BPDRecovery.com: Forums

I Do want to post this today, because I have given it some thought, and I would like to hear what you have to say on it.

I know people are tired of hearing my criticisms of them and the site, so I'm honestly posting this in an effort to get feedback and thoughts from others, not to criticize. These are some questions I have been pondering.

One thing I did want to comment on was this:

Sarah made the point that it's my actions and words that might cause others to treat me with a lack of empathy. I agree. And it's my problem, and my responsibility. But, I think I wanted to make the point that: There are 256 shades of bpd. There are many symptoms of bpd, of course in addition to the diagnosis. This is not personal, because I've noticed it with many here. But I've noticed that on the site, if someone posts who is po'd, angry, and/or acting out or abrasive, they don't get the same treatment as someone who appears to be a helpless victim. Some people can have bpd with narcissism, and/or other traits and diagnoses in addition to bpd. So should they be looked over or treated differently because they aren't feeling or acting like a helpless victim? Does one with bpd who acts and feels like a victim need help more than the person who is acting out and angry (and then perhaps goes off reckless driving and having promiscuous sex). In other words, do acting-in behaviors and victim-portrayals promote more rescuing behaviors from other bpds, than acting-out "rebel-without-a-clue" behaviors do? And does someone who acts out in this way, necessarily deserve a different type of empathy than someone who becomes afraid or helpless when subjected to the same scenario? And is there more tolerance for one type of acting out, and not enough for another, (and this could be because certain behaviors induce certain feelings and empathy)? And I think this could tie in with this:

"Some people with BPD may have an unusually high degree of interpersonal sensitivity, insight and empathy." (and I got this off the net, but I've seen it mentioned in several sources). I think that applies to me at certain times. Most of the time, it doesn't. But do you think that because of this, some bpd's could be more empathic than usual, and expect a higher level of empathy than healthy people who have never had a pd? Because I can guarantee, my bf, who has been there for me to endless degrees, has nowhere near this type of empathy for people. Nor do his friends. Yes, they will be there for me and display utmost loyalty and caring, but if I engage in bpd thoughts and behaviors, they start drawing lines quickly, and if I cry or act "emo", I don't get any coddling - no way. And he has made it plain and clear he does not want to hear about my past. He loses patience quickly with this type of thing. I'm not saying he's not understanding (we have *great* understanding of one another), I'm just saying he does not display that type of patience with those behaviors.

You make a very interesting point Aqua. It makes a lot of sense. Here is my take on it.

First, none of us are T's. So we react to people in ways that are colored by our past - our relationships, our experiences, and our thoughts and moods. We also have issues, so we may not react to others the way a T might. The amount of empathy we may nor may not have is colored by our past experiences.

I also want to say that just because a person doesn't have a PD, doesn't mean they can't have a high degree of empathy. I think my H has a high degree of empathy, and he doesn't have a PD. It's not a black-and-white issue. I do, however, agree that people with PD's, people like us, may expect more empathy than people without PD's. We may be more sensitive than other people and expect people to treat us in a certain way.

I can understand how people who act "in" may receive more favorable attention than people who act "out." On the other hand, I remember when I was in Group and the people who acted "out" got more attention than people who acted "in." I did not like that at all. I was jealous. I guess it depends on the situation you are in.

It could also be that people who act "out" are not in a place to receive empathy from others. They may want to prove themselves to be a certain way and are not able to accept/receive any advice or help from others. Yes, I believe people who act like victims will receive different treatment. But since there are 256 shades of BPD, there will be many different reactions to people, whether they act like victims or are acting out, or anything in the middle.

I also used to wonder whether the people who act like victims were doing it on purpose. I'm sure there are "victims" who are that way but don't realize they're doing it. And maybe there are "victims" who bring it on themselves, on purpose, to gain attention. How do we react to them? Again, we need to give people the benefit of the doubt. I know for me, if I see a "victim" doing the same old thing over and over, I eventually give up on them. I have a low tolerance for this and do not like banging my head against the wall. If I give you advice and you don't take it, then that's your problem and I'll walk away.

As far as people who "act out" I don't know. I have always thought of them as attention-seekers and tended to stay away from them. I would try to give them advice and most of the time they wouldn't take it. So again, I would give up. I found that in Groups, they treated the group as their private therapy session. I didn't have much tolerance for that either.

So to get back to your question, yes I think people will react differently to different types of behavior. I suppose if any of us wants to be taken seriously and prove that we really want help, we need to be somewhere in the middle. Easier said than done, right? So we get down to motives and we each need to explore our behavior - what we expect, what we need and how best to get those needs met. I myself have not been 100% perfect in this area too. I would imagine also, that if someone sees someone else displaying this behavior, and they point it out to the person, hopefully that person will take it to heart. It needs to be done in a caring manner, not a finger-pointing way. Again, empathy comes into play here.

Sorry if this was so long. I was just trying to get my thoughts down and tried to make them clear! Thanks for bringing up such an interesting topic.

I didn't mean to come across as saying that people with pd's have the copyright on a more-than-usual amount of empathy, if I did come across that way. I've read you describe some of the behaviors of your H, and I will agree that they are somewhat unusual.

I do agree with you that the sensitivity I think in ourselves could promote that same sort of empathy in others. Maybe, "I am sensitive towards this behavior, so I am going to treat you as if you are sensitive towards it too, and expect others to take into account the fact that I am sensitive towards it."

That makes sense Aqua. I guess we can only hope that others will see it as we do. Then they might have more of an understanding of how we feel and why we do some of the things we do.

I also know that some of the things I do in RL are somewhat, er, eccentric, and others definitely don't understand why I do them. I try to explain but sometimes it falls on deaf ears. Sometimes I am laughed at and I feel like I am being invalidated. It's a difficult situation I find myself in at those times and I do the best I can.

Yes. They should be treated however they should be treated, according to that person's internal code of behaviour.

What I mean is: if Sally's acting in ABC manner and Suzie's code of behaviour says "Treat her like crap" then yes, Suzie 'should' treat Sally like crap. Meanwhile Stan's code of behaviour toward Sally's ABC manner might say "Respect that behavior" and Steve's code of behaviour says "Ignore that behaviour outright."

Then if Sally's behaviour the next day or in a different situation is XYZ, Suzie's code might say "ignore that" and Stan's code might say "treat her like crap" and Steve's might say "respect that."

So yes, in the most high-level sense, different behaviour will always be met with different treatment -- both depending on the behaviour being presented and depending on the codes the recipients of that behaviour are living by.

That does not necessarily make it "right" per se though, does it? Treating someone like shit isn't a nice thing to do, and I think we can all agree on that. This is where perception comes into play, as does empathy.

If I ignore something because I've learned that feelings get hurt and noses get out of joint when I try to address the behaviour, does Stan perceive that as hurtful or disparate treatment? Does she see me as ignoring her maliciously, not giving her validation or compassion? Meanwhile, does Suzie pereceive my blind-eye as condoning the behaviour or giving silent approval of it?

On the other hand, back in Sally's shoes, when she sees me ignoring the behaviour, does she have empathy or compassion toward my blind-eye? Does she take it personally ("Oh, I'm being ignored, this is awful!") or does she take my personal or our shared history into account and recognize that the behaviour may be triggering me so I've chosen to distance myself? Does she probe to find out the reasons before leaping to assumptions?


In my extremely NOT so humble opinion, you bet your ass they do! Remember, one of the cores of Borderline is the lack of boundaries. If someone else is having a problem that can be related to (in-acting, victim loop), the natural (but borderline) tendency is to flock to that person to save them because they are me and me is they and it's all one thing so when I rush to help (coddle, baby, soothe, nurture, etc.) someone else, it's more than likely an attempt to save myself. It's all one giant blur to me, as someone who's really in-deep, if that makes sense.

The rebellious nature is one that is essentially stand-offish to many people. The stereotype includes the premise that "oh she can handle it, she's tough, she doesn't need me" which then distances that person or provides some inherent boundaries not otherwise visible in the victim types. Because these boundaries are present in whatever form or fashion, someone in the victim loop will not feel as connected -- there's less blurring between the Rebel and the Victim -- so there's less need to rush to that person with compassion, empathy, problem-solving, coddling, nurturing, etc.


Deserve? Well, let me turn it right back to you. As a Rebel, would you really want or know what to do with the blurred boundaried attempts at fixing things that the Victims get swamped with?

That said, taking "deserve" out of the equation, I think I'm back to the "for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction" premise. If I put out honey, I'm going to attract bees (or ants?) but if I put out stinky food, I'm going to attract flies. What I put out has a direct correlation to what I get back. I don't know that there's a right-or-wrong involved but I do think it's a basic principle of human nature.


Yep. Remember, Aqua, you're not 100% despised and reviled! There ARE people who get you. That group is smaller than the group that think you're a mean bitch (you get what I mean, I think) but they do exist.


From the sounds of it, he's a walking Existential Paradox. He doesn't hold your past against you but he knows that it's not necessarily relevant to the choices you're making today. You're an adult and you make choices. If you revert to childhood, that doesn't mean the rest of the world does too. They're still adults (and so are you!) and they're expecting you to be an adult as well.

The consistent communication and enforcement of boundaries is (IMO) the absolute BEST path to recovery (healthy, happy living) that I personally know of. That's what the bf and his friends are doing for you, I think. They're saying "this is not something we'll tolerate and these are the consequences if you engage in that kind of thing."

The past is the past to him (and to me & to many people I know). We're not three or six or twelve years old anymore and we don't get the luxury of temper tantrums. We don't have anyone to cut our meat for us or tie our shoes or wipe our asses and we no longer have the right to expect those things from other people any longer. (Certainly not physically but emotionally or psychologically, you understand.)

----------------

If I may go "off the reservation" slightly and share some thoughts, conjecture and observation for a moment ...

I get the sense that perhaps you're annoyed to some degree that there are people who are in the Victim role who are Nuture Monkeys - they can't get enough of it, there's plenty of it available for fellow Victims, it's a big old party and you haven't been invited because you're a Rebel and dammit, that just ain't fair!

Meanwhile, some part of you already knows that you wouldn't do well at the center of one of those parties simply because it's not a comfortable environment for you. That doesn't stop you from wishing-and-wanting-and-hoping-and-praying that you could somehow enjoy similar gobs of attention and affection.

The intellectual part of you knows that being a Rebel is a Fast Track to recovery because less time is spent throwing, attending or starring in the Victim parties but the childhood part of you still mourns the fact that (perhaps) you never, ever had a party like that. Maybe you (like me) were never allowed to have a temper tantrum which would bring Mom running, get Aunt Gerta to give you a lollipop or entice Grandpa to take you out for ice cream just cuz you threw that fit. Perhaps the intellectual part sees the current-day Victim parties (and the subsequent attendees) as Mom, Aunt Gerta and Grandpa - giving them current-day approximations of the treats and, darn it, if they're adults & can get those treats, why can't you too??


----------------

(Sorry, I think lack-of-sleep has brought out the Armchair Therapist in me. Please don't take anything I've said as gospel-truth, diagnosis or any form of personal indictment on ANYONE here or elsewhere!)

Very interesting.

My frank opinion: well people with BPD have been described as often having very high degrees of empathy. Empathy in this context I think means that they sense how another is feeling. I think this is the predisposition which gets us into trouble as kids, bc we sense how our abuser is feeling, and develop unhealthy behaviours in order to avoid them coming down on us. We take responsibility for their feelings and turn that responsibility inwards into self loathe. I truly believe this is how BPD develops. It's the combination of being empathic, extremely sensitive, and exposed to abuse.

However, bc one with BPD may be able to sense how another feels does not equate with them behaving with empathy or compassion. It does not equate with them acting upon those perceptions.

eg: For myself I think I'm above average on the perceptive scale, particularly when I stop to think. Often when friends discuss some interpersonal issue with me I point out how the other person may be feeling, and often my friend will respond with "Oh my God, I never even considered they might feel that way! You're right!". So, yeah, perceptive, empathic. But in my own interpersonal relations I often ignore my perceptions of their feelings, to give preference to my own. Because in my experience through my childhood my feelings were ignored, and so I'm constantly trying to compensate for that. I can overlook their feelings in order to seek validation of mine. And you know how this sounds? Like this: "YOU want empathy? What about empathy for ME?".

I think a "victim" type of person will induce very different feelings in people than an "angry" type person. Sadly for the victims (and I'm prone to being a victim) it's much more complicated: their anger may be hidden in their victim MO. Victims can be extremely manipulative (OMG my bio-mother is the absolute EXPERT in victim-style manipulation!!!) and eventually, when people come to see what's going on, they refuse to tolerate it anymore. But in the meantime, yeah, the whole IDEA is to play on people's compassion. Isn't that the whole basis of the MO?

People who express anger will have a very different experience, bc their MO is not to play on the emotions of others. The anger cannot help but spill out. It's not an MO at all really. It isn't designed as a means to an end. It simply IS. Those victims, once they remove their MO may very well find they're equally angry. But anger is just not tolerated well in society. Anger is a threat. It feels very uncomfortable to be around an angry person (I'm sure you've noticed).

I don't think anyone is less or more deserving of compassion, but I know that if an angry, aggressive person comes my way, I probably won't give them much of my time bc I'm busy getting out of their line of fire (sound familiar?). People should, in principle, be treated equally, but no-one ever said the world was fair eh? Aggression is an extremely primal thing. We see it in animals and it says "DANGER". Our success as a species has been in part due to our ability to sense that aggression and to get the hell away before the bear rips our head off, or the person spears us through the gut. The alternative to getting he hell away is to turn and fight, ie: get aggressive back. Perhaps that too sounds familiar. ? But if we encounter an aggressive bear it really won't help us to say "Oh poor bear! You're hungry aren't you dear! Here's a piece of cheese. There there." which would be the compassionate thing to do.

Your bf's actions to me do not reflect any lack of empathy at all, but in fact he is asserting boundaries. He seems to be saying "Hey, I'm not your therapist girl". My bf is a bit like this with me, and I appreciate it too. He actually senses that my past is full of a whole heap of baggage and doesn't see how engaging in it will be of benefit to either of us. He is actually being very perceptive. If it's of no benefit to us both to engage in it, then he's doing a good thing for me too, and isn't that compassion?

Although I see that there are perhaps not equal standards in what you're comparing, the fairness or lack there of is beside the point. You can't change the world and if you want to get people to be more fair then aren't you becoming a victim of them? At the end of the day the basic fact is that aggressive behaviour will piss people off and either make them turn away or turn on you. Right or wrong that's just the way it is. And why should anyone tolerate aggression even if it is born of the same abusive source as some other kind of dysfunctional behaviour? If people don't respond in this way to aggression then they're going against some primal instincts for their own survival. It takes an extremely highly evolved individual to transcend that, and the world just isn't full of people like that. Sadly the angriest people are probably those most in need of a hug.

I believe there is a part of me that DESIRES certain things that I do not indulge in. In fact, I would like no more than to have a shot right now, do a line of cocaine, and sleep with a member of a rock band, lay around with him like a sloth, dance for a living, and engage in extracurricular casual sex. But I stop myself, because I learned where those behaviors led me, which would probably be Aids, corrosion of my internal organs, and a short life, not to mention I am achieving nothing. I have herpes and hpv already. Now, this victim party you describe I also see as an indulgence I might like to take place in. But it seems like there are several people here who are there, that they do nothing to try to stop themselves from indulging. And it's like bringing a nice, hot band into my room who is doing coke, drinking, and partying, and inviting me along for the ride. Sure, I can say no from a distance, but I sure as shit wouldn't want to test it up close. In fact, I'm sure I would be angry because I didn't join in and they were having so much "fun".

In other words, I see it as an indulgence. I can stop myself for awhile from engaging. And then I start to become disgusted watching everyone else engage, and then I just ended up angry because they were indulging and I wasn't. So you're right in a way... but I still don't WANT to go there. I just want the people doing it to take the temptation out of my face.

I'm seeing it as a 50/50 thing. Enough people are getting something from it, so they continue doing it, in the name of help, friendship, caring, or whatever you want to call it. But from my pov, it's an indulgence and a distraction, and at some point, lines need to be drawn somewhere for a lot of people.

So there's your answer to why I care, to whoever was wondering.... not only that, but there's a list of other reasons too, that come from other perspectives, and I've mentioned here and there. But these are the answers coming from a certain part of me, not necessarily the thinking part of me, but the indulgent side that I try to control.

I think many of us see/want to indulge in behaviors that we ultimately dont' engage in. It's different for everybody. But what is good for one person may not be good for another. This is a community - a group of people coming together to work out their problems. We all come from different places and even though many of us have the same diagnoses, we all have different histories. So basically, you can only work on you Aqua. It's not fair to try to lead others down your particular path. We all came to the same place from many different roads, and have various experiences.

If I see someone "indulging" in a particular behavior, I have a few choices. I myself can indulge in that behavior. Or I can try to help that person avoid the pitfalls of that behavior. Or I can ignore what that person is doing so I can concentrate on myself. In the end, we all have choices. No one is forcing us to indulge in another's unwanted behavior, no matter how tempting it might be. We are only responsible for ourselves. If that unwanted behavior is so repulsive to us, we need only to look away. I myself have done that on various occasions. I don't need to be sucked into anything I really don't want to.

Reminds me of something a friend said to me. I was trying to put into words how I was feeling about something, and he said, "I knew you would" (feel that way). He hadn't gone out of his way to help me deal with what I was dealing with. Didn't email or approach me to say anything. And yet, when I did talk to him (staying purposely to talk to him), there it was. He did understand. He's not showing me empathy or compassion wasn't a lack of empathy. It was a matter of boundaries, and taking care of my emotional needs not being his stuff.

A note on attention seeking:

I've never really understood what's wrong with attention seeking behaviour. To be called an attention seeker, or to be caught trying to get attention, well, it's considered "bad". I appreciate there's a line of indulgence, but people who indulge others are quite entitled to do so. C'est la vie. The thing is that we all want/need attention. Those who seek it are allowed to want attention aren't they? Maybe they need it. Maybe attention seekers need attention more than others bc they've missed out on a big chunk of what they needed in order not to need it as an adult. Fair enough. Perhaps if people give the attention it will help to validate them. Perhaps if they receive that attention they won't need as much thereafter, and if they do, maybe what they need is just a shit-load of attention.

We all want attention. I'm a little put out that my post, which took me an hour to write, received no attention at all. We don't speak to be ignored. We do it to be heard, and in order for someone to listen we need their attention, right?

And not everyone knows how to get it. Ash began a site helping people with BPD and when she speaks people pay attention. Some people have authority, knowledge, wisdom or are just interesting and so people pay them attention. Some are beautiful and elegant so they get attention. They don't need it anymore than the frumpy plain chick in the corner. Some people have to stand on a table and wave and scream to be noticed at all. I knew a girl who was just a very funny person, and she got a lot more attention than most around her. Her way of getting attention was so refined, along with a bit of a lucky talent (at being funny). Well if I needed attention I couldn't do that bc I'm just not that funny. I might have to say "Can I have everyone's attention for a moment please?"

My observation is that those who throw around the label "attention seeker" are just pissed off bc they too want attention and don't know how to get it. Sometimes they even have to be rude and abrasive to be noticed. You know what they say "Any attention's good attention".

LOL. I'm working on replies, I just posted on that part because I was thinking about it at the time. It takes me a while to work it all out and give it all proper consideration.


I'll also get to my reply on this soon.

As far as attention seeking, the curious thing is, the two times I've been accused of attention seeking, once on a message board, once at a rock concert, I totally wasn't seeking attention. (With the message board post, more specifically, I was accused of trying to get one person's attention, which I wasn't. I did, of course, expect my post would be read. But I didn't think about that person who's attention I was accused of seeking reading it.)

The times I've actually sought attention have gone unremarked on. Only those two times was I accused, despite my innocence. But, a commonality was that I succeeded in getting someone's attention (even if not trying). The logic seems to be, if I got unexpected attention, I must have been seeking it. And I think some jealousy.

I don't have a whole lot more to add on Sarah's and Ash'es posts. I just want to give credit to both for explaining some things that are helping me to accept, better tolerate, and understand actions and their consequences, and bpd perspectives and drives. Sure, I wanted and needed attention at one time, more than anything else, which led to my dancing. It filled the emptiness inside, momentarily, but I didn't feel good about myself. It has taken me this long to give an honest effort to try to overcome that, and move from attention-seeking to trying to control it but flubbing for awhile, to honestly laying the cards out on the table and trying to grow past the need for it. And that has been a real struggle for me, but I think this time, I am going to make it. It's so easy just to continue to fill the emptiness with instant-gratification attention-seeking exercises, but I am finding this little place inside now that is realizing that real achievements make me feel so much happier and better. Making the transition is difficult, to say the least, because achievements aren't instantly-gratifying, so I've got to suck it in during that time in order to get there. I think my plan to study philosophy and ethics, yoga, and meditation, are going to do the job. I hope so.

Thanks again for all your help. It has been priceless for me.

I am more likely to pay attention to someone who is being direct and less likely to give someone attention if they are using a manipulative gesture. When a person has a direct manner of communication, I take their words at face value and respond in a direct manner. When a person has an "attention-seeking" manner of communication, I tend to give more meaning to the manipulation than I do to the message because I don't like being manipulated. If a "poor me" seems like a manipulative bid for attention, I would need to consider whether or not my paying attention to a manipulative gesture would be beneficial in the long run and typically I do not respond to manipulation because it is more effective for people to communicate in more direct ways.

There are people I can trust to be honest and direct in their communication style while there are others I am more likely to suspect of manipulation based on their patterns of behavior, just like in the story of the boy who cried "wolf" too many times. The more "over the top" a person's emotional outburst is, the less likely I am going to take them seriously because I can't trust their judgment. I have more trust in someone who can remain calm and rational, even in the face of crisis, so that I am more likely to offer assistance to that person. I personally don't want to get involved in the emotional turmoil that tends to accompany attention-seekers so I typically avoid them whenever possible.

I do understand how some "attention-seeking behavior" is mislabeled and is instead a legitimate need for attention at a particular moment in time. I had a hospital employee write in my chart that I was using "attention-seeking behavior" and what was funny is that I had tried unsuccessfully to get his attention and the behavior he was calling "attention-seeking" actually resulted from his lack of attention! What happened was that I was banging on the window of the isolation room to ask him to unlock my bathroom, which was locked because I had nearly hung myself with a sheet from the emergency sprinkler head in the bathroom the night before, and he would not respond. When my only option was to pee on the floor in the corner of my room, he called that behavior "attention-seeking" so that the term has taken on an entirely new meaning for me now. LOL He apparently thought that I chose to pee on the floor in order to get attention, which seems like an unusual conclusion for someone to make considering I was desperately wanting to use the toilet at the time.