Re: All for one and One for All - Seeking Common Ground

[Guest guest]

Hi Free,

[conflict in this group are inevitable]

That sounds true to me of any 'group' of thinking individuals. And I agree,

in determining to be a functional vs. dysfunctional support group, the key may

be in realizing that we may be unconsciously acting out FOO roles, even here.

Reacting to one another in such a way as to distort our natural

characteristics of being valuable, vulnerable, imperfect, and immature causes

our spirit to

recoil; whereas seeing the child in one another we can comfort each other and

ourselves.

I'm in. Carol

In a message dated 3/19/04 8:32:07 PM Eastern Standard Time,

free_spirit_etc@... writes:

Another post that has me thinking is the one about how conflict in

this group in inevitable. That makes a lot of sense to me.

Yet there are functional conflicts and dysfunctional conflicts. The

results of those two types vary greatly.

Personally, I think as members of this group - it is OUR

responsibility to keep this group a safe place - or regain the sense

of safety once again...so it can be a safe place for ALL.

I have a suggestion - if anyone is " game. "

What do you say we try to seek common ground for awhile... A few days

at least. For a few days we could talk about:

1. Our personal experiences (which rarely provoke arguments).

2. What we agree with in someone else post.

3. Offering support to others.

4. What we like about each other, the posts, and the group.

We could also decline talking about:

1. our general beliefs,how people /life are /is or should be (which

often provokes arguments.

2. What we do not agree with in someone's posts.

3. Offering critcism to others (no matter how constructive it is

intended)

3. What we don't like about each other, the posts, or the group.

Granted - we won't agree with everything or everyone. But could we

let go of the need to discuss that for a little while for the higher

purpose of re-creating group cohesiveness by seeking common ground -

making it, once again, a safe place in which to agree AND disagree?

Free (the Placater) <<<trying to increase my awareness of when I am

in " placater mode. "

[Guest guest]

-Yes Free! GREAT idea!! I agree with you!! LOL

Just wanted to follow up with a disclaimer for all out there in KO-

land whose mind chatter has already started asking " Was it ME? Did

*I* do something wrong??? Is it anything that *I* said? yadayadayada "

No - it wasn't you...

It was just I was out talking to some trees... and they all seemed to

be getting along... and I thought... Hey! Maybe they are on to

something here....

Free

-- In ModOasis , " free_spirit_etc "

<free_spirit_etc@y...> wrote:

> Another post that has me thinking is the one about how conflict in

> this group in inevitable. That makes a lot of sense to me.

>

> Yet there are functional conflicts and dysfunctional conflicts. The

> results of those two types vary greatly.

>

> Personally, I think as members of this group - it is OUR

> responsibility to keep this group a safe place - or regain the

sense

> of safety once again...so it can be a safe place for ALL.

>

> I have a suggestion - if anyone is " game. "

>

> What do you say we try to seek common ground for awhile... A few

days

> at least. For a few days we could talk about:

>

> 1. Our personal experiences (which rarely provoke arguments).

> 2. What we agree with in someone else post.

> 3. Offering support to others.

> 4. What we like about each other, the posts, and the group.

>

>

>

> We could also decline talking about:

>

> 1. our general beliefs,how people /life are /is or should be (which

> often provokes arguments.

> 2. What we do not agree with in someone's posts.

> 3. Offering critcism to others (no matter how constructive it is

> intended)

> 3. What we don't like about each other, the posts, or the group.

>

> Granted - we won't agree with everything or everyone. But could we

> let go of the need to discuss that for a little while for the

higher

> purpose of re-creating group cohesiveness by seeking common ground -

> making it, once again, a safe place in which to agree AND disagree?

>

> Free (the Placater) <<<trying to increase my awareness of when I am

> in " placater mode. "

[Guest guest]

Free, For me personally, I agree that this board doesn't seem safe. I

am still posting, but I don't feel comfortable about it. Regardless,

I am doing so for my own benefit. That is why I joined this board,

to get help and support from others who understand what it is like to

live with a BP parent. I have also noticed, as you referred to, that

when we talk about our experiences with a BP, we are all supportive

of each other. I think it is interesting to see that when we start

writing about ourselves, and not how we were harmed by a BP, that we

are not always so kind and understanding.

I agree with most of your suggestions. It has been my experience that

when a situation gets very volatile, the best thing was to 'just not

go there' for awhile, until emotions, etc. have had a chance to work

themselves out.

I thought there was something missing at the end of your post, which

I am copying here:

Free wrote: We could also decline talking about:

>

> 1. our general beliefs,how people /life are /is or should be (which

> often provokes arguments.

> 2. What we do not agree with in someone's posts.

> 3. Offering critcism to others (no matter how constructive it is

> intended)

> 3. What we don't like about each other, the posts, or the group.

>

> Granted - we won't agree with everything or everyone. But could we

> let go of the need to discuss that for a little while for the

higher

> purpose of re-creating group cohesiveness by seeking common ground -

> making it, once again, a safe place in which to agree AND disagree?

>>>>>>>>>>>>

Sylvia adds: What I think is missing is - 'how' are we going to make

it a safe place to .....disagree? I'd like to add that we need to

remember how to convey our disagreements in a respectful manner.

Using I statements, as mentioned in another post, and also reviewing

the guidelines seems to me to be an effective way of doing this. I

think that if we don't clarify this, that after the 'time out' we

could still get back to a similar situation.

With that addition to your statements, I am going to do something I

don't usually do - and that is agree to your suggestion. (I have

always coveted my independence too much to be a joiner in most

things. I might do what was suggested - I just didn't want to agree

to be part of any group, initiative, etc.)

Sylvia (was as Scapegoat, and is now a Lost Child transforming into

her real self)

[Guest guest]

Hey! Great Sylvia. Now the count is three for All - and growing ...

And there are all kinds of techniques for keeping conflict more

functional (and actually productive) - I just thought we might try

taking it one step at a time - and try building some group

cohesiveness and seeking some common ground before we even began to

try to discuss how to handle disagreements.

Welcome aboard -

Free

We could also decline talking about:

> >

> > 1. our general beliefs,how people /life are /is or should be

(which

> > often provokes arguments.

> > 2. What we do not agree with in someone's posts.

> > 3. Offering critcism to others (no matter how constructive it is

> > intended)

> > 3. What we don't like about each other, the posts, or the group.

> >

> > Granted - we won't agree with everything or everyone. But could

we

> > let go of the need to discuss that for a little while for the

> higher

> > purpose of re-creating group cohesiveness by seeking common

ground -

>

> > making it, once again, a safe place in which to agree AND

disagree?

> >>>>>>>>>>>>

>

> Sylvia adds: What I think is missing is - 'how' are we going to

make

> it a safe place to .....disagree? I'd like to add that we need to

> remember how to convey our disagreements in a respectful manner.

> Using I statements, as mentioned in another post, and also

reviewing

> the guidelines seems to me to be an effective way of doing this. I

> think that if we don't clarify this, that after the 'time out' we

> could still get back to a similar situation.

>

> With that addition to your statements, I am going to do something I

> don't usually do - and that is agree to your suggestion. (I have

> always coveted my independence too much to be a joiner in most

> things. I might do what was suggested - I just didn't want to

agree

> to be part of any group, initiative, etc.)

>

> Sylvia (was as Scapegoat, and is now a Lost Child transforming into

> her real self)