Invalidation

Post Reply New Topic

ok, best wishes

(((((Kraftie))))))
(((((WrongPlanet)))))

We'd have a world full of spoilt brats, hmm all of whom probably wouldn't get on with each other, so probably more war!?

Difference is good, so is compromise and polite discussion, but there needs to be a threshold for acceptance of error, no one is perfect!

"But the purpose, really, is not to gratify myself. The purpose is to correct the behavior. "

That is not an explanation since you do not define what 'correct' is. And if you follow your line of thinking back, it IS to gratify yourself because YOU value 'correct behavior', whatever that is.

I don't have children for a very good reason.

I think you are confusing validating with praising. Besides which, negative emotions themselves are reason enough for an individual to choose actions to avoid that emotion in the future.

If someone's actions harm someone else in such a way that the other person had no means to avoid those actions, then the actions of that person were not acceptable. BUT that's rather not the point since the start of the discussion was ENTIRELY about someone expressing emotions and another person telling them that their emotions and mild actions associated with them (like verbally saying they are that thing or 'acting bouncy' or pacing, etc.) are wrong.

Yep. Everyone experiences invalidation, but I guess people on the spectrum probably experience it tenfold.

I think invalidation is so pervasive, people just assume it is normal and learn to live with it (by suppressing most of their unwanted and unvalidated emotions). So when this "norm" is challenged, it can turn a person's view of reality upside down, and churn up a lot of emotion that hasn't been dealt with.

It's also typical when people feel uncomfortable with their emotions, to want to use diversionary or escapist strategies, ie doing something "fun" or entertaining, or else stir up arguments with other people as an outlet.

If I feel "gratified" because I helped a person become a better person,

then I'm guilty as charged!

C'est la vie!

What objection do you have to me, anyway? I don't get it.

If you have a bone to pick, pick it up with the person whom you have a bone to pick.

If you do not understand at this point I do not think I will get you to understand. I am talking to the right person also. Don't think that this is some misplaced something-or-other. You basically say that you know better than other people, that other people should be controlled, based upon your expression of wanting to calm someone else down who is not calm.

So yeah, if you do not understand how I find that disgusting, can't help you.

Last edited by cavernio on 27 May 2015, 9:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I agree...I think probably a lot of people are doing this.

Also people are confusing validation with affirmation (declaring something to be true).

Stuart Smalley was referenced earlier...well, he used affirmations, not validation.

Well, Sir.

No, I don't get it. Maybe I'm not smart enough to "get it."

Oh well.

Such is life.

But if you want me to be the beneficiary of your insights, you will have to find a better method of teaching me.

Abject criticism, without basis, doesn't work.

Maybe....if you were more "diplomatic."

In simpler terms, they are really saying:

In time you will understand this.

or

When you are older you will understand

Ooops, silly me, that would mean they were invalidating your lack of understanding!

This is off topic (and I get the point you're making) but I won't be able to sleep tonight if I let this go.

Marie Antoinette NEVER said "let them eat cake." This was just propaganda used to turn the public against her.

What happened to Marie and Louis was abhorrent, neither one of them deserved it, and it is sad that people still unknowingly pass on the propaganda that was used to justify killing them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZvsjPsyzjA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VpqEgFjCO8

Possibly a key issue here re this topic is mistaking validation for agreement. Validating someone else is acceptance, not necessarily accompanied by agreement. When people say, with genuineness "I see/hear where you are coming from", that's a form of acceptance and signifies that they are willing to hear what you say without rushing in to judge, criticise or correct you; they may or may not agree with what you think, though they accept your right to think it, even if it is different from what they think. Acceptance is more closely allied to tolerance of other points of view than just agreement.

It seems to be a common misunderstanding. And some people only feel 'right' when making someone else 'wrong'.. we probably all know an invalidating someone like that. They are 'compulsive invalidators', as they lack any capacity to accept a difference of viewpoint and only feel ok if they assert their supremacy of opinion at the other person's cost. They are not great people to be around for any length of time...and if you had a parent like this, you probably still bear the scars; my condolences... you will probably have to work harder on validating yourself, your own thoughts, feelings and viewpoints to overcome those early influences and poor role modelling. Growing up with parents like that teaches you to invalidate yourself, and this can lead to depression in later life, and often does...

This article makes some valid points, I think:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/pi ... acceptance

Quite true. It's such an ingrained misconception. There were powerful political forces marshalled against her, and she has been treated shabbily as a result. Alas, what goes down as history is written by the winners, not their victims...

That suggests all winners were wrong, in many cases the oppressed or suchlike win... or are you calling the Nazi's the victims?

Um, I'm pretty sure you're the only one that's mentioned nazi's here. The only thing more uncool than Nazi's is people that bring them up as a knee jerk reaction to something they don't like.

Only obvious example I could think of, anyway it was simply an example to illustrate a point, to which I notice you were too cool to agree or disagree with...