Tag Archive: Education


Taking Children Out Of School

Advertisements

Striking Poses

Here’s one: because I am getting on in years I am entitled to some of the luxuries of life, and to establish the lifestyle I have always wanted.

Yesterday coming home – sorry, back to the hospital; I must be getting institutionalised – I thought that was a lie put out by pension and financial investment providers.  We aren’t entitled to anything just because we are getting older and feel we have always been entitled to it.  Not even respect and facilitation of the lifestyle we would choose for ourselves.

Is that true?  Is that really true?  Because at the moment it feels such a desolate thing to say and believe.

To bring it back to my situation, I am being told that they want to transfer me under my present section to shared housing which comes under another hospital.  I have chosen, by default or otherwise, to live on my own. Knowing the kind of harassment I have had towards me in places I have lived, I am afraid of it springing up in my actual living space and turning really nasty, maybe even dangerous.  We, I and my proposed housemates, are not people who could expect to be taken seriously if we said what was happening, because I, at least, am not being taken seriously by the psychiatrist now.  I am getting tired.  I would like some peace and protection and safety on my own terms.

But I’m not entitled to it just because I am aging.  Or am I?  Have older people, like myself (I will be 52 next week) been demeaned a little bit too far?  There we are, I am striking a pose again.  I am tired, I am grief-stricken, I am menopausal.  Is a safe and peaceful living space, and a little respect and self-determination, too much to want and aim for?  What is this third age?  Is it a new age of helplessness?

What Is Disablism?

After my last post I thought I had better check and see, though it seemed obvious, what disablism is.  I put ‘what is disablism’ into Google and the search came up with some sites, including this one from a feminist perspective.  I would add to it that disablism is saying that everything you say about your social situation and background is false because you are judged to have a mental illness.  Or is it that you are lying about your life so you must be mentally ill?  Though I’ve been completely honest and said nothing which isn’t true.

I talked about Emily Pankhurst in my first meeting with my psychiatrist here and I was told not to start on that one, though I meant it earnestly with all my heart and mind.  I said she had not fought for women’s rights and suffrage for women in power to subjugate other women or define them as they did not wish to be defined.  They dismissed it as the ploy of a mentally ill person who would use anything to get out of the psychiatric situation.

‘What Is Disablism’  is a good search to put into Google.  I have only used the first result but there are others of interest.

I’m having an awful time at the moment, as far as being a vegan is concerned.

I keep wanting to give it up and go back to ‘normal’, happy, easily sociable and available eating.  The only reason I can’t and don’t is that I believe in my reasons for having become vegan in the first place.

So miserable!  I believe in my reasons, that I have no needs that require the death or utilisation of any other animal.  But recently I have wanted to rush straight back, with great joy, to being omnivorous.

I say ‘only one reason’, but that isn’t quite true.  Also my stalkers would never let it rest, and having made such a big thing about the rightness of veganism, I would be embarrassed.  I’d be confused myself, though, and I would also be doing an act of violence to myself to go back to being omnivorous.  People might get all chummy with me about having seen the light of omnivorism, and the error of my ways in trying to be vegan.  And sitting here writing this, right now, I can’t say for sure that I could never agree with that.  That would be saying that the life of an animal doesn’t matter so much that we can’t eat it, which is what I was brought up with, that we have God’s blessing to take an animal’s life for food.  I would like to believe that is true and feel I am just being proud and rebellious saying it isn’t.

I feel mesmerised, and also that I just can’t be bothered being a vegan anymore.  But as ever I don’t know what I feel and think as soon as I try to put it to print and think about it.  The same stuff is still happening.  I can’t tell the path from the scrub.

Internal tapes:

1.  Animals are for eating

2.  Christian Fundamentaslism is good or

3.  Christian fundamentalism is convenient because

4.  I want to eat what I can eat with fundamentalist, right-wing Christians

5.  I AM a fundamentalist, right-wing Christian.  If God says I can kill for ease and appetite, I CAN, and thank God for that!  If he says it I don’t have to think about it.  (what is this resentment I have against those who will not kill?  What is this need, what is this love, this strong emotion, I feel for and towards those who will not kill to eat?  It must be admiration, and more.  That the position of these people is where my heart is, the place I am challenged to recognise as right.  I would hate to convert someone from veganism/vegetarianism to being omnivorous.  I would hate to bring them down from their high place to such a place of shame.  And I would hate to have them validate my own).

6.  I AM a fundamentalist, right-wing Christian, in many ways, but also being a vegan, I could never fit in.  I would be teased all the time for being a vegan, and if I objected, it would be MY holiness called into question, and not theirs.  It could be fun and humorous, but there will also be those who go, in absolute conviction, for the fact that the Bible says that after the flood, God gave permission to eat meat, and re-asserted it later in the NT.

At the same time, in many arguers, there is a secret wanting to see it the same way as you do yourself.  It’s about liking and trusting and feeling safe, to some extent.  I was thinking last night that if someone says ‘thank you’ and a Christian says in response ‘it’s a blessing’, what the Christian is really saying is ‘I like you’.  It’s/you’re a blessing = I like you (or any other ordinary affirmation and expression of positive feeling/perception).

God IS, and we are dependent on Him.  But we are also dependent on air, for example.  We just breathe, it is automatic.  We don’t keep the air in mind and keep bringing it up AS need and essential.  If we did, it would demonstrate insecurity and that perhaps our supply was somehow threatened or contaminated.  In ordinary everyday life we don’t make constant references to the air to facilitate breathing or ANYTHING.  Or to our own bodies.  We don’t need to.

After Cain killed Abel and God asked him where he was, Cain said, “am I my brother’s keeper?”

I feel as if my upstairs neighbours are my keepers.  Or that they see me as an animal in captivity for observation and experimentation, or as a subject of some form of pest control.

Until a few years ago I was never one for talking about vibes and energy, but now it is unavoidable.  Every time my mind goes into recreative and positive relaxation a sound from them is imposed on it, usually vocal, normally sounding, today, like ‘dobre’, though it could be ‘hallelujah’ or banging.  Throughout the day, all day, every day.  I feel it as ‘don’t you dare’.  Every movement I make they put a sound or comment on top.  She screams like a demon when I come and go.  They do tapping stuff.  She goes from sweet to hate in a second, unless there is another woman there.  My mind can’t cope with it.

Also I have people turning up and ringing my doorbell and when I answer there is no one there.

Every time I become animated within myself and feel I can express myself in a way I like, their voice imposes itself, and I am here like a guilty and frightened thing, desperate and constantly seeing my own expressive life being killed by what can only be called aggressive psychic interference.

I sneezed a few minutes ago.  Sneezing, when my mind feels so bound, feels cleansing, and I like the recovery period, the seconds afterwards.  But as soon as I finished sneezing one of them said ‘dobre’.  I take hold of what I am writing now and give it a mental affirmation as it presents itself, and they speak uncomfortably and as if objecting.  It frightens the life out of me.  That phrase has a whole new meaning for me these days.

I went to the toilet and as I came out one of them said ‘dobre’.  I don’t want not to get on with them but they are making it impossible.

They still bang at me when they hear me in the bathroom.  They stir and bang about uncomfortably or deliberately every time sleep becomes restorative or pleasurable or exultant for me.  If I think about it, it is as if they are dragging me around by the hair.

I went to a pizza restaurant yesterday, and there is a children’s play area right in front of it.  Three girls dressed in yellow stopped and stared at me and I thought about the paedophile rumour.  I sat down and a few minutes later one of them shouted out ‘zestoki’ (cruel), which is something I have been heard to shout at my neighbours.  I don’t know where they got that from.  I felt mentally assaulted and raped.  A bit later the children started screaming, really soul-piercing screams I felt invaded by, and a few seconds later a security guard appeared using a mobile phone, and he stared at me.  I’ve been here a long time.  I wondered if something he had done had been responsible for the screaming and the way it made me feel.  I’ve been harassed by security guards for ages now, sometimes mockingly and exultantly.

I had a couple of women come in and act strangely close to me.  One of them was eyeing me with narrow slit eyes, like an animal ready to pounce, and I was blank, I didn’t smile because my mind was preoccupied.   Then she went into a wonderful awesome sociable switched on beauty routine.  The clearest face, the most beautiful, fluttering almond eyes.  Face held up to her man.  I resented it, it seemed theatrical and aggressive.  I noticed she had a child with her, a girl of about 8 or 10 who seemed to be a bit ill-behaved, I can’t quite remember how.  I looked and thought, ‘like mother, like daughter’.   But as I kept looking I realised the girl was uncomfortable and wanted attention that she was being denied, and she kept trying to get it, then she looked bored and wandered off.  And I thought, ‘poor kid, having a mother like that’.

That was when my scepticism and my ‘I don’t believe this’ response kicked in, and I decided to have a good, doubting, examining look at the whole act.  Shortly afterwards they got up and left, but as they walked away it looked almost as if she deliberately divested herself of a character.  Afterwards it seemed to me that the whole atmosphere in the restaurant was changed.  I had felt before that people seemed so happy and relaxed, but afterwards everyone was awkward and trying to recover comfortable and natural behaviour.  I would call it vamping, but she seemed to be presenting herself as one of God’s and nature’s beauties, dominant in her way and empty-headed.

I feel as if I am being malicious now, but I’m not.  I’ve had women doing this around me a lot when I go out, and I don’t know why.  Every time I get a moment of mental light and start thinking about what I am writing or examining it, the voice I find frightening from the woman upstairs when I am trying to write imposes itself and it is like an electric shock saying, ‘thou shalt not’, or ‘I don’t want you to’.

Thinking about it it reminds me that I have betrayed my own intentions and that I came here for the country and the people, not to be separate on a computer all the time.  But it feels like my refuge from their madness and invasiveness, as well as a chain in itself, and they won’t let me have that refuge.  The feeling that I can go to them and be friendly and that it will be welcome imposes itself, or is imposed on me, at the most psychologically inconvenient and resented and rebelled against times.  They have tied me up in knots, these changelings, and left me feeling guilty for not wanting to be available when I think I realise they want me to be.

They still comment when I cough, they still comment when they hear my computer and, if it is songs, at the change of every track.  They bang when I shit and comment when I fart or belch.

Jesus, does anyone understand this and how it makes me feel?  I was going to say, ‘how I feel about it’, because pop psychology in recent years has said that nothing can make you feel something, you feel it for your own reasons.  As I wrote it the man’s voice came in sharp and aggressive, like a knife into my mind, and now I can’t rework or work with anything.  When she opens her mouth it is as if she is piercing the air demanding power or recognition.  It often happens when possibilities and connections open up in my mind that I begin to feel happy and positive about.  So to me she seems to be saying, continually, ‘you owe me’.

One of Shakespeare’s characters ends a play saying, “the world is a stage and we are its actors”.  I was tagging this and thinking about the theatre aspect and watching and being watched, and that that approach to life runs counter, it seems to me, to the approach of the spirituality I have valued that emphasises unselfconsciousness.  I felt it when people started telling us to be vigilant about terrorism threats after 9/11.  Maybe that is my problem and misunderstanding.  If you are educated in the warning signals maybe you don’t go around with the terrorist attack threat constantly in your mind and even when the thought can’t be found, if the right things present themselves you become aware there might be a cause for concern.  To me, life is not for going around being consciously vigilant.

Who is this little savage, stripping people bare with her blasphemous imitation of speaking in tongues, stripping off the flesh then sounding pleased?  Coming on all offensive and aggressive, then going out tweeting purity?  She’s a bastard (biblical sense, if she is even that).

What point is she trying to make?

Why does she need to make it?

What are they trying to achieve by it?

Spiritual rape and armed robbery, it can only be.

They talk about ‘Twitter’ every time my mind and speech come strongly together, which probably means I have invalidated their deception and control at a deeper level and feel released from observing civil rules with stalkers and criminals.

This listen to mummy/daddy act they do.  It’s rubbish.  Mummy and daddy have told you the news.  Yeah, right!

9.30pm UK time.  the man who comes on treating really serious things as if they are a Talksport phone in has just come on, with the latest headlines before Hardtalk, and he said ‘turd’ for ‘third’, and talked about Vladimir or Vladivostok which consequently, deliberately or not, sounded like ‘bloody’.

BBC World News.  Making up emails or reading out plants.

10pm Jamie Robertson just said ‘spike’ as if he was spitting the word ‘spite’.  I get really upset at this.  I keep finding myself with the same expression on my face and attitude of mind (I suppose) and body as the News of the World guy who was done for phone hacking/bugging.

Anti-Psychiatry

I’m really embarrassed that, as someone who has never really believed in psychiatry, and as someone who lost her father to death by overdose at the age of 11, I have got to the age of 50 and never pursued the anti-psychiatry movement with any degree of commitment.

Although I am against the psychiatric view of people and their problems, I know that I am nervous of psychiatric patients and ex-psychiatric patients and don’t really want to spend time with them.

One of the reasons for this is that I think we are all too desperate, and in our own minds too undermined.  Most of the time we are grasping desperately, even at each other.

Another reason is that I think we develop a self-protective dishonesty, even if we didn’t have it before.  I’m not going in there in this post.

Another reason is that, in a structured group, the people running it, in my experience, are usually people who validate the psychiatric approach, or at least won’t speak against it.  For an angry and volatile anti-psychiatrist, like myself, that is not a good place to be.

Today I feel that my life has failed to mean anything, because I have failed to follow this in a committed way, when following it and investigating it properly was my obvious duty, as my father’s daughter.

I put ‘anti psychiatry’ into Google as a search term.  I’ve just started reading the first of the results that came up, the website www.antipsychiatry.org.  It looks as if it has some very well-written articles.

There is a whole school of thought behind this, from the 60s at least.  R D Laing I’ve known about for some time.  I didn’t know Foucault was one of them.

This might sound really selfish, but I feel really upset.  My life could have made so much more sense and been so much richer, if I had only known this before.  To me the obvious reason that I feel this way is that I feel I have something in common with these academics and might have grown up with them and in contact with them.  Obviously that doesn’t necessarily follow.  The feeling I have is, ‘oh no, not you.  I didn’t know you were into that.  Why didn’t you tell me?’, as if they knew me to tell me and I have always been a part of this community and I’ve got lost.  Or something.  I don’t know much about them anyway, I only know their names.  I don’t know why they seem to mean that much to me.  I never studied them adequately when they were part of my education, and they probably just represent this (supposedly) wonderful thing, education, to me, and the youthful ideal of education is what is invoked for me when I read or hear their names. 

What I am thinking, whether I like it or not, is that if I knew something about their lives, I might not be so keen to identify with them in their anti-psychiatric views and see them as the best proponents.  I don’t know anything about their lives.  Even if I did and didn’t like what I knew, that wouldn’t necessarily invalidate what they have to say.  People don’t like my life.  That might make me an embarrassment to my beliefs, or not, but in itself it doesn’t invalidate them.  Right beliefs are right beliefs, whoever holds them.  Like the belief that two and two make four doesn’t become untrue because of the life of the person who holds it.  And I have been taught two things about the universe, that it is both mathematical and moral.

Lady ‘hallelujah every time I cough or anything’ harassment upstairs has been on for the last half hour or so, latching onto my cough and my audio.  She’s doing my brain and my feelings in.  She’s savage.  I don’t know what I mean or what I’m talking about as long as this is going on.  I feel that maybe I never will again.  She is the nearest I have been to a demon and this is the nearest I have been to living with possession.  They frighten me so much.  It is so indecent and spiritually and psychologically violent, I feel beaten about the head just about all the time.  They combine violence and rejection and indecent invasion with a santa madre scenario.  Both at the same time I want to break down in totally reduced and beaten tears, and hit back.  They have been playing a locking and shutting doors game every time they hear me in the corridor recently.  She says ‘hallelujah’ when I cough.  What is wrong with this stupid moron?  Is she frightened of me or something?  Why can’t I cough and fart, etc, in peace, without this indecent and terrifying and desperation-inducing invasiveness?  I really can’t take it much more, and I wish some of these people who want me to think of them as friends (whether they are or not) would listen to me and help me and get me away from them.

I’m wondering if the idea is to make as much invasive and control-taking sound as they can, coming up to 10pm when everything is supposed to go silent, and then just shut up?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00zmc6f/The_King_James_Bible_The_Book_That_Changed_the_World/

Available until 9pm (8.59) tonight for watching or download.

I’m opening a new file – the VW FILE – Vulnerable Women Fall In Love Easily.

In this case the name came before the acronym.  Good though, innit?  On so many levels it would be a really long post if I wrote the explanation that suggests itself.

What An Idiot!

Written Saturday, 26th February.

“You idiot, what a stupid thing to do!”

Isn’t that much more human and kind and accessible and friendly than finding something offensive and constructing an argument about it to demonstrate that it is offensive and being dogmatic about its motivation?  At least in normal circumstances.  Even then, maybe we need to broaden our understanding of all the things that should carry the label, “normal”.

I just looked at someone I was offended with earlier, and while I believe I understand what they are doing and that it is offensive and I can make all the arguments as to why and how, I just thought, “honestly, what an idiot, what a stupid thing to do”, and the lack of a thesis or essay about it made it far less charged.

I thought about it for a few minutes afterwards.  I decided that, sometimes, being a Christian and therefore not free to call someone stupid or an idiot, in good conscience, can make you far less human and sympathetic in the way you approach people when they are idiots and do stupid things.

Then I thought again.  Where did this restriction come from, the idea that you can’t call someone an idiot?  Is it Christian?  While it is true that Jesus said if you call your brother a fool you will be in danger of hell fire, the Old Testament talks a lot about fools, especially in the Book of Proverbs, and there is a parable about the man who built bigger barns to store his grain and congratulated himself about having plenty stored up, that God said to him, “you fool, this night your soul will be required of you”.  Whatever we might think of that concept of God, even though the Bible says it was Jesus who told the story, perhaps the fact that it is in the Bible should indicate that Bible believing, evangelical Christians, if we don’t already do so, should hold a more liberal view about just calling people stupid when it might be more appropriate and productive than having to construct an argument.  Because some behaviour obviously is stupid, and sometimes the best way to deal with it, in the right kind of relationship where the person can accept and respond to it, is just to say so.

So I’m not sure how I got the idea that you can’t just tell someone they are being an idiot and their behaviour is stupid, in an affectionate, good natured way, and they could just exhale in relief and maybe slightly embarrassed recognition and change it.  maybe someone was censorious with me at some point for doing that, or maybe someone whose opinion I value would be against it.  If so, me, what an idiot, what a stupid thing to do, to take that on board, maybe, and the person who influenced me could well be an idiot, at least over that, also.  Having to construct arguments and theses all the time doesn’t half kill the flow of fondness in relationships, and all the positive change that comes out of that.

It’s just a thought, for normal circumstances.

I think this is a stupid post written by an idiot.

Loose paraphrase:  Which would you rather receive, a comment saying ‘great post!  check out my blog at (www.suebarnett.wordpress.com, in my case)’ or one saying ‘well said!  I know what you’re talking about because . . . and I think . . .’?

While the forum, if properly, fairly and legally run, is useful and sometimes feels helpful, I for one would rather not be nagged and patronised and treated like some sort of a great-niece or child or student in a classroom in this way.   As far as I am concerned, we comment the way we can at the time, and those of us who are sincere in our comments and appreciation might well be using that shorthand to say, ‘I am so impressed with what you have to say here, there is nothing I feel able to add, but I would appreciate you looking at my blog because I think yours is an opinion I would value’.

Some people, like me, sometimes read and blog in distress, or very focussed on their own thing and they are desperate to have someone else aware of and concerned about the things they are concerned about.  I don’t think we need to sanitise and make anodyne the way everyone should leave their comments, or that anyone should see it as an insult or somehow inadequate if a person says, ‘great post, please check out my blog’.  It might be all they are capable of at the time, and it might show more appreciation than launching into an opinion.

While I understand exactly what is being said and on the whole agree with it, there are times of desperation or recognition, for me, when I can’t say what I want without it being as short as possible and straight to the point.  I’m thinking, maybe pretentiously, of the difference between a diver, say, at their most polite and articulate, saying something like, ‘honey, would you mind getting the air cylinder out of the car?’ and a woman in intense labour pains screaming and swearing and snarling like a savage at her helper who insists on going by the book to shut up and give her the mask.  Something like that.  There are other situations of pain where the same would apply.  Or the difference between someone swimming yelling ‘hey, great to see you, come on in, let’s play ball’, and someone else in the water drowning doing their best while trying to snatch air to attract the attention of someone to help them.

Etiquette is for the adequate and sometimes even for the indifferent and self-absorbed, to get what they want with as little friction as possible.  Many people are inadequates who accept that about each other, and don’t want to be told they should emulate the adequate, bright, happy, switched on people in order for their contribution to be acceptable.

And while I’m thinking about it, someone said that most people live lives of quiet desperation.  But we have been taught in the past, if not now, to be completely hypocritical about that fact when applying for a job, for instance.  I can’t theorise on why that is at the moment, but if a person is desperate for a job, and also capable of doing it or of learning to, why should they be advised to rely on such self-negating and relationship-sabotaging dishonesty and subterfuge right from the beginning, and why should anyone be taught that it is not acceptable to show desperation if it exists?  I’ve never employed anyone, so I don’t know if employers are advised to despise desperation, or if the advice is based on the belief that, if someone sees you are desperate, they might take advantage of you, but it seems to me that no honest and honorable relationship can be based on an initial dishonesty of that kind.

It also occurs to me that the kind of comment WordPress is presenting as less desirable might be nothing more than the expression of an internalisation of that advice which allows for nothing more.  Keep it light, keep it casual, can easily translate to, ‘hey, that’s great, come and see mine!’  We need permission to become honest again, not instructions on how to become presentable and acceptable to other people in order to compensate for and not address the fact that experts in communication have told us to steer clear of some kinds of honesty.

So thank you for your advice, WordPress, and I hope this post might be in line with the kind of comments and responses you would like to see.  And please check out my blog at www.suebarnett.wordpress.com. Thank you for reading and for letting this pass the moderation procedure (which I personally find also inhibits and tampers with my ability to communicate as I would wish, sometimes.  If I’m not even sure I am going to get through the door or have my existence acknowledged or welcomed, why should I and how can I lay myself bare, as it were, in my response?  Often closed doors and rejection make desperate and battered people who can hardly hear you anyway, even with the impecceable (and expensive) etiquette of having a butler to hold the door wide open).

Oops, here we go!  Back to me.  If you go through a butler, you have probably had to go through other levelsof protocol as well, and how you handle them might determine whether or not you get as far as the butler.  In church I was taught that this procedure is a way of reveaing a person’s heart and whether or not ‘they are ready’ for access.  They never, to my memory, said anything or much about any inadequacies or unreadiness expressed by the person requiring such protocol.  Is it right that the person expected to go through it should be the only one expected to fit? In reality does it even work that way?  Some people want the challenge of the protocol because they want a process of validation or change.  I happen to believe that in some situations I am one of those people.  But if the people imposing or handling the protocol don’t respect that about me or even respect the protocol itself . . . .  protocol is a mutual thing, isn’t it, not just from the top down.  I’m sure it should be and that really that is how it should work.

They are so violent, they make me feel violent.  I know I speak for many.  Some people, as we know, act it out.  The full extent of my acting out is yelling, which is always misguided, because people continue without regard, and really I’m the only person that gets hurt.  I’m on my own and, because people involved professionally refuse to communicate with me constantly feeling not quite secure.  At least these people have their families, the partner or the gang they go around in.

But I’m glad I said what I said yesterday.  Now, if it wasn’t the case before, what they do will be more obvious to some people than it was.

I was just thinking, they use strings of names and references from my life and adopt a tone of entitlement to do it, as if they are doing it in co-operation with the people concerned, and that is where many of my guilt feelings come from when I don’t respond.

Today there was a little string – Mardi Fish – a tennis player, but also we say mardy in Nottingham to talk about people grizzling and crying and being miserable, and that was immediately followed up by the names Adams and Baddeley, two male teachers from my secondary school in Nottingham.

With some of the details they sometimes use, it appears that they are working in co-operation with people from my school life, whoever they are.  This little string was in the sports report.

When all this started for me the church, or at least Kensington Temple, was talking a lot about witchcraft, and I thought they meant me.  Maybe they didn’t, but I thought they did.  That’s why I was so upset, partly.  At the same time there was a tennis player called Goran Ivanisovich.  Sounds like ‘even he’s a witch’.  I heard a radio presenter say that much later, and I had thought it myself when I first heard it, in hospital, and it freaked me.

By the way, I’m still talking about BBC World News.  The time now is 11.08, UK time, which is the time people will need if they want to check this out, if they can get access to the tapes.

I don’t want to play this game with them and I don’t want to validate it.  I have been desperate enough myself.  There are others who are made even more desperate by it, if that is possible.

I saw a rcorded TV programme recently, it might have been in the “How Television Has Ruined Your life’ series on the BBC.  Whatever it was, the presenter was saying that the media uses shock tactics to keep people watching, because people are psychologically wired to give their attention to what appears to be a threat to their safety.

Charlie Wolf, when he was on Talksport, used to say he was pleased if people hated him because that meant they would keep listening. That is still how they do it, on a really wide scale.  But mixed with stalking, and obviously it becomes sinister and lethal, sometimes literally lethal.  They set out to sound violent or otherwise objectionable.  For me I find there is an element of not quite being able to believe what I am hearing or seeing, and a landing place of satisfaction is carefully avoided, so you can’t quite disengage.  Sometimes they make you feel as if you should and that they think you should, but I think it is a double bluff trick.

Just now as I was thinking clearly to write this, the presenter said he just wanted to take us back, almost in a hypnotherapy tone.  I can remember when this approach was first adopted and perpetrated.  There was a deliberate decision made, a few years ago, to adopt the language and intonation of therapy.

He just used ‘tweet’ as in Twitter, which I find always coincides with any fluency of thinking close to speech that I feel.  He just talked down from it to a stop.  Another dissonance, another contradiction.  I find it offensive. maybe it’s just me.  And I am sure there must be some sort of spiritualism involved for this to be happening.

Maybe it is just the violence of the shouting.  Now the presenter of the World Business Report is doing it.  It sounds obviously put on.

The news presenter before him – I think his name is Adam – was saying something about ‘you don’t have to be called Aron to work here, but it helps’, and he said it in such a way I thought and am sure he was referring to the time that I told Tommy Boyd, in his car, that I thought what he had said was arrogant.  He said he had a lot to be arrogant about.  Maybe we have a different understanding of the word, because i think it is a negative trait and he appeared not to.

Aron is back with the sports report, 11.45 am UK time.  He has just mentioned James Pearce.  My form teacher at the school I just mentioned in connection with the other names was called Clive Pearce.  I remember him to have been a very nice and kind person.  Straight after James pearce was mentioned Aron started talking in accented sympathetic and sad tones about people now being in danger of not qualifying.  The weather girl just appeared to stutter with the word ‘mock’.

But they keep going.  They make you feel stupid for saying it, or they look so hurt they make you feel guilty.

David Edes is on.  he was stressing for the first time that i have heard, that his programme is about opinion as well as news.  I thought he was getting at me.  At the same time they showed a report with footage about Guantanamo Bay, and the blocks didn’t look too bad and a staff member was saying conditions are much better, but there were blocks we couldn’t see for security reasons.

There must be something wrong in my head, or in the presentation, or something, because I was thinking it didn’t look too bad and Julian Assange might be OK there.  If I’m that broken down that I’m thinking that I think there must be a lot wrong on a lot of levels.  David Edes is sounding strict and disciplinarian.  I’m not sure who his tone is aimed at or what it is meant to achieve.

Yes, we should.  It is the only way to understand each other and live in peace with each other.  David Cameron is right.

But he is wrong about which language it should be.

The language should be mutual respect and respect for human rights, not the spoken language of your adopted country.  The problem arises if we let people in who are against our values in the first place.  What could happen then is that people learn our language (English, in our case) and subvert it to use it against us.  People who don’t speak our language coming in to the country are not our problem, but people who don’t share our values.

What are our values?  I don’t know!  Get any group of White Anglo Saxons together and you can have just as many culture clashes as you can with anyone else, even though we have been here for generations as the dominant group.  The loud mouths.  “It’s all the fault of the immigrants, coming into our country and stealing our jobs”.  If people have to make an enemy out of someone and unite against them, I have been taught that is possibly all they agree about, and some of those do it because they wouldn’t feel safe to disagree.   Correction, some of us, because we all do it sometimes.

But not speaking the language of the country should not be a problem, because there are ways around that.

Respect is the thing.  If we provide translations (or anything) but resent doing so, that communicates and damages relationships.  Or the people working with the translations, the officials and what have you who, for some reason, don’t really value different cultures but are doing a job because if they don’t they are financially penalised, if they can’t stand the people they serve or work with, how is that going to help anyone?  I know the answer is obvious and so does my reader.  “It isn’t”.

Translators are people who love language.  They problably love the culture that goes with it as well, otherwise they might not have got that far (I managed to take French to first year degree level myself, starting at the age of 9 or 10.  My best exam mark for it was an A at ‘O’ level, as it was before GCSEs.  My worst might have been an E at ‘A’ level.  I put it down to the increased literature element and my inconsistent attendance).

What if translators of English into other languages translated our literature for the non-English speaking people that live among us, and we also got their literature in translation?  This must be distress at its worst, because I know I’m talkiing garbage because I know that obviously happens, now I say so.  That’s what snakebite does for you, it has you all over the place!

But . . .  national identity doesn’t depend on us all speaking English, and you can’t blame the foreigners for the fact that there are many clashing value systems in our country, because that is true without them.

If we maintain respect there is no reason why we should push for integration.  People want to maintain their own identities, that is natural, especially in a strange place.  And why should it be seen as unhealthy if some of them never want to do anything else?  Saying that kind of thing about what someone wants makes them angry and miserable and promotes discrimination and prejudice.

We can keep the separate communities.  We can celebrate difference.  We can enable learning about each other within our own communities.  We don’t have to mix it, we can keep it separate, if that is easier, and let different communities be taught what they need to know by their own people and anyone else able to communicate with them that they accept.

Why, these days, should a non-English speaking child be thrust into an English taught school and therefore be at a disadvantage?  We can’t all learn another language, it doesn’t come naturally to some people.  Some people have problems with their own language, let alone someone else’s.  And there was plenty of illiteracy in England before mass immigration, so it isn’t fair to say we are being slowed down.  And why should the focus be language skills anyway?  What about other necessary skills?  There are some jobs you can do quite happily without needing to yap at everyone.  Some jobs might be better done that way.  Artisan type jobs, for example.

Let’s celebrate everything!  Different cultures, different gifts and skills.  It doesn’t have to be onerous and pedestrian, it can be a constant, joyous flux and flow.

People keep up trade links with their own countries anyway.  Why force people to integrate who can’t or don’t want to?  As long as we can establish and maintain respect between the communities there is nothing wrong with separateness where people want to be separate and coming together where they want that.  I’m thinking that education, at least in the first years, should be within the child’s own ethnic community, because that is where they will be happiest.  And what’s wrong with having further and higher education that way as well, all within our own country?  Why should we invade or insist on dragging out into the open the private place of someone else’s cultural identity?

It’s about choice.  Choice creates industry and jobs.  This is something there is both a need and a demand for.

I say, back to basics.  Back to reality.  Stop blaming people and trying to create jobs selling things people don’t need like food, for instance, with all kinds of subliminal messages attached (why else do you think we are obese and lazy?  But those who sell it and know the methods they use to sell it still turn round and blame us and say we are a burden on the tax payer.  Well, some tax payers are a burden on everyone!).  Start providing instead the things we actually need to make society work – people skills, philosophy, values, the arts, beauty, (shh erm – religion?)

Quack quack, said the silly duck, it’s time for another industrial revolution.

Hey, this is the 21st century! (I never thought I’d say that!)  David, what kind of leader says, “you must learn our language, or you can’t come here”?  Different isn’t bad, it’s different.  It’s an opportunity.

This is so outrageous I can hardly believe you mean it.  I watch the most serious things these days and find myself laughing as if it is a comedy, sometimes.  Does everyone end up saying, as they get older, “the world has gone mad”?  Because I did last night.

If we are going to say to people, “you can’t come here unless you learn our language”, what about the people here who already don’t speak it? Are we going to end up having an ethnic purge?  Shall I being the mental health system into this?  Yes, I think I might, because in many ways it is the same kind of thing.  Ethnic purge.  That is a real danger.  There are elements, including among those in power, who after stopping entry by others who can’t speak the language/don’t share our values, will next turn on those already living among us, and that wouldn’t be pretty at all.  David Cameron, you seriously need to rethink this.  You can’t make people conform at will without damaging relationships. There would also be a backlash from some people already here from countries from which some people were not allowed access.

By the way, when I talked about snakebite earlier – I had just watched the Andrew Marr Show before I wrote this and I first thought of that phrase after hearing William Hague talking.

I think among our human rights should be the right to be inadequate and incapable, if that is what our lives have done to us, without it bearing any kind of stigma at all.  I wonder if that is possible while the great god the tax payer gets invoked against everyone that is or feels that way?

This society stinks, it is so abusive.  But it is probably not that much different from many others.  Jesus said you can’t serve God and mammon.

He also pointed out that the Bible says in one of the Psalms that we are gods, and the scriptures cannot be broken.  I used to think that was sarcasm, but would the Jesus I have been taught about have been sarcastic about scripture?  No, He wouldn’t.  Is the Jesus I have been taught about the real Jesus?  Unquestionably!  Jesus defended the scripture that says we are gods.  He would not have been sarcastic about scripture.  And we can’t serve each other (God/gods) and money as well.

I apologise for my style, but I watch and listen to so much rubbish.  It seems to be all there is available.

OK, the thing is, right, I agree wiv Tony Smiff. 

If the workers aren’t going to get a fair cut of the profits reflected in their wages so they can take full responsibility for their needs themselves, then companies should be made to pay by the government.  That is just normal human common sense.  A common sense of what is right.

This is my answer to Jeremy Paxman’s question about how do you determine what is morally right when they are already obeying the law, and Tony kept saying it, that the law needs to be changed.

The law is not written in stone.  It evolves.  It evolves either by force or by common consent.  Common consent is better (we all know what is morally acceptable in this kind of situation), but if interested parties and rulers won’t give easily, pressure has to be put on them to make them give.  That is my understanding of how every change in the law has come about.  When the law is seen as not reflecting a widely accepted sense of morality, and when people suffer as a result, eventually that law must be changed.  Come on, Jerry, me old mate, you know that, what are you trying to do?  I think he was just being mischievously provocative, and great respect to Tony Smith for holding his ground in the terms he was able to do so.

I felt a real sense of exhileration when I saw the protests.  I thought they had good energy and also a very powerful cross section of society represented.  I thought I would love to be there and be involved, then I excused myself on the grounds that it might be used to put me back in hospital, then I thought excusing myself was cowardly and I should be there.  Good for these people, more power to them.  Power to their cause, at the very least.  Hopefully they won’t need to protest in this way for too long before our leaders see sense.  But I thought that what was shown on film was absolutely great.

Hey, what happened to our new freedom to protest peacefully?  That woman they dragged out, the one who said it was disgraceful, did she actually do anything wrong?  I don’t mind our leaders holding on to power, but they need to remember they are exercising that power for us, all of us, not just the people who head up the producing and finance machine.  Bugger this, I’m going to argue like a woman because I am a woman, and you can call it emotional blackmail if you like, but how are things fair when the law allows such inequality that at one end people live the jetset lifestyle from the profits they make out of people who work for them and buy from them, one of whom, a few weeks ago, lost her daughter to swine flu because her age and health category were not catered for by the government to be vaccinated against it?

I fear this Baran guy represents a group which will ignore any conscience it has as long as it is allowed to.

Here is something I didn’t act on at the time, and perhaps that is now to my shame and makes my argument and stance a little less persuasive, but I can still remember how it felt emotionally at the time.

I have never been so well off financially as I have been over the last 14 years, since I started getting Income Support plus an additional allowance built in for severe disability, Disability Living Allowance and Housing Benefit for a flat which cost me about £350 per month, plus a Freedom Pass for travel on London Transport and many local bus networks nationally.  I sat down a few years ago, when I wanted to work out my tithe, when I tithed to the Church, and worked out that the whole package was worth about £13,000.  As I said, I have never been financially so well off.  It is probably worth a little less now as my Freedom Pass has lapsed and I pay for my own travel expenses.  I always felt guilty about having it anyway, as I did about all my benefits.  Funny how they can slap a label on you and refuse to take it off which means you qualify for benefits, then make you feel like a shirker with some fancy footwork.  This label and the power everyone is society can and does wield with it is one of the most distressing things in my life.

But one year early on, on and around budget day when they were talking about the plight of pensioners and insulting increases to their pensions, I wanted to approach the government (to which I remain thankful for this financial provision) and tell them that I didn’t need everything I was getting myself to live on and that, in view of the plight of pensioners at the time, I wanted to be able to give something back to the government for it to be given to the pensioners.  I wanted to find out if there was a mechanism for those kinds of voluntary donations to be used for those not so well-provided for.  I still don’t know if such a mechanism exists, and if it does I missed the opportunity to use it.

But my point is, that was me, on £13,000 a year, believing I was stuck for the rest of my life in rented accommodation in a basement flat that I wanted to make work because I and everyone around me had a right that it whould work, and I looked at someone less well off than me and wanted to give back a portion of my own benefits to help them.  But these people who cream off millions and billions don’t even acknowledge they have that in their hearts and argue for the ‘right’ to maintain the legality of the present financial status quo.

I am sure that people make charitiable donations, but that can’t be the security of the people who need that charity.  It has to be formal and legalised, something they are entitled to, not just something they should be grateful for.  I don’t understand economics or, at least, I have never been taught.  Would doing something like that lead to eventual fiancial ruin and insecurity for everyone? Or just redress the balance in a way which is obviously needed and, to the uninitiated into the mysteries of economics, like myself, looks like such an easy and obvious thing to do?

The title is now in quotation marks whereas before it was not, and therefore connotes something different .  Quotation marks in this post are appropriate because they surround the name of the original post, otherwise it would have been 2 sets of quotation marks.

Although I republished it several times to show it with the most recent changes because some categories move quickly, like Politics, Christianity and Human Rights, this latest and, probably, most important, amendment has not been acknowledged.  I think “Christianity” acknowledged the first few changes to publishing times, but the change to the actual title remains unacknowledged when I had expected the position and the title changes to be shown, especially after I rescheduled publishing of the post to a later time.  As it now stands in the display, it is a misrepresentation, in both title and positioning – in Christianity, Politics and Human Rights for certain, whereas some of the smaller and, arguably, more “peripheral” groups have recognised the changes.

I think this conveys a message, especially when I think some of the posts that appeared afterwards might have been written in response to mine, but I obviously have no proof of this, and decisive statements should not be made or actions taken without proof. 

For your information, the post to which reference is made is that immediately preceding this one.

When I started this corrective post I thought of it as both a gentle tease and a serious point, and a third thing which I have now forgotten.  I decided not to make it comical in presentation, but have deliberately allowed some ambiguity which, in view of my opening statements, might appear merely to be grammatical oversights, the correction of which has been ommited in error and unconsciously.  I am conscious of the ambiguities and believe that they serve a purpose in this communication.  Other perceived errors, however, must be attributed to tiredness and lack of recent, sustained practice in precision, or to stylistics, or to the possibility that, in some areas, I might be incompetent anyway.

Thank you for your patience and kind attention.

A while ago I tagged one of my posts “possession” and decided to reread it this morning since my statistics say it is getting read a lot.  The heavy metal man with headscarf post.

I searched my tag to see what was under it, partly because I realised I had meant demon possession and that possession on its own was a bit ambiguous.  It could include possession of drugs, and does if you search the tag.

I found a post that I like and agree with for what it says about writing with an agenda and use of allegory to impose an agenda leading to a sort of possession. I think it’s meant to be humorous but I’m not sure.

http://ariellekbosworth.wordpress.com/2011/01/09/some-blogskeeping-and-reading-as-telepathy/

I think any communication which tries to control its recipient is abusive.  The writer of the post says that is what allegory is used for.  So what about everything I’ve learned about the use of parables by Jesus, and illustrations and object lessons?  Do I know what I’m talking about when I say I agree with this, or do I just like to hear myself postulate?

I’d be interested in feedback on this.  Both me and the post I’ve given the link for!

Joan of Arc

I don’t really know anything about Joan of Arc. except what I read in a George Bernard Shaw play.  She turned up to fight for France or something, and rescued the dauphin (French prince?)  The church condemned her because she heard voices and had her burnt or something, then later decided she was a saint and canonised her.  That’s how the church says sorry and tries to deal with its guilt.  Not much good to Joan, they killed her.  And they haven’t learned from the mistake and her canonisation means nothing, because these days in the same circumstances they put people in a mental hospital.  Grubby people.  Nasty, slimy and creepy.

I was just trying to make sense of why John Pantry this morning started with a reference to Joan of Arc (I think it’s her feast day or something) then followed it up with a subliminal ‘schitz’ reference.  I could tell from his voice he was going somewhere treacherous and that it would be best not to listen to him.  He seems to be trying to act in a woman’s identity.

I feel guilty because how I’ve been taught it is.  I’m writing because of how it actually is.  I think they’ve siezed my books and other personal things that I had in storage in a church.  I feel guilty about saying this because I think I should see it is having taken my things into safekeeping for me.  I was told they had got rid of them though.  No one told me they still had them.  I just thought it became obvious when I heard what they were saying.  I felt ill.  Since then it appears that both Christian and non-Christian media have had acess to my things, because I mentioned a piece of writing I had done that might make people think I was violent, and a day or two later Steve Allen on LBC was saying that it looked more like someone saying ‘every time I say something that is true someone comes at me with a belt’.  If this is true, it isn’t right, is it?  It’s hostage taking and kidnap, even though it feels so much like love I should be grateful for.

I also had a blank book among my things, a big thick one for writing in.  I still have the recording where I think that Anna Raeburn made reference to that.  I’m frightened because I feel as if it’s right and I shouldn’t be opposing it.  I’m very frightened.  If they have worked together on this no one will be for me.  No one that matters to me.  John blips so sweetly he has to be right, doesn’t he?  It makes me feel I’ve wrecked everything myself and I have no right to object, maybe even no right to live.

Is heavy shepherding right?  I’ve used the term.  It might be out of date and out of use now.

I’m listening about 6-8 minutes behind.  John just said quite forcefully that he was going to keep going on.  My stomach hurts, I’m upset and I feel sick.  I feel I am the one that is treacherous.  I really do.  I can’t defend myself against anything, even the face to face stalking I get so openly in Bulgaria.  I’ve never felt such despair and the need to give in to what I have so far maintained is obviously wrong.  I feel I am more wrong than the ‘obvious wrong’ which is actually right, that is being done to me, and I need the ‘wrongdoers’ to help and restore me.  Please someone tell me they are wrong and help me.

My connection to Premier has been terminated, and my post which was showing in the tag search is now no longer showing, even though my Colin Dye (2) post has more tags than this one.  Someone is constantly taking a decision to disempower me.

BBC World News

Do you know that if you are in the UK, you aren’t allowed to watch it?  It is available for live streaming on the internet and on cable channels abroad, but if you are detected on the internet to be in the UK, you can’t watch it.  You are physically barred and a message comes up saying you’re not allowed to watch.  This is a British broadcast of World News, it says.  But in the UK you can’t watch it.  I hope people are going to ask why, I think they should.

I have UK connection through an unlock VPN provider.  That’s how I know.  I use it to watch and download UK tv.  It’s legal.  I hope it stays that way.

David Edes is on BBC World News, weekday mornings.

I’m trying to write in spite of the fact that my hysteria would have me not do so and in spite of the fact that my hysteria blocks my access to the way I want to write and even makes me write in a way I don’t want to.

I’m hysterical because the way they target me psychologically and linguistically leaves me feeling I have been touched in my private parts.  It was a man, dark skinned guy doing the sport, and all the time he was doing it he was eyeballing ‘the camera’, with a sort of stupid, vacant look on his face, but also quite intent.

He started off saying ‘we’, in that significant way they do, and later in his presentation he came back to saying something like I heard a week or so ago, ‘now, I want to talk to you about this‘.  It was said in the tone you would adopt if you were telling someone off, that was the scenario they set up.  It was as if they were talking to a naughty dog.  It was demeaning, dehumanising and very distressing.  But they keep going, as if they haven’t done anything wrong.  Maybe it was one man coming to the aid of another, because David Edes was visibly upset.  But if they do it by treating a woman that way then these men are completely indecent and evil and not fit to be unleashed on anyone.  I wouldn’t want to be married to them, and if I had children I wouldn’t want these men anywhere near them.

And there they were, molesting secretively and moving on as if they had done nothing wrong.  And I’m sitting there watching and becoming more and more physically distressed because it was tantamount to an indecent touch.  Although I feel it, I continue to watch, trying to come to terms with what they have just done, and also open and interested to see where they go next.  But watching them and listening to them, I do myself a disservice.

But this sort of thing happens any time I begin to recover.  This machine is disgusting, degrading and murderous.  They have gathered all the information about me that they can and use it to try and present themselves as people who want to help me and who understand, but when you begin to think independently of them and repossess your own life, they attack you in this way.  If they are not allowed to be the helpers and the benefactors, they will just as happily turn round and assault you in this way.

It makes me feel as if I am wrong and that, as a woman, I should respond to these men on their terms and that it is unreasonable of me not to do so.  It makes me feel they have a right to molest me in this way if they don’t get what they want.  These career people shaping the way we see the world are acting like the scum of the earth.

I feel like a bad woman, because I object to be treated this way.  I believe this is how they want me to feel, or they would not adopt that tone.

Or maybe they don’t care how I feel, they just want their own embarrassment to stop.  So they go for me in that way and feel helped, but I feel so worked over I’m too distressed even to leave my home.  A sexual touch opens people up. It’s like linguistic hit and run rape.  And knowing all my electronic communication, even before it is released, is being watched by govenrment, media and church people makes it even worse.  They are there watching, and do nothing.  Then they turn and try toi make you think they are the people supporting your life because they don’t stop your benefits.  But you never know when they are going to, and if I was properly compensated for what they have done to me I might never need to make a decision ever again that was money based, I believe I am entitled to that much compensation.  I could live the life of Reilly, and that would be wonderful

Is this kind of thing what David Shearman was referring to when he said ages ago that it is molestation?  If so, I agree with him on that.

Yesterday the BBC New Channel put together an account of a teenage asylum seeker who said she had a torch shone into her face once an hour during the night to make sure she hadn’t harmed herself (common sense says there are times to leave people alone to sleep, and this happened to me in hospital as well.  And if a person is ill, they need sleep?  No further comment), with a sign saying ‘Welcome to Crane’, an asylum seekers’ unit and also the name of the secondary school I went to and where I was repeatedly molested by a male teacher who has now died, and this story was immediately followed up by a story about a teacher charged with sexual molestation of a pupil in school.

I think the people upstairs must be watching television or listening to the radio or something.  I believe the media here is stalking me as well, and as I typed that bit, which is obviously a part of me that I need to possess if I’m to have any chance of recovering my life, the man started to shout out.  maybe the same man that pitched up and shouted aggressively outside my flat on my first or second day here.  This happens repeatedly.  I have nothing to relate to anyone with, the onslaught of violence, aggression and molestation is so continuous.  It’s as if they are saying, ‘don’t touch that, that’s mine’, every time I begin to engage with my own life and experiences.  It’s not theirs, it’s not yours, it’s mine.  It is mine.  It’s my life and history my mind is beginning to engage with every time someone touches me in this way.

All of you, whoever you are engaged in doing this, UK and anywhere else, you are indecent, murderous bastards, and I hope you are made to pay.  You are going to pay.  There are other voices than mine in agreement, and I hope they read this and act.  And I hope the media stops using my life to shape its material, whether news or entertainment or lifestyle or whatever.  Because these people are the criminals and the space invaders, not me.  Are they too stupid, so morally and ethically far gone, they can’t even see that?

OMG!!!

First published 9th December 2010, after a post on veganism.

Edit:  This is a Sticky Post – Stuck to the front page for future reference.  It didn’t appear in any of the tag categories I selected, I assume because it has too many tags, although plenty of others that HAVE appeared have more than the 10 suggested in WordPress Help.

I brainstormed on the tags.  One reason I have stuck this on the front page, so you can search the categories any time, and so can I.  And what I say in this is relevant much of the time.   If you look at my tags in this you get an idea of how I think and feel about what is happening and how I think it should be perceived, understood and treated.

Spread the word, please, if you are with me.  Maybe if I break up the tags into easier to handle chunks I can get the post into all the categories I want, if I reproduce it or something.

Just listen to the sickly sweetness on Premier right now.  You have an hour.  I wouldn’t mind if it wasn’t criminally fuelled sarcasm, teasing and stalking.  They are not sincere people, even if they sound it.

Listen, you will hear them using my blog.  Even this.

They are taunting people, maybe me, with ‘Ah, you think YOU are always right, do you?’ But whether I am or not, I’m not using criminal means to enforce my opinion.  They are.  These Christians.  If you can’t win and you want to cry, mock and laugh, they say.  These carers for souls and God’s vision for humanity as a whole.  Unfit for purpose.

What’s it like, playing God? Esther says.  You’re asking the wrong person, Esther.  I wouldn’t know.  You would though, if you think He authorises the use of criminality and everything else in my tags to destroy a person.  Croaking and squeaking, most of it is deliberate and to hurt and offend FOR NO GOOD REASON EXCEPT TO WIN FOR YOUR ORGANISATION and you have no right to my sympathy.  I am not you, I am weak, you are abusing your position.

And you keep teasing, making out you’re going to comment or pass an opinion on what I say, but talk about something else.  I can hear the mockery in your voices, past experience of you all helps.

I love it when John Pantry gets hsi knickers in a twist about something being blatant.  If he’s talking about me, he’s projecting.  he is seeing things that were not intended at the time of writing, but I am awfully glad they are there.  But they weren’t intentional, so it is all, for him, a product of his mind, guilty and sneaky as it is.

Thank you for seeming sweet, guys, even if you are not.  We all need our illusions, especially at this time in the morning.  Pity mine don’t hold.

Got it – they are taking the message to their own consciences and forcing them outwards. That’s what this kind of Christianity does, all the time.  Look at the blogs, see how often they talk about they rather than I or we.  They think it is a sign of good authority to stand out in the street complaining loudly or pointing the finger, literally, in someone else’s face, a member of their congregation.  I’ve seen and heard it all, and deliberately recoil from and distance myself from it.  Buzz, buzz.

I’m being censored.  This doesn’t appear in any of my tag categories, 50 minutes on, and the Premier news just had something said with firm sternness about needing medical help.  It’s not new.  Maybe that is why Premier felt able to mock so freely and why it was so effective.  They caught me on my blind side.  I assumed it was going out and being shown in the categories.

Rick Easter, I have no responsibility.  I’ve already tried to meet it many times over, and you continue to taunt and terrorise based on the consequences.  You are angry, degrading people.

I really hate it when I hear leaders moralising and laying down the law as though they themselves are paragons of virtue who have never done anything wrong.

Even if the violence on the student marches is purely politically motivated by a subversive minority and there is no real emotion of anger or frustration behind it, our leaders are laying blame with the protesters and denouncing it as if their own lives are and always have been pure.

Have you conveniently forgotten the violence and neglect of the state powers towards some of its people?  The lies and the smears and the cover ups and the subliminal abuses no one can get you for but that make them feel the most angry?

Also, I’m wondering if David Cameron has EVER, at ANY time in his life, acted out his own anger in a way which he believes should be condemned.

Identifying with people in their anger to the point of personal vulnerability often has a far more calming and reconciling effect than denouncing and blaming.  That’s what I think.  I might be wrong.  it’s an impression I got listening to Tommy Boyd’s Angry Hour, when he did it.  It worked for me.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00wlg97/Have_I_Got_News_for_You_Series_40_Episode_9/

Yesterday I made 3 blog posts, and this week, including yesterday, I have done some searches on my tags and read some interesting stuff, mainly around religion, psychology and philosophy.

This programme is interesting to me at this time.  I always feel for people who appear to be in distress, and some of these people did.  Miranda Hart is a new name to me.  I’ve just discovered she is a comedienne trained in acting and in politics whose father held a position in the Royal Navy at the time of the Falklands war.  Nice.  A bit of class.  And they ended with pandas.  I like pandas.  And I learned there is a backbencher called Alan Futhermucker (or was that a joke? It was said in the context of a newsreader making what was, for him, a distressing and embarrassing mistake over Jeremy Hunt’s name.  The poor newsreader was mortified.

So why has the BBC squawked over the whole tone of the programme at the end with metallic and empty twitter from a girl talking about the next programme?  Is this the BBC saying, ‘we give you the platform and we set the boundaries.  We control perceptions.’?

I know this happens on the television when it is television, but on the internet recordings we don’t get that throw forward, as it is called.  Not normally.  This is the first time I have seen or heard it with an iPlayer TV programme.

So why now?  I hope it isn’t something we can expect on all future programmes.

The thing is, they are smashing at people’s minds and ability to think, including mine.  The jarring is deliberate, the timings, I believe, are deliberate, never quite enough time to ‘be with’ anything.  They say it is because our attention spans are not that long and that they are accommodating that ‘fact’, but if that is really what they think and why they do it, there is a sizable and voluble section of the population that is saying, ‘hang on, this is dumb down stuff’.  I am part of that section.  I’m not one of the people who doesn’t care about that, I care very much and object strongly, just on the general level.

As someone who is actively being targeted for stalking or whatever people want me to call it (stalking isn’t a very nice word and we are all lovely people) I find it particularly chilling, infuriating and petrifying.

I find it grievous too, because having just turned 50, I’m looking back and blaming myself for having allowed them to invade and control my life, and limit it, to the extent that they have.  In the coolness of thought, with everything that was happening to me and around me with family and neighbours and other contacts and acquaintances, I had no choice but to give attention to what was happening, and it did set out to make a grab for me.

As I’ve said before, I’ve asked over and over and over again for people to make proper contact through normal recognised channels of communication, and on the very few occasions that someone has their communication has seemed to me to be controlling and evasive of the issues.  Most of the time people don’t.

The whole thing has left me feeling that I have been too relaxed and happy and chilled for people’s comfort, so they set out first of all to destroy me emotionally and have me blame myself for it (or other members of my family or friends), then they can easily go for my underbelly, or jugular, and ruin my reputation (ha ha!) or make me do so myself.

Sometimes I look at what I’m feeling and the areas of personal development I feel I need to work on and think it is more appropriate to teenage angst than it is to a woman in her 50s.  I mean, I’m over the hill, man.  I’m Saga age!  People were talking about retiring at 55 yesterday.

I look at my attitude and realise it has become as unattractive and disrespectful as what I have constantly been fed exposed to.  For me, disrespect is not a gateway to answers.

I’m thinking about the student marches.  More later.  Except the same things that shape me shape them.  It’s obviously because I’m 50 years old.  I once had an employer who had a student or graduate customer come in all the time and tell him how to change his business.  It infuriated him.  He kept saying things like, ‘bloody kids, you can’t tell them anything.  Coming in and telling me how to run my business.  They think they know it all’.

Our young students are the same.  Who has taught them this invective and rhetoric?  Do they think they are thinking for themselves?  They are trying so hard to be the young, bright, entitled people they have been taught to believe they are in the face of a government which is now saying they are not, in effect, if not by intention.

We talk about reason and debate.  Why are these poor young kids with no idea of the world having to fight this on their own with such shoddy weapons, risking arrest?  Are the parents not voluble, or is it just that the media isn’t letting us see that bit?  Why are the marches being shown and, it could be said, glorified, but no one is saying anything about the parents and their role to fight for their children’s future?

These children are not independent.  Their futures are under threat.  And they don’t really understand what they are dealing with.  That isn’t their fault, they are young. They just haven’t been around long enough, no matter how well-informed they think they are.  I really hope there is a strong parent movement behind them.  This is not a battle they should have to fight on their own.  It needs people who know and understand and who command respect, who can’t be fobbed off because of their youth and inexperience, although some of them might be got on their posturing, just like the kids.  Where do we think the kids get it from?

But I don’t know, either.  I heard someone say that in paying back the student debt if they earn over £21,000, they will be hampered in their abilities to establish a home.  But I don’t know if that is true.  Because I don’t know how much they will be expected to pay back each time they have to make the payments, I don’t know what the general cost of living will be, I don’t know what will have happened to house prices.

Eee by gum, talk about sensationalism.  Or is it just my own ignorance of facts that are readily available?

We’ve had a lot of witchcraft imagery in the media lately.  When the Pope came, on the first day he or some high official was confronted by a reporter called LeVey, or McVey, or something.  Anton LeVey wrote the Satanist Bible, I think.  In that same first programme I think it was Hew Edwards who was talking about cauldrons.  Or maybe it was someone else.  I might be getting him mixed up with someone else because, when the woman who used to be a nun and was part of the on screen discussion group said ‘It’s a big ask’, he rapidly took control of that.  I’ve always thought it was supposed to sound like ‘a big arse’ (unacceptable in UK) ass (unacceptable to US readers)  arse/ass, both common in children’s playgrounds.  But this woman said it innocently and for some reason Hew Edwards took it away from her  I think that was where the cauldrons bit came in, straight after.

I’ve noticed this a lot, when someone says something innocent which has previously been perverted/subverted by the media, or some people in it, the innocent use is treated with embarrassment and consternation, and attention taken away from it as quickly as possible.

Anyway, that will do for now.  I don’t want to be rude, but I have to be busy this morning.  I feel as if I have just shot myself in the foot.  that if I disconnected more respectfully, acknowledging I have no right to be in my present position and therefore ‘busy’ in the first place, someone would say I am now ready to be helped and swoop down and help me, send me an email or something.  As long as they don’t arrive at my door to take me into custody, but at the moment I feel I would even be willing to face that, but that isn’t allowing for the level of intimidation people might use in that kind of situation.  Some people turn into savages when faced with a decent and reasonable person they have been told to arrest or put in hospital.  I know.  I do feel like a bad person though, taking my country for a ride, so maybe even that shouldn’t be a problem to me.  Usually though my fear is that they are going to get physical, and I can’t control my feelings, both of fear and outrage.  And I try to resort to reason as well, and find the attempt is despised.

I’m desperate.  Is anyone going to make proper contact and give me an official way out?  Even if the way out is arrest and prison.  It’s better than this uncertainty and feeling of cheating all the time.  It has to be.

Paranoid Thoughts

You know they keep telling us we need a voice?  Well, that’s rubbish.  For most of us, that is the last thing we need.  The people who say different groups need a voice want to be the voice themselves. Some of them, if that aren’t granted that, will take it by force.

Most of us just need the protection and integrity of privacy, within our own allotted circle of relationships.

I think electronic communications, in terms of enabling undetected and widespread surveillance and crime, might be one of the worst con tricks we have ever fallen for.

They take your stuff and feed it back to you, sometimes really specifically, targeting communities and individuals within communities, we all end up frightened of each other and of intimacy because a parody of it is being shoved in our faces constantly by the media, so when we all get to sitting indoors they sell us another gadget to further enhance our media experience.

Most of these people are criminals on the make.  They force the TV licence issue while knowingly using their media empire to invade people’s privacy.  I have in mind the person who was on Andrew Marr’s show yesterday, BBC1 9am Sunday 5th December, the present director general of the BBC.  I don’t know, maybe it isn’t him, maybe he doesn’t have that much power over what people using the BBC to broadcast do, and maybe he doesn’t actually know that much.  But I think he does.

Wise observation of the day, if it IS wise, I don’t know:  If we share a truth, why do we need a voice? The philosophical debate that will come out of that is nothing to do with me, so please don’t try to make out that it is.  I might be responsible for what I say and do, but I’m not responsible to everyone who decides I should be responsible to them. That is self-igniting manure that burns with a stench.

Happy Days!

Touch

People are touch starved.  I am.

In schools teachers are being given more disciplinary powers.  I wonder if they are also going to have restored to them the right to casual, affirming touch and hugging?

It isn’t only the teacher’s right, it’s the child’s right as well, to touch and be touched positively.

Relationships with significant others where hugging and affirming touch are restricted are subhuman.  Everyone needs it, especially with significant others.  It is normal and natural.  Withholding it is not.

I believe it would resolve many discipline problems, because freedom to love and be loved makes people more secure.

As a society, we go immediately to coercive touch because we dare not or will not practise positive touch.

We are drunk and giddy on goodness knows what and some of us have been beaten senseless by the refusal to love in the most obviously normal and natural ways.

The Moon

So, what is the moon to me? 

When I went to school we had a song about the moon, or a man who lived there.  His name was (not sure how to spell this) Achin’ Drum.  And he played upon a ladle.  And something to do with cream cheese.

It has always been an object of beauty to me, and valuable for that alone.  I am assured that it is probably going to be around for at least as long as I am.  So I can look up, and there it is, awesome, beautiful, especially in the mountains on a cloudless night.

Why can’t we just look at it from a distance and love it, and love its maker?  Why can’t we let it be separate and appreciate it for its light and beauty?  Why do we have to get close up and analyse it?  To find that it has enough water per tonne for a shallow bath, but it isn’t drinkable, as said in Fiona Bruce’s News at Ten last night, ‘there are problems’.

Someone said, ‘a thing of beauty is a joy for ever’.  Someone else said, ‘familiarity breeds contempt’.  Since we can analyse anything we want to, why should we be grateful for or awed by anything?

My first intellectual reaction to the report was, in this era of austerity, isn’t it a waste of money to be ‘conquering’ space in this way?  Isn’t it only scientific man’s way of flexing his muscles, and isn’t it an intellectual luxury we can’t afford?  I think so.  I don’t think anyone is ever going to live on the moon.  I might be wrong, but we don’t need that space, it will only be novelty and ‘because we can’ if we do.  But it’s showing off and we can’t afford it.  In all kinds of ways we can’t afford it.  I believe the fabric of who we are can’t afford it, and I think it is immoral.  Just because we CAN do something, it doesn’t mean we SHOULD.

I went to a political talk in Deptford on climate change last year, hosted by Joan Ruddock, my MP.  I didn’t feel informed enough to contribute, so I sat and listened and thought, and eventually she waved a hand in my direction saying, ‘some people, of course, don’t even care’.  I defended myself, saying it wasn’t that I didn’t care, just that I didn’t feel qualified to have an opinion, and that the experts were divided, at which point someone suggested quite forcefully that I could leave if I wanted to, but I held my ground and stayed.  Later I asked about the impact of space exploration on the climate and the environment, but she said it was minimal, and all the lights left on and CFCs etc were more harmful and these little changes made all the difference.  I’m not convinced of that, and I thought her answer was very defensive and evasive.  Having watched parliament for a while as well, it appears to me the issue of climate change is often used strategically and metaphorically anyway.  It’s a handy issue to have going.  I was invited to the talk at a very strategic point in my own life last year, having never been invited to anything before or since.  I think I had emailed her or we had had a brief correspondence or something.  But I had had contact with her ages before that as well.

I think space programmes are an intellectual luxury we can’t afford, which adds only to our material knowledge and satisfies some of our curiosity but does nothing really for the quality of our lives, unlike other areas of science, and unlike the arts, and religion.  I suppose a few drugs might have their origin on the moon, but at this point I don’t know.

In this age of climate consciousness I wonder if people still find it so ridiculous to say, ‘if God had intended us to fly, he would have given us wings’.  Hasn’t the number and intensity and geographical reach of wars increased with our mobility?  Could we have had world wars without aircraft?  Most of us can’t afford the ‘benefits’ of air travel (going on holiday is up there in the list of the most stressful things to do as well – we need a holiday.  We need the stress of going on holiday to get away from the stress of everyday life and recharge our batteries, they tell us.  Maybe that is why many of us don’t bother with our neighbours ‘too much’, we can walk away, put space between us if it becomes too intense, and come back and maintain the comfortable distance), but apparently we can’t afford it environmentally either.

We look out there for everything, if we can’t easily find the solution nearby, everything comes at us from out there, and we end up out there ourselves.  There is no centring anymore, no respect for the individuality and separateness of another, whether it be person, family, community or country.  We cross the boundaries whenever we think we will.  Modern day mass media gives us the impression of immediacy and responsibility, but the reality is, we do not have it in us to take on that kind and amount of responsibility (or to be busybodies), and we are suffering for it.  We need more independence.  Our economies need more independence.  There should be no such thing as a global economic crisis, and no possibility of there being.  That’s what I think, but I might be wrong, I’m not that educated or well informed.

But back to science and stuff.  I’m not sure if we have the moral and ethical compass to keep pushing the boundaries.  Every new discovery seems to add more reasons to our lives to be afraid than it does benefits, and we always seem to be being told that we can’t afford the benefits anyway, as in drug treatments.  Please sir, why can’t we afford the benefits if we can afford to keep funding the war and fear machines?  Please sir, why not?

Who are all these despots that keep terrorising their people, who have been put in place by the western world leaders?  Is the selection process itself responsible for the havoc they can create and maintain?  All these famines and things where we can’t or won’t deliver because of the countries’ leaders.  I don’t want to just bandy words about that I don’t understand, but this really IS still colonial Britain, isn’t it?  Imposing our ways and values on every people we get involved with.

IF multiculturalism doesn’t work, why don’t we adopt the same ‘no pain, no gain’ policy towards dealing with that in the face of all the PC protests and accusations of racism, the same as we do with economic issues, where the accusation is that of classism?  Or on that is everyone saying, ‘you turn if you want to, the lady’s not for turning’?  Why is it taboo in England even to consider that?  Protests don’t stop our politicians in any other area of national and public life.  I’m not saying we should, I’m just asking why we can’t even give respect to the people who think we need to regain the separateness of our national identity.

Here endeth this little foray.

Emerging From The Dark Night

Working through the Dark Night of the Soul to emerge as me.

The Elephant in the Room

Writing about my experiences with: depression, anxiety, OCD and Aspergers

The Sir Letters

A Tale of Love

The Seeker's Dungeon

Troubling the Surf with the Ocean

Seroquel Nation

Onward and upward...

We are all in this together

it's gonna be okay.

my last nerve

psychology | psychiatry | neuroscience | n stuff

A Philosopher's Blog

A Philosopher's View of the World...assuming it exists.