that you do not unintentionally insult or hurt others.

Reverence/wonder. I have put these together because I experience them in the same way. For me, all things (living or non-living) have feelings, and all things are important and magnificent if you consider them carefully. I feel a terrible shock and revulsion when someone reacts to wonder with a shut-it-down attitude (for example, a child sees an oil slick and says "look how pretty!" to their parent and their parent says something in a dismissive tone). Approaching all things with wonder and reverence -- treating them as if they are magic and as if they are alive (whether you believe it or not) -- is extremely important to me. Part of this is having a personal relationship with things I own, especially things I use daily. I do not want to have two items that serve the same purpose, unless I often need more than one of them at a time; thus I have one coat, one jacket, one pair of shoes (and a pair I wear only at interviews), one pair of sunglasses, one pair of glasses, etc. Another part of this is not harming any living thing any more than necessary for survival (though I am hypocritical about this and will use anti-bacterial and/or anti-viral chemicals for cleaning or medicine).

Connection/compassion. I see all parts of the universe(s) as one being, and the truest expression of that being as empathy. I feel this as the purpose of all life, and those top three I listed because they are the methods to this one. I feel equality, respect, and reverence/wonder are the values necessary for connection. I have seen inequality, disrespect, and irreverence destroy possibility of connection in spiritual, social, ecological, and other ways. Ways of honoring connection are important to me and I value them even when they are not ones I would want to do or feel capable of such as climbing a mountain or having sex with a stranger (did it once, that was enough). Refusing to attempt to empathize is deeply upsetting to me as a violation of this value.

Imperfection/action. I do not ask "what would fix this?" but instead "how can I make this better?" I allow myself to fail at my own values without judging myself; I just look at the instance and try to learn how to avoid it next time. I do not strive for perfection or reject any but the best, but instead take action. When people do not have this value they do things like say "well I can't fix the whole world so I'm just going to throw my cigarette butt or water bottle on the ground like everyone else." I think that comes from fear of self-loathing; they do not want to commit to a value that they cannot do perfectly because they would hate themselves for failing. I am okay with failure; it is the effort that matters to me. I want to take imperfect actions.

Honesty. I cannot stand lies, not from me or other people. Not in words or silence or deeds. I will not pretend to like someone who damages me on purpose, even if that would allow me to escape damage. I do not think it is acceptable to be silent when I know that my silence will be taken to mean something other than the truth (though I will hypocritically do this if I feel endangered).

Curiosity/questioning. Asking questions is a sacred value of mine, and I am hurt when people do not show curiosity towards me. (however, I recognize that the 'showing' is a kind of openness and there may be curiosity with no evidence for me to see) I am deeply upset when people squelch curiosity, especially of children. Part of this value is critical analysis: not just absorbing information but engaging with it, dismantling it and rebuilding it as one's own unique understanding.

---

And these are my secondary values, deeply important to me but not to the level that I am automatically repulsed by people who violate them:

Transparency/openness. I value the free flow of sharing and loathe when things are cloaked. I feel betrayed when I learn that people I feel close to have kept something hidden from me, even if they didn't make me think something untrue. I feel smothered and shrunk when I cannot share freely, and good when I can, even if I feel ashamed of the thing I am sharing. I feel disconnected and unloved when people do not share freely with me, and honored and loved when people do share freely with me.

Creativity. By this I don't mean being an artist: I mean creating. Taking some part of yourself and sharing it with the world; taking some fallow bit of the universe and making it sprout. I feel deeply upset when anyone disparages someone else's creation as inferior. Creation in and of itself is sacred. Whether you make macaroni necklaces or carve marble or decorate your notebook or whatever, it all matters.

Growth/change. I need to be able to look back on my life and see that I have become more of the me that I want to be. I am upset when people suggest that I should not concern myself with deliberate change (especially of my mind), should return to a former version of myself, or should alter my growth pattern to suit them. I 100% disagree with the statement "people don't change." This is an important value of mine because no matter what I might have accomplished, if I did not grow and change during the process, I would consider that part of my life wasted.

Thoroughness. This is one I only learned I had after I kept getting upset that others didn't have it. Once I realized it was a clash of values I was much more accepting. I value doing things carefully and fully. This can be a hindrance and it is incompatible with values like easygoingness (there's got to be a better word for that but I can't think of it). Tidiness falls in here (I also don't live up to my own value in this way sometimes).

(written for LJ Idol's topic 0) ETA: On further reflection I rearranged these for better accuracy and added "imperfection" because it is vital to me. As evidenced by this imperfect entry :D

A world where Hannah and I were never friends is inconceivable for me. But even more so, myself without the changes Hannah has inspired in me; most importantly, how ze taught me to keep compassion in my anger.

My earliest education in how to be angry involved yelling, throwing things, calling names, breaking things, and generally trying to hurt the person one was angry at. Through my first romantic relationship I learned how to refrain from those things, and I thought I was really good at being angry without being a jerk. But then Hannah and I had our first fight. I was very angry and I did not want to hurt Hannah, so I withdrew into coldness and silence, trying to dissolve my anger before interacting. Hannah got very upset with me about this, which baffled me. Here I was, not attacking, restraining myself, trying to avoid being mean, and it wasn't enough? what more could ze possibly want?

We talked about it for some hours, and ze tried to explain to me that one could be angry and compassionate/kind at the same time -- that ze practiced this with zir partner Nick. I didn't even believe zir at first, because in my mind anger was the opposite of love, and they could not coexist. But when I saw how upset ze was, I realized that even though I was trying very hard not to hurt zir, my methods were doing just that. So I opened myself up to the possibility that one could be angry and compassionate at the same time. I asked how ze did it, and I do not remember any more what ze responded -- but it took root, grew and became an inextricable part of me. I didn't even realize this until I found myself getting upset with people for how they treated me when they were angry. In trying to articulate why, I verbalized how it is that I try to act when I am angry.

1) hold off on getting angry; assume good intentions. Most of the time, the anger is coming from a misinterpretation of someone else's behavior; first ASK what their motives are. Don't jump straight from "they did this" to "and that means BAD THINGS." Take a pause in the middle and ask. In my experience, the vast majority of the time people are not trying to hurt me. Most of the time they are missing some key information or understanding that would have prevented my upsetness.

2) treat them as a whole person; don't turn them into a cardboard cut-out labeled "enemy." Don't ignore or discount the good, even if they have been a total shithead for the past day and a half. Remind yourself of previous kindnesses, things that contradict the statement their actions seem to be making to you.

3) listen and empathize. Being understanding of their reasons does not invalidate your own pain. I used to refuse to empathize because I thought if I did, the other person would take that as proof that my suffering wasn't really that bad, or would ignore my suffering because they hurt too. But through practice I learned that it is possible to give compassion AND receive it in a situation of hurt on both sides.

4) don't disconnect. It takes a hell of a lot of strength to stay emotionally connected to someone who is hurting you, but it's a hell of a lot easier to rebuild afterward if you haven't severed bonds. I can understand when people do this because it is instinctual, but I believe it is the more damaging route. For me, at least, it definitely is.

I can't even imagine myself without these practices. Not that I'm always true to them; sometimes I need to be called out on my turning-people-into-cutouts, for sure -- but I do usually manage to follow #1 and avoid anger all together. But they are so much a part of my personhood that without them, I cannot conceive of the kind of person I would be.

I can't say how it makes other people feel because I haven't asked, but I can say that when this method is used on me it makes ALL of the hurt and upset go away. It makes me feel safe, loved, and understood, and it makes forgiveness the easiest thing ever. (I don't feel that anyone on my friends list owes me any apology, just to be clear)

How I apologize:
I refrain from getting defensive or considering whether or not it is "my fault" -- regardless of my intentions, the point is that you were hurt.
I try to fully understand how my actions hurt you,
     ("so when I did action Y that hurt you because situation/perspective Z")
I empathize with you and apologize,
     ("I can imagine how that would hurt; if I had been in situation/perspective Z I would have felt the same way. I imagine you felt _____; I'm so sorry")
THEN AND ONLY THEN
I explain my feelings and motives,
     ("I can see how it seemed like I just didn't care, but my intention was _____, and I definitely do care")
I figure out how to avoid ever making the same mistake, and
     ("I think that happened because situation/perspective X")
I commit to a change which will keep me from making that mistake again.
     ("I commit to being more careful, avoiding situation/perspective X so as not to do action y")

or to make it simple: empathize, explain, change.

( a not-real example )

It's really important to me not to skip the empathizing step because if I do, the other person will often feel as if I don't care about their feelings and am only concerned with whether or not I made a mistake. And when someone is apologizing to me, if they don't empathize BEFORE explaining then it feels like my feelings are an afterthought, rather than the point of the conversation. But it's also important to figure out how not to make the same mistake, because otherwise it will just happen again.

Obviously on lesser wounds it's not necessary to go to all that effort -- accidentally stepping on someone's toe is not the same as triggering a memory of abuse. HOWEVER, which wounds are 'lesser' is defined by the person in pain, NOT the one who caused the pain.

Sometimes people seem to take "you hurt me" as some kind of challenge to their honor, thinking that they have to prove that they did NOT hurt you or they are therefore a bad person. (my bioparents, for instance, ALWAYS react this way) But I consider it much more honorable to heal something than to never have harmed it in the first place.

I can't say how it makes other people feel because I haven't asked, but I can say that when this method is used on me it makes ALL of the hurt and upset go away. It makes me feel safe, loved, and understood, and it makes forgiveness the easiest thing ever. (I don't feel that anyone on my friends list owes me any apology, just to be clear)

How I apologize:
I refrain from getting defensive or considering whether or not it is "my fault" -- regardless of my intentions, the point is that you were hurt.
I try to fully understand how my actions hurt you,
     ("so when I did action Y that hurt you because situation/perspective Z")
I empathize with you and apologize,
     ("I can imagine how that would hurt; if I had been in situation/perspective Z I would have felt the same way. I imagine you felt _____; I'm so sorry")
THEN AND ONLY THEN
I explain my feelings and motives,
     ("I can see how it seemed like I just didn't care, but my intention was _____, and I definitely do care")
I figure out how to avoid ever making the same mistake, and
     ("I think that happened because situation/perspective X")
I commit to a change which will keep me from making that mistake again.
     ("I commit to being more careful, avoiding situation/perspective X so as not to do action y")

or to make it simple: empathize, explain, change.

( a not-real example )

It's really important to me not to skip the empathizing step because if I do, the other person will often feel as if I don't care about their feelings and am only concerned with whether or not I made a mistake. And when someone is apologizing to me, if they don't empathize BEFORE explaining then it feels like my feelings are an afterthought, rather than the point of the conversation. But it's also important to figure out how not to make the same mistake, because otherwise it will just happen again.

Obviously on lesser wounds it's not necessary to go to all that effort -- accidentally stepping on someone's toe is not the same as triggering a memory of abuse. HOWEVER, which wounds are 'lesser' is defined by the person in pain, NOT the one who caused the pain.

Sometimes people seem to take "you hurt me" as some kind of challenge to their honor, thinking that they have to prove that they did NOT hurt you or they are therefore a bad person. (my bioparents, for instance, ALWAYS react this way) But I consider it much more honorable to heal something than to never have harmed it in the first place.

I can't say how it makes other people feel because I haven't asked, but I can say that when this method is used on me it makes ALL of the hurt and upset go away. It makes me feel safe, loved, and understood, and it makes forgiveness the easiest thing ever. (I don't feel that anyone on my friends list owes me any apology, just to be clear)

How I apologize:
I refrain from getting defensive or considering whether or not it is "my fault" -- regardless of my intentions, the point is that you were hurt.
I try to fully understand how my actions hurt you,
     ("so when I did action Y that hurt you because situation/perspective Z")
I empathize with you and apologize,
     ("I can imagine how that would hurt; if I had been in situation/perspective Z I would have felt the same way. I imagine you felt _____; I'm so sorry")
THEN AND ONLY THEN
I explain my feelings and motives,
     ("I can see how it seemed like I just didn't care, but my intention was _____, and I definitely do care")
I figure out how to avoid ever making the same mistake, and
     ("I think that happened because situation/perspective X")
I commit to a change which will keep me from making that mistake again.
     ("I commit to being more careful, avoiding situation/perspective X so as not to do action y")

or to make it simple: empathize, explain, change.

( a not-real example )

It's really important to me not to skip the empathizing step because if I do, the other person will often feel as if I don't care about their feelings and am only concerned with whether or not I made a mistake. And when someone is apologizing to me, if they don't empathize BEFORE explaining then it feels like my feelings are an afterthought, rather than the point of the conversation. But it's also important to figure out how not to make the same mistake, because otherwise it will just happen again.

Obviously on lesser wounds it's not necessary to go to all that effort -- accidentally stepping on someone's toe is not the same as triggering a memory of abuse. HOWEVER, which wounds are 'lesser' is defined by the person in pain, NOT the one who caused the pain.

Sometimes people seem to take "you hurt me" as some kind of challenge to their honor, thinking that they have to prove that they did NOT hurt you or they are therefore a bad person. (my bioparents, for instance, ALWAYS react this way) But I consider it much more honorable to heal something than to never have harmed it in the first place.

I firmly believe that the only reason anyone ever hurts someone else is because they have been hurt. It's a cycle of pain -- we all have brokenness, and our brokenness causes us to hurt others. For this reason, I think it disturbing that we lock people away (which causes them MORE brokenness) and don't do anything to heal them before releasing them into society again. It's treating the symptom, not the cause. I understand that it would be terribly costly to give them help, and that it would be unfair to all of the broken people who have not committed crimes and cannot afford help -- but at the same time, the most compassionate, giving, wise people are the ones who have been deeply broken, done hurtful things to themselves and others, and then been healed. If we truly worked on healing the broken, we would have an incredible resource of wise people to learn from.

We might not be able to afford counseling, at least at first, but we could help heal the broken by giving them the chance to serve. It is such a healing experience to give, and I think many broken people feel that they have nothing to give, and so do not experience this healing. When you give to someone, you are opening the doors of your heart -- then those same doors are open to receiving gratitude and love. For a person who has been rejected by society and placed into jail (or detention), feeling a positive connection with people is absolutely vital. Someone who feels they are going to continue being mistreated and distrusted is not going to take the risk of growing, of finding better ways to live, but someone who feels that there is at least a chance of them being loved and accepted just might be willing to take that risk. We need to show people in prison that they do have a chance of being a productive, accepted, loved member of society.



"Juvenile offenders start life over with a crochet hook"

These people have attempted murder, destroyed people's property, sold drugs, etc. But given the chance to create and to give to others, something changes in them. It's not perfect, of course, but it is a large improvement over the norm: once released, 85 percent stay out -- far up from the national average of 50 percent. The article describes one person's experience in particular: "To see his eyes well up with emotion about the smiles his blankets have brought a needy elderly man and a toddler in a day-care center is to witness genuine tenderness." That person, Branden, was in for attempted murder, and for the first year and a half of his time there refused to join the program. Now he has created more blankets than anyone else, and speaks with real hope about his future.

I hope that people take notice and use the power of giving to change the lives of all inmates, not just the young ones. I believe all people deserve that chance.

((note: I found this article through the Good News Network, a site that collects positive news from other publications. Anyone can submit, so if you regularly read the news, please submit any positive news you find! You can also add the site's feed on LJ: good_news_net))

LJ idol topic 4: "Current Events" ((feel free to vote here if you get something from this post))

I firmly believe that the only reason anyone ever hurts someone else is because they have been hurt. It's a cycle of pain -- we all have brokenness, and our brokenness causes us to hurt others. For this reason, I think it disturbing that we lock people away (which causes them MORE brokenness) and don't do anything to heal them before releasing them into society again. It's treating the symptom, not the cause. I understand that it would be terribly costly to give them help, and that it would be unfair to all of the broken people who have not committed crimes and cannot afford help -- but at the same time, the most compassionate, giving, wise people are the ones who have been deeply broken, done hurtful things to themselves and others, and then been healed. If we truly worked on healing the broken, we would have an incredible resource of wise people to learn from.

We might not be able to afford counseling, at least at first, but we could help heal the broken by giving them the chance to serve. It is such a healing experience to give, and I think many broken people feel that they have nothing to give, and so do not experience this healing. When you give to someone, you are opening the doors of your heart -- then those same doors are open to receiving gratitude and love. For a person who has been rejected by society and placed into jail (or detention), feeling a positive connection with people is absolutely vital. Someone who feels they are going to continue being mistreated and distrusted is not going to take the risk of growing, of finding better ways to live, but someone who feels that there is at least a chance of them being loved and accepted just might be willing to take that risk. We need to show people in prison that they do have a chance of being a productive, accepted, loved member of society.



"Juvenile offenders start life over with a crochet hook"

These people have attempted murder, destroyed people's property, sold drugs, etc. But given the chance to create and to give to others, something changes in them. It's not perfect, of course, but it is a large improvement over the norm: once released, 85 percent stay out -- far up from the national average of 50 percent. The article describes one person's experience in particular: "To see his eyes well up with emotion about the smiles his blankets have brought a needy elderly man and a toddler in a day-care center is to witness genuine tenderness." That person, Branden, was in for attempted murder, and for the first year and a half of his time there refused to join the program. Now he has created more blankets than anyone else, and speaks with real hope about his future.

I hope that people take notice and use the power of giving to change the lives of all inmates, not just the young ones. I believe all people deserve that chance.

((note: I found this article through the Good News Network, a site that collects positive news from other publications. Anyone can submit, so if you regularly read the news, please submit any positive news you find! You can also add the site's feed on LJ: good_news_net))

LJ idol topic 4: "Current Events" ((feel free to vote here if you get something from this post))

I firmly believe that the only reason anyone ever hurts someone else is because they have been hurt. It's a cycle of pain -- we all have brokenness, and our brokenness causes us to hurt others. For this reason, I think it disturbing that we lock people away (which causes them MORE brokenness) and don't do anything to heal them before releasing them into society again. It's treating the symptom, not the cause. I understand that it would be terribly costly to give them help, and that it would be unfair to all of the broken people who have not committed crimes and cannot afford help -- but at the same time, the most compassionate, giving, wise people are the ones who have been deeply broken, done hurtful things to themselves and others, and then been healed. If we truly worked on healing the broken, we would have an incredible resource of wise people to learn from.

We might not be able to afford counseling, at least at first, but we could help heal the broken by giving them the chance to serve. It is such a healing experience to give, and I think many broken people feel that they have nothing to give, and so do not experience this healing. When you give to someone, you are opening the doors of your heart -- then those same doors are open to receiving gratitude and love. For a person who has been rejected by society and placed into jail (or detention), feeling a positive connection with people is absolutely vital. Someone who feels they are going to continue being mistreated and distrusted is not going to take the risk of growing, of finding better ways to live, but someone who feels that there is at least a chance of them being loved and accepted just might be willing to take that risk. We need to show people in prison that they do have a chance of being a productive, accepted, loved member of society.



"Juvenile offenders start life over with a crochet hook"

These people have attempted murder, destroyed people's property, sold drugs, etc. But given the chance to create and to give to others, something changes in them. It's not perfect, of course, but it is a large improvement over the norm: once released, 85 percent stay out -- far up from the national average of 50 percent. The article describes one person's experience in particular: "To see his eyes well up with emotion about the smiles his blankets have brought a needy elderly man and a toddler in a day-care center is to witness genuine tenderness." That person, Branden, was in for attempted murder, and for the first year and a half of his time there refused to join the program. Now he has created more blankets than anyone else, and speaks with real hope about his future.

I hope that people take notice and use the power of giving to change the lives of all inmates, not just the young ones. I believe all people deserve that chance.

((note: I found this article through the Good News Network, a site that collects positive news from other publications. Anyone can submit, so if you regularly read the news, please submit any positive news you find! You can also add the site's feed on LJ: good_news_net))

LJ idol topic 4: "Current Events" ((feel free to vote here if you get something from this post))

I have been just... FIREY lately. It's like I had to restrain all of my fire for a while so that I could learn how to use it properly, and now I have learned enough to let it (mostly) free again. I think it is very important to be honest, but also very important to be compassionate, and balancing those two qualities can be difficult.

In this struggle for balance, I have learned the supreme importance of vagueness. If someone shows me, say, a painting that holds great importance to them and I find it utterly hideous, I don't have to describe in detail how just glancing at it makes me want to throw up on it just to make it more attractive. Instead, I can just scrunch up my face and say, "I don't really like it." Usually they don't ask for more detail because my facial expression is eloquent enough. So I am getting across how I truly feel, without saying something that would hurt (it might hurt just that I don't like it, but I'd rather unintentionally hurt someone than deliberately deceive them with a lie they would like). I think it's honest to give someone a watered-down version of your opinion, as long as it still gives them the correct basic impression.

I've been overly watered down for a good while, and I am now realizing that part of that was because I was afraid of offending certain people (although some of it was because of genuine good will). But it was a good discipline, and I'm glad I chose it -- and I'm glad I'm out now. I feel so incredibly strong: my inner cobra has re-awakened. People will always take offense, no matter how delicately you tread, and I am not the type to enjoy treading delicately. I quite enjoy stomping. *stomp stomp* But I shall try to reserve my stomping for lies, not the people who believe in them. It's often a hard line to draw, and I am sure I will fail many times. But I'm willing to err on both sides now, rather than only on the side of caution/compassion -- I'm also willing to err on the side of too-blunt.

Speaking of compassion, I think possibly the strongest measurement of compassion is how you respect other's pain. If you tell someone to 'suck it up,' you are invalidating their pain, when you have no idea what they are going through. Everyone is different, everyone has different sore points. Obviously if someone high-fives a healthy person, it's not going to bother them one bit. But if that person happens to have a hand with several broken bones, the pain will incapacitate them. So if someone cries because a stranger gave them a dirty look, that doesn't mean they are 'oversensitive' -- it means that they have so much other pain in their life that that one act just made it too much. I don't believe there is a such thing as 'oversensitive' as it relates to pain. If you feel something, you feel it, and you can't control it so obviously you can't feel 'wrongly' or 'too much.' (however, I do think people can be oversensitive as relates to offense, because offense IS something you control and choose) I used to be the type of person who would think "omg, I can't believe you're upset over that" because I used to stifle all of my own feelings so I expected others to do likewise, and if they didn't then they were 'weak' or 'oversensitive.' I am so. fucking. glad. that I am no longer that person. I am unashamed of my own pain -- even to the point of shedding tears in public -- and because of that, I can respect other people's pain.

( this song has very deep meaning to me and I think it fits this entry, so: here is 'Feel' by Michelle Tumes )

I have been just... FIREY lately. It's like I had to restrain all of my fire for a while so that I could learn how to use it properly, and now I have learned enough to let it (mostly) free again. I think it is very important to be honest, but also very important to be compassionate, and balancing those two qualities can be difficult.

In this struggle for balance, I have learned the supreme importance of vagueness. If someone shows me, say, a painting that holds great importance to them and I find it utterly hideous, I don't have to describe in detail how just glancing at it makes me want to throw up on it just to make it more attractive. Instead, I can just scrunch up my face and say, "I don't really like it." Usually they don't ask for more detail because my facial expression is eloquent enough. So I am getting across how I truly feel, without saying something that would hurt (it might hurt just that I don't like it, but I'd rather unintentionally hurt someone than deliberately deceive them with a lie they would like). I think it's honest to give someone a watered-down version of your opinion, as long as it still gives them the correct basic impression.

I've been overly watered down for a good while, and I am now realizing that part of that was because I was afraid of offending certain people (although some of it was because of genuine good will). But it was a good discipline, and I'm glad I chose it -- and I'm glad I'm out now. I feel so incredibly strong: my inner cobra has re-awakened. People will always take offense, no matter how delicately you tread, and I am not the type to enjoy treading delicately. I quite enjoy stomping. *stomp stomp* But I shall try to reserve my stomping for lies, not the people who believe in them. It's often a hard line to draw, and I am sure I will fail many times. But I'm willing to err on both sides now, rather than only on the side of caution/compassion -- I'm also willing to err on the side of too-blunt.

Speaking of compassion, I think possibly the strongest measurement of compassion is how you respect other's pain. If you tell someone to 'suck it up,' you are invalidating their pain, when you have no idea what they are going through. Everyone is different, everyone has different sore points. Obviously if someone high-fives a healthy person, it's not going to bother them one bit. But if that person happens to have a hand with several broken bones, the pain will incapacitate them. So if someone cries because a stranger gave them a dirty look, that doesn't mean they are 'oversensitive' -- it means that they have so much other pain in their life that that one act just made it too much. I don't believe there is a such thing as 'oversensitive' as it relates to pain. If you feel something, you feel it, and you can't control it so obviously you can't feel 'wrongly' or 'too much.' (however, I do think people can be oversensitive as relates to offense, because offense IS something you control and choose) I used to be the type of person who would think "omg, I can't believe you're upset over that" because I used to stifle all of my own feelings so I expected others to do likewise, and if they didn't then they were 'weak' or 'oversensitive.' I am so. fucking. glad. that I am no longer that person. I am unashamed of my own pain -- even to the point of shedding tears in public -- and because of that, I can respect other people's pain.

( this song has very deep meaning to me and I think it fits this entry, so: here is 'Feel' by Michelle Tumes )

I have been just... FIREY lately. It's like I had to restrain all of my fire for a while so that I could learn how to use it properly, and now I have learned enough to let it (mostly) free again. I think it is very important to be honest, but also very important to be compassionate, and balancing those two qualities can be difficult.

In this struggle for balance, I have learned the supreme importance of vagueness. If someone shows me, say, a painting that holds great importance to them and I find it utterly hideous, I don't have to describe in detail how just glancing at it makes me want to throw up on it just to make it more attractive. Instead, I can just scrunch up my face and say, "I don't really like it." Usually they don't ask for more detail because my facial expression is eloquent enough. So I am getting across how I truly feel, without saying something that would hurt (it might hurt just that I don't like it, but I'd rather unintentionally hurt someone than deliberately deceive them with a lie they would like). I think it's honest to give someone a watered-down version of your opinion, as long as it still gives them the correct basic impression.

I've been overly watered down for a good while, and I am now realizing that part of that was because I was afraid of offending certain people (although some of it was because of genuine good will). But it was a good discipline, and I'm glad I chose it -- and I'm glad I'm out now. I feel so incredibly strong: my inner cobra has re-awakened. People will always take offense, no matter how delicately you tread, and I am not the type to enjoy treading delicately. I quite enjoy stomping. *stomp stomp* But I shall try to reserve my stomping for lies, not the people who believe in them. It's often a hard line to draw, and I am sure I will fail many times. But I'm willing to err on both sides now, rather than only on the side of caution/compassion -- I'm also willing to err on the side of too-blunt.

Speaking of compassion, I think possibly the strongest measurement of compassion is how you respect other's pain. If you tell someone to 'suck it up,' you are invalidating their pain, when you have no idea what they are going through. Everyone is different, everyone has different sore points. Obviously if someone high-fives a healthy person, it's not going to bother them one bit. But if that person happens to have a hand with several broken bones, the pain will incapacitate them. So if someone cries because a stranger gave them a dirty look, that doesn't mean they are 'oversensitive' -- it means that they have so much other pain in their life that that one act just made it too much. I don't believe there is a such thing as 'oversensitive' as it relates to pain. If you feel something, you feel it, and you can't control it so obviously you can't feel 'wrongly' or 'too much.' (however, I do think people can be oversensitive as relates to offense, because offense IS something you control and choose) I used to be the type of person who would think "omg, I can't believe you're upset over that" because I used to stifle all of my own feelings so I expected others to do likewise, and if they didn't then they were 'weak' or 'oversensitive.' I am so. fucking. glad. that I am no longer that person. I am unashamed of my own pain -- even to the point of shedding tears in public -- and because of that, I can respect other people's pain.

( this song has very deep meaning to me and I think it fits this entry, so: here is 'Feel' by Michelle Tumes )