I may be misunderstanding what you meant by your choices.
1) Give in to the message (I interpreted as doing the actions that were consistent with "go on and get mad") 2) Fight the message (I interpreted as telling yourself those things are not true).
Choice 3 is still different than choice 2.
When I think "fighting the message" I think in terms of arguing with that voice in your head. "Maybe you deserved this," No I don't deserve this. "maybe he hasn't really loved you for a long time," I'm sure he still did. "how did you *expect* anyone to be able to love you and keep loving you when you're this fucked up and broken?" I don't know but I thought it could be possible
( ... )
There is "fighting the message" and "not fighting the message". Not fighting means succumbing to the belief that the message is true and inescapable. Fighting the message can mean a number of things that betoken resistance to belief, *including* but not limited to various methods of not listening to the message (the effective method of not listening would be as you describe, the stillness that comes of listening to my Self; the ineffective method would be sticking one's head in the sand and singing, "LALALALALAICANTHEARYOUIMIGNORINGYOU" as a form of resistance).
Gandhi is an excellent form of passive resistance, the bough that bends but does not break. But his was still a form of resistance to an oppressive regime. Yes, methodologies vary, but at the highest level not listening is still a means of fighting back, at least in my lexicon.
I happened to come across an O Magazine in a waiting room (in a car mechanic, of all the odd places to run into it, on a funny day when my hood latch broke when I was in London, and I absolutely needed it repaired before I could drive on a highway) and fate brought me to one of the articles in that magazine which I really needed to read right then.
The message was that when things broke, it was time to take time to do nothing for a while.
It's ok not to find energy for creative projects. It's ok not to find energy for reaching out to friends. It's ok to take time to do nothing for a while.
As always, I love you. I have loved you for a very long time and while you occasionally annoy the fuck out of me, I will continue to love you for a long time to come. When you have time & headspace, we'll spend time together.
Comments 11
Reply
Reply
1) Give in to the message (I interpreted as doing the actions that were consistent with "go on and get mad")
2) Fight the message (I interpreted as telling yourself those things are not true).
Choice 3 is still different than choice 2.
When I think "fighting the message" I think in terms of arguing with that voice in your head.
"Maybe you deserved this," No I don't deserve this. "maybe he hasn't really loved you for a long time," I'm sure he still did. "how did you *expect* anyone to be able to love you and keep loving you when you're this fucked up and broken?" I don't know but I thought it could be possible ( ... )
Reply
Gandhi is an excellent form of passive resistance, the bough that bends but does not break. But his was still a form of resistance to an oppressive regime. Yes, methodologies vary, but at the highest level not listening is still a means of fighting back, at least in my lexicon.
Reply
The message was that when things broke, it was time to take time to do nothing for a while.
It's ok not to find energy for creative projects. It's ok not to find energy for reaching out to friends. It's ok to take time to do nothing for a while.
Reply
It's not because I expect you to perfect that I like you.
I JUST DO. OK??
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment