Coffee - Cheers!

POSTED BY: Oonjerah
UPDATED: Wednesday, April 9, 2025 22:59
VIEWED: 51462
PAGE 12 of 28

PREV PAGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NEXT PAGE

THGRRI

Sunday, July 27, 2014 8:26 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Oonjerah:
The ‘Can’t Say ‘No’' Syndrome: A Deadly Hazard to Your Health by Yaz Rooney
http://yazrooney.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/the-cant-say-no-syndrome-a-d
eadly-hazard-to-your-health/

"Are you one of those people that everyone depends on; one of those creatures who just cannot say ‘No’ when the cry for help comes your way, even when you desperately want to decline your services?"

Oonj: the article above mostly describes the female domestic "slave,"
who's always in demand as a babysitter & may do the housework in the
bargain. This is not the only role for Yes-folk. More often, I see 'em as
listeners for those who need to dump or need a lot of attention, maybe
a companion on shopping & weekend trips, & if presentable, they may
be required to show up for family holidays & other social events.
They will be called when a friend needs help moving (away, we hope) or
for any onerous chore.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

Part of being smart is knowing what you're dumb at.

I found the blog interesting. I’m not sure I agree with the analysis. There is a lot of documentation of people drawing their own kind of sustenance from doing for others that is positive. It appeared to me much of what the blogger spoke of was people who cannot say no from within unhealthy relationships. I would like to see a study taken in a much broader context not just from the bloggers own experiences.

OONJERAH

Monday, July 28, 2014 2:41 PM

Quote Thgrri: "I would like to see a study taken in a much broader context not just from the bloggers own experiences."

Agreed.
It's not just one flavor; people who suffer from or indulge in this
behavior are not all alike.
Example: a Caretaker type I know well is living alone with domestic
& some wild animals but no people there to take care of no more. No
people who are asking for her care. The need to take care of all the
animals around is certainly as strong as the need to take care of
people was. Shows no sign of letting up at all.

Yes-persons don't all have the same priorities, rules, expectations
or games. There's a lot of variation in it. Many are picky and say Yes
only to a certain few.

I'm sure there are more articles out there; might even be some books on it.

What I think I see in them: They are lonely, unhappy, and won't for
a moment consider change. A quote, "I don't need to change! I just
need someone to talk to."

What I'd find interesting to know about it are the consequences and
the prognosis.

Is there a Can't-Say-No Anonymous? I seriously doubt it.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

Part of being smart is knowing what you're dumb at.

THGRRI

Monday, July 28, 2014 9:56 PM

I think many are trained to be submissive due to what our perceived roles for women are. Even with dolls you will find little girls playing at taking care of the doll. Perhaps a lack of a sense of security about one’s self contributes to this nurturing behavior?

Perhaps fear of abandonment plays a role in turning predisposed children into nurturers? Nurturing does keep others close. I have a strong suspicion how some children learn to get attention from their parents, has much to do with the messages sent to impressionable minds. This works to my benefit a child learns or this does not. It may be beneficial for a parent to have a nurturing child because they are less trouble? Perhaps many of us unintentionally push our children in that direction?

Perhaps again, if we learn to recognize these behaviors in our children we can teach them to be less submissive through sports or some other activity? People with two or more children are at an advantage in understanding that children in the same family are as different as night and day and that our diversity is ingrained.

Perhaps again, it is those of us who do not play the role of the nurturer who are at fault for the ills perceived by the nurturer. Perhaps it is the nature of the non-nurturer to take advantage of the nurturer and that is what we should be addressing?

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, July 29, 2014 4:04 AM

Caring for an infant is such a 24/7 job. I think it can easily lead to the 'Mummy comes last' syndrome, which continues on, even when the needs dont need to be met 24/7 and can spread to everyone else. And there is something immediate and satisfying about being needed so completely as a baby needs its mumma.

If you look at any literature, any advice for women from 40 + years ago, pre feminism, it's all about women putting the needs of their husbands and children ahead of their own, 100%. In fact, women's needs were pretty much ignored. You got your sense of self through your husband and children being happy with you. It was superficially great for the husband and children, but I think in the long run it lead to some pretty neurotic behaviour from mothers whose lives and personalities had been subsumed by those around them.

THGRRI

Tuesday, July 29, 2014 4:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Caring for an infant is such a 24/7 job. I think it can easily lead to the 'Mummy comes last' syndrome, which continues on, even when the needs dont need to be met 24/7 and can spread to everyone else. And there is something immediate and satisfying about being needed so completely as a baby needs its mumma.

If you look at any literature, any advice for women from 40 + years ago, pre feminism, it's all about women putting the needs of their husbands and children ahead of their own, 100%. In fact, women's needs were pretty much ignored. You got your sense of self through your husband and children being happy with you. It was superficially great for the husband and children, but I think in the long run it lead to some pretty neurotic behaviour from mothers whose lives and personalities had been subsumed by those around them.

The entire history of man and women is in your statement. It is only very recently things have begun to change and in fewer that more locations around the world so far.

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Tuesday, July 29, 2014 4:29 AM

Not the entire history, no. Women's role in society has not always been the same. It has varied throughout history and culturally. There have been matriarchial societies and societies where men and women share power more equally.

But we are definitely living with the judeo/christian/roman legacy of women being treated as second class citizens.

OONJERAH

Tuesday, July 29, 2014 6:39 AM

Sorta-half quote Magonsdaughter, "You got your sense of self through your husband -"

It's 1950; Dr. Bill Johnson has just proposed to me. He's a wonderful
catch. After we are married, I become Mrs. Johnson, Mrs. Bill Johnson.
I have no need of my own name anymore. I'm a smiling, grateful extension
of Dr. Bill Johnson. People know nothing about me, but treat me with
respect, because they respect him. Some will call me "his better half."

Had I married a lesser man, a mere Mr., I'd get little respect. Many in
those days would call me "his ball and chain," for marriage, way back
then, was seen by many men as a rip-off and an end to their freedom.

Pre-assigned roles suck badly. Self-realization is better.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

Part of being smart is knowing what you're dumb at.

THGRRI

Tuesday, July 29, 2014 8:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Not the entire history, no. Women's role in society has not always been the same. It has varied throughout history and culturally. There have been matriarchial societies and societies where men and women share power more equally.

But we are definitely living with the judeo/christian/roman legacy of women being treated as second class citizens.

This is why one should never generalize. I learned about many different cultures in an Anthropology class. Most realize the relationship of men and women in more general terms. I was just trying to get the point across women have mostly taken a back seat to men. It is an accurate assessment.

OONJERAH

Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:07 AM

Quote Thgrri: "I was just trying to get the point across women have mostly taken a back seat to men. It is an accurate assessment."

I have heard & probably read it, but now, I don't have a reference. So
this is It as I recall about "the Formative Years." There are the preverbal
years from birth to about 3. And there are the pre-Reasoning years. I
gather the "Shrinks" observe that most people do not think critically or
reason before the age of about 7. (In my experience, many seem to
never learn it.)
Anyway, infants & toddlers cannot evaluate the input they get. They
simply experience life and absorb all the "data" as true. This is a time
when parents could really brainwash their kids if only they knew which
inputs form the desired belief set.
I observe in me that certain impressions-beliefs-views of the world
were formed & Set during this time, and if I decide later that those be-
liefs were wrong ... I can't change 'em. They are permanently recorded
in the "snake brain."
(But then ... Click training. Is that strong enough to permit reprogramming?)

The point I'm tryin' to get to, which no doubt has been belabored by
the Pros ad infinitum: In my judeo/christian/roman legacy of women
& girls, second class citizens, very undesireable to Be one, We of low
self-worth, with a conflict about ourselves, are given the task of
training the infants during their most susceptible and important period
of development. We train the boys who'll become the Leaders, the
"Responsible" citizens.

Dumb Plan.

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

Part of being smart is knowing what you're dumb at.

OONJERAH

Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:13 AM

The Strange & Curious Tale of the Last True Hermit
http://www.gq.com/news-politics/newsmakers/201409/the-last-true-hermit

For 27 years, "a phantom haunted the woods of Central Maine. Unseen and unknown,
he lived in secret ..."

... oooOO}{OOooo ...

PREV PAGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NEXT PAGE