This topic has been on my mind recently, and the subject of conversation with some of my buddies, so I wanted to put some of my thoughts up here in the hopes that others might have some input.

I wrote in the Disagreements thread that I see that emotions are fuel for manipulators.
I'm sure I'm not introducing a novel concept to anyone here, but I wonder if this isn't a topic worth examining here. I think from time to time we all fall prey to this particular form of manipulation, and some people live by it. Certainly we all fell prey the Love Bombing used by Con:Sin to get us hooked on Lazaris materials.

I see that Peny uses this technique often, with her favorite "tears running down my face" show. Peny sheds a tear, and everyone becomes a Mexican jumping bean or a monkey on a stick, running to her defense, thrashing away at the souls of her "offender". Pretty powerful stuff, and I believe that Peny knows better than any of us how to put it to use.

No one likes to see someone in pain. Humans are so wonderful in that way, I think even the hardest of hearts is moved by the tears or suffering of another. We learn this as babies, that our tears will bring comfort and attention.

Good old Dr. Spock advised young parents to let babies cry it out sometimes rather than to pick them up at every little whimper, and I think the much maligned Doctor might have been on to something here. Maybe we train our children, and have been trained to believe that our tears and wimpers give us a sense of entitlement to be appeased, comforted, and given attention. Maybe we have never trained ourselves to let the baby cry it out sometimes.

Dr. Spock's logic was that if a baby learns that they will be picked up every time they cry, they will never learn to go to sleep on their own, so the parents will never have any peace, and the baby will never get enough sleep. He also cautioned to hold tight and let the baby cry no matter how long it took, because if we caved in even after an hour of crying, we had just taught the child to cry longer and louder, and eventually they would get a response. Sound logic it seems to me, yet a generation of critics found the thought of a baby left to cry themselves to sleep to be horrifying. (He wasn't talking newborns here, but kids around one year of age).

The thing is, that those of us who did try the technique found that it only had to be implemented once or twice, and then the baby learned to go to sleep without any muss or fuss. So, was this child abuse, or was it a good thing for our us and our children to get a good nights sleep every night for the rest of their childhood?

It is my observation that sleep deprived parents with cranky crying babies who whine and sob into the wee hours on a nightly basis are often themselves emotional manipulators. Now, this ain't science kids, it is my observation!

Have you ever noticed how some households with children are peaceful and orderly, and in some it's impossible to even have a conversation with the parents while the kids are around, and the kids are ALWAYS around, whining, crying, temper tantruming, and demanding attention?

Is this just the luck of the draw as some people believe, that some of us get "good" kids, and some of us don't? I don't think so. I think it's symptomatic of the fact that some people don't want to cop to the facts of emotional manipulation. They can't call their kids on it, because they can't call themselves on it.

So, what happens to these kids who were trained by their parents to use their tears, whining, crying, to get what they want? Am I stating the all too obvious here? As I write, it seems so blatent, yet how many of us use or fall prey to this tactic?

I have met some world class emotional manipulators in my time, and I can say without question that these encounters were the most painful of my life. People who whimper and moan, and scream "abuse" every time they don't get their way are true menaces as far as I am concerned. They wangle and wheedle their way through life, always presenting themselves as sweet and loving darlings, but always ready with their tried and true little carving knives of emotional blackmail.

It's obvious that the only way to stop this rampant co-dependency in our society is to stop playing. That means that we have to be strong enough, and wise enough, to not cave in to, or to practice this very effective and widespread tactic.

The problem is that it is so widely practiced and reinforced that when one does address it from a place of self-respect, they are often viewed as "bad guys".

Manipulators aren't going to support any efforts to end the madness, on the contrary they will do everything to keep the game going, because they don't know any other game. Turn on the TV, watch a soap opera, a movie, a talk show, they're all about emotional manipulation, and when does anyone ever get called on it? I think I can count the times I've seen it on two fingers.

Our politicians emotionally manipulate us, news reporters use the same tactic, it is so widely used because it works. It goes without saying that cults use it, and cults are so widespread now because they have studied human emotions, and made it their business to become state of the art emotional manipulators.

I have seen some of us here stand up to emotional blackmail and manipulation, and I am proud of us for that, not only because it is an indication of self-respect and mutual respect, but because it creates a model. Every time we stand up to an emotional manipulation, we demonstrate another way.

I do not believe that most people really want to be manipulators or manipulated. I also don't think many people can even define it when it is happening. This is why we have such a hard time hearing someone say that their feelings are hurt, or why we address issues from our feelings. We have come to deify feelings without taking a hard look at the source of them.

Just as it is not loving, in my mind, to teach a child that their every little whimper is worthy of stopping the show, an entitlement to be comforted, soothed, held, and coddled, it is not loving to treat each other that way. It is most unloving to expect to be treated that way.

I think it's time to let the baby cry themselves to sleep. I think we'll all find more peace, and keep our houses in order if we do.

When someone starts whining, or we find ourselves with the urge to let out a bit of a whimper, maybe we need to ask ourselves what exactly it is that we are doing. Are we seeing someone who is really hurting or in need, are we really hurting and in need, or are we just knee jerking a technique that is pretty much guaranteed to give us a quick fix, but is reflective of zero respect for ourselves or others, and only serves to perpetuate the problem?

Tears are running down my face as I write this, so I do expect you will all write very quickly and tell me how right and brilliant I am......

Just kidding, but, what do you all think? Am I overstating the obvious?

You wrote:

[[No one likes to see someone in pain. Humans are so wonderful in that way, I think even the hardest of hearts is moved by the tears or suffering of another. We learn this as babies, that our tears will bring comfort and attention.]]

It is amazing how much power a person can exert over another simply by claiming to be hurt or actually being hurt and using it as capital to get something from people they don't think they could normally get such Allegiance, loyalty, agreement "love", power..

It is so common I think we fail to notice it in the way that fish tend to forget they are surrounded by water.

The whine is definitely the most effective club.

All manipulation is certainly not created equal.

People who manipulate through weakness would love to pretend that all manipulation is created equal and is equally effective.

Probably because they secretly know just how potent their game is and don't want to share the wealth [g]

It also seems to be a trait of highly manipulative people in the new age to on the one hand behave like total emotional tyrants and on the other hand talk endlessly about fairness and equality..

It is much easier to walk away from an overt bully than a bully that clubs you with guilt, and tales of all the suffering they have experienced at the worlds hands.

Manipulation through weakness is such a powerful club because, as you mention, it plays on our basic human nature and our aspirations for fairness and compassion.

Somebody who is bullying overtly raises other human instincts: The instinct to protect others smaller and weaker than ourselves when they are in danger.

If you see a big kid picking on a little kid in the playground the impulse is to step in and protect the little kid.

Experienced manipulators know this and have opted for manipulation through weakness so they can bully people with a reduced risk of getting called on it.

Their greatest position of strength is knowing that anytime anyone questions them they can limp, hobble accuse and whine about how they never could bully anyone because they are so weak or so pure or so whatever..

An overt bully might produce fear in a person, but not the confusion that a covert bully produces. You might be afraid of an overt bully but you certainly know what your dealing with.

A covert bully challenges you to call them on it because they know how GUILTY you will feel if you say anything because they have carefully crafted the appearance of being weak and victimized.

All they have to do is look wounded and you feel like shit. Most of the time it works.

I wonder if people have an interest in talking about ways to safeguard yourself from this kind of manipulation.

One of the things that comes immediately to mind for me is that having a self image that says "I never hurt anyone" or a belief that "hurting someone is so horrible an offense that I should never do it or get caught"

If we think that hurting someone is the same thing as killing them or disabling them then we are prey to anyone who wants to manipulate us claiming they are hurt.

I think you have to be able to admit that we can and do hurt people and that doesn't mean you loose your basic human rights..

WDYT?

IMO -- Katie's point about anything "new age" being suspect as potentially (soul sucking) is an excellent warning.

Abraham Maslow's scale of human needs puts social belonging at #3 -- even before self esteem (#4).

Vicki, your comment about the manipulators that work under your management really made me sick -- people who canot take respecting, adult criticism about their present level of capability -- and use it constructivly (vs. the destructive use you describe --), IMO have toxic issues they milk TO DEATH with their fathers, or father figures. This is most often done by -- just as you describe -- working covertly within a group to have the one pointing out their behavioral shortcomings black listed and/or banished from the group.

The only thing I have ever seen work with these adult children is hard and *fair* authority saying: "This is the way it is, period. If you don't like it, THERE is the BIG door."

People never disciplined firm and fair enough in childhood IMO.

Steve
sb6@altavista.com

Something I've been noticing about the dynamic of how we process information is the tendency to respond to it emotionally.

When we hear something we like, maybe that gets our happy endorphins buzzing, and when we hear something we don't like, it gets our adrenal "fight or flight" mechanisms rolling.

How far do we go beyond our emotions when processing a particular piece of information?

I think the degree to which we allow ourselves to do that just might be the degree to which we are able to accurately process information.

No one likes to feel bad, or be challenged.
This is why Lazaris adds such healthy doses of Love Bombing into the information. If we couch challenging thoughts with lots of hugs and assurances to mitigate the "fight or flight" response, maybe that makes it easier to get through the defensiveness.

Those who recognize this tendency can exercise a lot of power over others, just by right of understanding that what most of us are looking for, is the quick fix of a happy glow, rather than the actual down and dirty TRUTH.

I think that dynamic is very much at play here, given that MOST of us are not resorting to the Love Bomb tactic to get our points across. We aren't wrapping our opinions up in soft and fuzzy security blankets geared toward creating a false sense of security in each other. We are operating from a sense of respect for each other that we don't need to be emotionally manipulated prior to hearing a new thought.

That makes us seem very mean to those who are still in need of a comforting sense of safety before allowing thier brain to kick in to process anything.

I think that many people never do go past the immediate emotions that are raised when hearing information, but just let it stop right there in the infant brain as either "feels good" or "feels bad". When it feels good we'll do anything to get more, and when it feels bad, we'll do anything to stop it, up to and including hurting the messenger. It explains a lot to me about why some here are so confused about the difference between a personal attack and an attack on an idea or concept.

I think even Lazaris once said that true genius is not knowing a lot of facts, it is knowing the difference between a thought and a feeling. On that I concur, although I won't give it to Lazaris as an original thought of "his", because that would make me feel bad!

Anyway, some quick thoughts.

WDYT?

In trying to get away from the Lazaris definitions of terminology I've done some searching for other opinions and perspectives on manipulation.

Here is a link to an article which I think is pretty bland, but still of interest.

http://www.innerself.com/Behavior_Modification/manipulation.htm

The article begins:

quote:

---

Avoiding Manipulation
by Jerry Minchinton
We can define manipulation as "getting people to do what you want without giving them something they value in return".

How does manipulation work? When someone says to you, "If you don't help me clean my house I'm going to be mad at you," that person is attempting to manipulate you. He is not offering you anything except to withhold a display of bad temper, which he could do in any case. But if the same friend says, "If you'll help me clean my house, I'll take you to the baseball game this afternoon," and your friend knows you love baseball, that is not attempted manipulation because you are being offered something you value in exchange for your efforts.

---

I'm not sure I completely agree with this definition, but it works for me as a starting point. The rest of the article goes into more detail

Any thoughts?

Katie