Wow this thread's evolution is really something. I created a monster 8-)

Come on Jay give it to me one more time because this thread is about to die and you don't have many occasions to send me replies knowing that I won't put you on my twit filter and that way you're exploiting a weakness in the twit filtering system.

>>>I actually do understand what you are saying and the concept you describe as "learned helplessness" is hardly some new revelatory insight. Wikipedia is hardly necessary in this case. I'm old, reasonably well read and for a number of years have been married to a woman who is both a clinical psychologist and a social worker who has been dealing with these issues for years.
>>
>>I appreciate this clarification.
>>
>>>I am not unsympathetic to those whose life experiences have caused them to be disappointed with what they feel are "intrinsic promises" of childhood. But am also not into enabling what I find to be ultimately self-destructive thinking i.e. that their problems are the result of life happening to them and therefore out of their control.
>>>
>>>It is exactly the thinking you describe that give others the power to create stress in you.
>>>
>>>My contention is that buying into any kind of victim mentality is self-destructive and the only compassionate thing to do is discourage it in others and the only successful life strategy is to guard against it in oneself.
>>
>>One might argue what constitutes that a person is a real victim or merely has a victim mentality. But suppose it is a real victim. There are several ways a victim can react.
>>
>>- One tactic is to try to reverse the victimization, to get it undone. If successful, then one is no longer a victim.
>>- Another is to try to get compensated. If compensation is possible, then this is a very effective tactic.
>>- Another is to ask others for social support, either informal or formal. Support of others may lower the stress, pain, loss, whatever.
>>
>>None of the above is self-destructive. Our whole law and culture are structured to reverse, compensate and support. But what do we do if reversion is impossible, compensation isn't perceived as enough and social support appears to fail? What does the victim do? What do the others do?
>>
>>- The victim will lower the self-esteem by selfblame and the others too will lower their esteem for the victim by blaming the victim for being victimized.
>>
>>Is selfblame self-destructive? Not in every case. Even if it's untrue that the victim could have prevented things, a mild to moderate degree of selfblame will lower stress and will help prevent similar problems in the future. But a wrong type of selfblame can indeed be self-destructive.
>>
>>Is blaming-the-victim destructive? I guess not in every case, but esp. if it's untrue that the victim could have prevented things, blaming-the-victim will increase stress in the victim and will not help prevent similar problems in the future. On the other side, it WILL lower stress in the blamer. Guess why.
>
>There is nothing here to prevent. Somebody doesn't want to talk to Naomi. What is there to prevent? Should we insist that Naomi tell us who this person is and then start haranguing and harrassing this person until he gives in and talks to her? Pointless.
>
>>
>>Some here urge Naomi to blame herself. That's their way of supporting her, but the message is not lowering her stress at all. On the contrary, it is increasing her stress. Instead, they should show empathy and tell her that this twitter is a b#%$^d indeed. Choose her side, show her that she's not the only one who thinks it was unjust. That's the kind of support she hopes to get. Pity for her is that this forum is loaded with quite harsh beta people. Naomi is far better off in a forum that's loaded with supportive alpha people. Actually, she'd be positively surprised if she'd visit a social worker or shrink. This alpha person will immediately show the kind of social and emotional support she longs for.
>
>Nobody is blaming Naomi for the situation. What we are blaming her for is her inability to let it go and get on with her life and for continuously bringing it up ad nauseum until nobody wants to hear about it any more. Who deserves blame for that? The other person who apparently has got on with his life?
>
>We also don't know (at least I don't) who this person is. Why should I tell her the twitter is a b#%$^d indeed when I have no idea if he is or he isn't.
>
>We don't even know what precipitated the issue in the first place. You want us to take her side and call it unjust without any facts. Interesting concept, but ...
>
>>Can we close this conversation? :)
>
>Why? Aren't you having fun? ;)