Women that are self-conscious about their bodies and sexuality....thread

[Toaster126]

Originally Posted by Gilda

Yes. This doesn't justify their being made in the first place.

Oh sure, they don't escape the label of "asshole". But it's better to be an asshole than internalize hateful language and turn it into a self-fufilling prophecy, no?

[abaya]

Originally Posted by Toaster126

But it's better to be an asshole than internalize hateful language and turn it into a self-fufilling prophecy, no?

Not in my book. A guy who does something like that is headed for the lowest level of hell. A woman would be at that level of hell, too, if she ever made some disparaging remarks about her partner's body. Not that women (or men) shouldn't be responsible for their own well-being, but jesus. Come on, man... especially when it happens at a young, developmental age... that shit fucks up men AND women alike, and it ain't right.

Meanwhile, I love my body. Sure, there are days when I feel like my boobs hang low and dangle to and fro, but that happens only occasionally. I love being naked in all kinds of light, especially with my man... most of our weekends are spent being naked around the house, wheee! And if the neighbors catch a glimpse... well, lucky them.

[Jinn]

Originally Posted by Toaster

Isn't it the women's responsibility to not let small statements fuck up their mental health and self-image? Hint: it is.

Seconded.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.

Did anyone else hear this in kindergarten? Well, it stuck with me, and I wish it stuck with more people.

The instant you let someone else's words "screw you up," you're the one failing - not them. You're giving THEM control over YOUR self-image. Worse still, you're giving THEM control over what YOU think. That doesn't bother you?

I value the right to my own emotions and my own thoughts, and I sure as hell am not going to let someone's disparaging comment take that control away.

I don't care if your mother, father, brother, ex-boyfriend, ex-girlfriend, sister, brother, cousin, aunt, uncle, grandmother, grandfather and your entire village told you that you were ugly daily. And I don't care if it was during a 'developmental' period or not.

Your choice to let it bother you NOW is your fault NOW, not their fault.

[Gilda]

Originally Posted by Toaster126

Oh sure, they don't escape the label of "asshole". But it's better to be an asshole than internalize hateful language and turn it into a self-fufilling prophecy, no?

I doubt those are the only two choices. I don't buy the "I'm an asshole" defense to rude behavior or offensive language. We all have a responsibility to treat others with basic courtesy.

---------------------------

Originally Posted by JinnKai

Seconded.

Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me.

Did anyone else hear this in kindergarten? Well, it stuck with me, and I wish it stuck with more people.

Like many things we simplify for children to teach them a specific lesson, this one really isn't true on a broad scale. Words can hurt, quite deeply at times, and in ways longer lasting than simple physical pain.

Personal responsibility works both ways. Yes, people should try be careful not to overreact to external judgments or innocent remarks. People shouldn't go looking for things about which to be offended. People should also be courteous in regards to the needs and feelings of others.

It's easy enough to say, "People shouldn't be oversensitive." It's true, but very vague, and makes for an easy out for those who don't want to go to the effort of making reasonable adjustments their behavior or assessing their own responsibity in hurting another's feelings.

Perhaps people shouldn't be affected so strongly by negative external judgments. I don't know exactly where to draw the line. But we should recognize that most people are affected by external judgements to different degrees, and take that into account when dealing with them.

Words have the power to do great good. They also have the power to do great harm. It matters how we use that power.

Gilda

[Toaster126]

Originally Posted by Gilda

I doubt those are the only two choices. I don't buy the "I'm an asshole" defense to rude behavior or offensive language. We all have a responsibility to treat others with basic courtesy.

You completely misunderstood me. I said it was better to be the asshole rather than the person with the fucked up viewpoint. Not that it excused it in any way, just that it simply was less messed up to be disrespectful to another person as opposed to blaming someone else for your SELF-esteem problems. Notice the caps.

Originally Posted by Gilda

Words have the power to do great good. They also have the power to do great harm. It matters how we use that power.

Quoted for truth. I remember the first time I heard the sticks and stones saying, and even then (at six or whatever), I realized how ridiculously wrong it is to take that to heart. Words have real power. It's just your own responsibility to not base your SELF-esteem on them.

[Deltona Couple]

Gilda, correct me if I am wrong here, because I feel like I am agreeing with you here...
Toaster, I think the point she is generally trying to make is this: Even though we shouldn't take hurtful words personally, and even though we all should learn to shrug them off without letting it affect our feelings or self esteme, it still does NOT give anyone the right to be rude and hurtfull in their words. We should ALL hold ourselves accountable for our actions in deed, as well as in word.

Originally Posted by toaster126

Words have real power. It's just your own responsibility to not base your SELF-esteem on them.

In a sence I agree, but also, it is the responsability of the person who SPEAKS those words, to consider the respect due to another human being.

[Toaster126]

Ok, then I say people should be held as fully accountable for their self-esteem as their interactions with others.

[Deltona Couple]

Well I can see Toaster, that you are obviously unable to be acceptable of other people's right against personal attacks. I don't know if it is because of bad experiences in the past, or just a total lack of respect for others. I am glad that I don't know you personally, because I don't have room in my life for disrespectful people. I hope that I am wrong in this, I honestly do. But by your statements in this thread, it leads me to believe that you have no problem telling someone their bad points, regardless of how it might affect them. Socially this is just not acceptable in the places that I have lived. I wish you good life and prosperity, and hope that anyone you have relations with doesn't suffer from attacks from you on their ego or self-worth as a human being. At this point I will end my discussions in this thread. Thank you all for your time and insights.

[Jinn]

This is such a huge basket of eggs, I don't even know where to start. I know it wasn't directed to me, but you're making some pretty bad assumptions:

In a sence I agree, but also, it is the responsability of the person who SPEAKS those words, to consider the respect due to another human being.

If you remember, we got here because someone was blaming a guy for making a comment about her nether regions and how it was still affecting her today.

If we want to get down to the "both parties are at blame" scenario, then I think we ALL agree, even Toaster. It's certainly the responsibility of the speaker to consider the feelings of the reciever, just as it is the reciever's responsibility to determine how it effects their self-worth and self-esteem. But just because someone either (a) didn't consider your feelings or (b) considered your feelings and didn't care doesn't mean that we should continue to let it effect our self-esteem.

To be frank, unless the guy told her about her nether-regions about 15 minutes ago, she no longer has a right (in my book) to be concerned about it. If she's concerned about it, then she skipped the important part of human interaction -

Is this person right? Does this person's opinion matter to me? Do I agree with them? Is it something I can change? If so, what can I change?

If the answer is NO to any of these questions, then you forget it and dismiss the other person as being poor at considering your feelings.

If it still bothers you, then YOU are at fault, not the speaker.

[Gilda]

We've since moved past the specific case of the OP and into a more general discussion of the issues involved.

Negative comments continue to affect us because we don't have perfect control over our emotions or how they effect us in the long run. We're not robots reflecting on external conditions all the time to decide whether or not they are rational and whether it's reasonable to allow them to affect us.

We learn through internalizing external observations, both through direct and indirect instruction. If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are going to believe that. That's one of the basic elements of pedagogical theory, repetition and practice leads to internalization of the concept being taught. This happens informally also, through assimilation of implicit cultural values.

Self image can suffer as a result. It's a mistake to believe that because it's an internal characteristic that it is controllable in the same manner as rational thought. It's an emotional characteristic that is formed through a long series of exposures to and interactions with the world. It can be shaped by rational examination, and good parents and teachers, considerate people will try to steer it towards productive self awareness, will try to shape it intentionally in a positive and realistic manner.

There's also the implications derived from true statements. For example, I'm skinny and flat chested. Those are facts, not judgements. That those things are generally considered unattractive in our society is a judgement, one which is easy to internalize given how often it's encountered in a variety of contexts, both explicit and implicit. This doesn't mean that I want to be reminded of this, and most people are considerate enough not to comment.

The target of rude comments and culturally instilled values does have a responsibilty to deal with how those values affect her on a personal level, this is true, but it's a lot more complex than "Don't let it bother you."

If someone were to call me flat chested as an insult, the answers to your little quiz would be yes it's true, yes it matters to me, yes I agree with them (I have to because it is factually true) and no, I can't change it. This is supposed to make me feel better about having been insulted? Not seeing the logic there.

Gilda

[Jinn]

We've since moved past the specific case of the OP and into a more general discussion of the issues involved.

Indeed, we were all addressing ghoastgirl1's comment, not the OP.

I feel that nearly all of your post is derived from one core assumption, with which I disagree. I believe that one's current inability does NOT make something impossible, nor does it make it universally impossible for all humans.

I'm sure you know this, and I doubt you'd claim that what you do is the case for all humans. However, you've implicitly stated similarly in your post via statements such as:

Negative comments continue to affect us because we don't have perfect control over our emotions or how they effect us in the long run.We're not robots reflecting on external conditions all the time to decide whether or not they are rational and whether it's reasonable to allow them to affect us.

Your use of 'we' inherently makes an assumption that your inability to act in this manner makes it likely that 'we' cannot either.

I'd like to make the assumption that we can, using myself as an example. With rare exception, I act in exactly this manner - I reflect as objectively as possible on my external conditions, and decide whether or not stimuli should relevant to me, and whether or not they should make me feel a certain way. You can see vaguely in the outskirts of society - someone doing something that they believe to be right despite the protestions of everyone they know - friends, family, society, or government. Martin Luther King is a perfect example of someone who was able to ignore racist comments simply because he rationally decided they were unbased claims and that the speakers of such comments were not worthy of consideration. I would be supremely surprised if MLK ever expressed comments that the comments made him feel bad, or made him feel a certain way. He simply made the choice not to let it effect him at all! (My assumption, of course)

We learn through internalizing external observations, both through direct and indirect instruction. If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are going to believe that. That's one of the basic elements of pedagogical theory, repetition and practice leads to internalization of the concept being taught. This happens informally also, through assimilation of implicit cultural values.

I believe your statement that "If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are going to believe that." should be modified to "If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are can chose tobelieve that." We are not hapless dogs to authority, and we can chose to disregard comments, no matter the authority of the person or the statement. Again, simply because you are poor at it does NOT make it impossible. With practice, could you not improve your ability to disregard such comments as irrelevant, unncessary, or unproductive to retain? If so, then you must realize that we CAN have 'perfect control of our emotions in the long run.'

I think you might find "The Zen Art of Teaching" by Peter Gartner interesting. He's modelled what he believes to be the three prototypical models of education. His third method (Teaching III) addresses my point:

He says,
"From a constructivist point of view learning is considered as an active process in which people construct their knowledge by relating it to their previous experiences in complex and real situations in life. In their practical lives people are confronted with unique, unpredictable situations the problems of which are not yet obvious. Therefore, in contrast to cognitivism, the
solving of already existing problems is not the main priority, but the independent generating of the problem. These must be searched for in confusing, insecure, unpredictable and partly chaotic situations."

In short - rather than develop "solutions" to unique situations, we can best learn to search for the problem in "insecure, unpredictable and partly chaotic situations," by focusing only on the problem. What is the problem at the root of insecurity? At the root of 'letting something bother you'? It's your inability to not let something bother you. Although the chaotic delivery of self-esteem lowering comments might seem unique, they ultimately revolve around a simple problem and solution that you've learned. My solution is the solution I've learned, certainly, but that does not mean that you or ghoastgirl1 cannot learn and practice it.

In this case I am not trying to diagnose specific problems or offer specific solutions, only state that these situations are not unique. If you focus on the analysis of the problem rather than the chaotic real-life solution, you can see that there is a rational and objective manner to approach ALL of the problems.

I appreciate you contributing a real example, because I think it provides the perfect platform for the discussion.

That those things are generally considered unattractive in our society is a judgement, one which is easy to internalize given how often it's encountered in a variety of contexts, both explicit and implicit.

It is also easy to chose NOT to internalize those judgements, if you are aware of them and their potential impact on your pyschological well-being. It certainly becomes more difficult in the case of women, and even more difficult in the case of women and self-image, but that does not make it in unsolvable or unmanageable problem. You may have to become better at it than a similarly equipped man, but that does not mean you cannot ignore societal judgements.

The target of rude comments and culturally instilled values does have a responsibilty to deal with how those values affect her on a personal level, this is true, but it's a lot more complex than "Don't let it bother you."

If you could truly implement a policy of "don't let it bother you" with any statement that you rationally deduced as irrelevant, do you think it would fail? If not, then it doesn't HAVE to be any more complex than "Don't let it bother you."

If someone were to call me flat chested as an insult, the answers to your little quiz would be yes it's true, yes it matters to me, yes I agree with them (I have to because it is factually true) and no, I can't change it. This is supposed to make me feel better about having been insulted? Not seeing the logic there.

If you look anything like your profile picture, and if you truly agree with the sentiment, than you clearly mis-understand what is "factually true." It is not factually true, but biased by your own perception of the words "flat" and "skinny." I, for example, would not evaluate "flat" and "skinny" in the same manner as you, and would arrive upon a different conclusion. This simple contradiction means that it cannot be factual, and that you can dismiss the claim as simply as any other which could cause harm to your pysche.

Furthermore, even if you were to accept it as factually true, yes knowing that you cannot change it should offer consolation. If you recognize a problem but there is no solution, then you should not let that "problem" be a "problem." You either act towards a solution, or you ignore it.

BTW - the Zen Art of Teaching is available as a PDF at http://www.elearningeuropa.info/extr...ofteaching.pdf if you'd like to read it.

[SugahBritches]

Since I was the OP............I have some comments........

I personally believe that it begins early in life. Meaning that if you are told early in life that you are not worthy (meaning in any aspect) that soon you may believe it. And sometimes it takes more that just someone saying, ..."Sticks and stones my break my bones........etc..." I'm sorry, but that doesn't cut mustard.

The few years before puberty, is the biggest impact on anyone's life...........PERIOD. Unless this person is receiving personal and professional treatment to wade through all the past garbage, it's not going to END with a phrase like "sticks and stones". It's easy for many to suggest ways to address these issues, but until you have personally experienced any early childhood experience that might make you feel unworthy/unloved, you really don't have the comments/solutions to help someone wade through all their past garbage.

Not that I'm judging anyone here, but I've seen what critical opinions can do to an adolescencent.

[Gilda]

I'm sure you know this, and I doubt you'd claim that what you do is the case for all humans. However, you've implicitly stated similarly in your post via statements such as:

Your use of 'we' inherently makes an assumption that your inability to act in this manner makes it likely that 'we' cannot either.

No. I was not generalizing from myself to everyone. I find that tactic to be very poor reasoning and have said so on many occasions. I was generalizing regarding women with a poor self image. This generalization was not intended to be an absolute statement either.

I'd like to make the assumption that we can, using myself as an example. With rare exception, I act in exactly this manner - I reflect as objectively as possible on my external conditions, and decide whether or not stimuli should relevant to me, and whether or not they should make me feel a certain way.

I'm glad you're able to do that. Not everybody is, and to make that claim is to do exactly what you just accused me of doing, applying how you function to everyone.

You can see vaguely in the outskirts of society - someone doing something that they believe to be right despite the protestions of everyone they know - friends, family, society, or government. Martin Luther King is a perfect example of someone who was able to ignore racist comments simply because he rationally decided they were unbased claims and that the speakers of such comments were not worthy of consideration. I would be supremely surprised if MLK ever expressed comments that the comments made him feel bad, or made him feel a certain way. He simply made the choice not to let it effect him at all! (My assumption, of course)

Dr. King was a great man of extraordinary resolve. The person who is his equal is very rare indeed. I certainly don’t come anywhere close, and I’m pretty sure that he wasn’t a woman with a poor self image.

I believe your statement that "If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are going to believe that." should be modified to "If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are can chose tobelieve that."

I’m fine with it the way I wrote it.

We are not hapless dogs to authority, and we can chose to disregard comments, no matter the authority of the person or the statement.

My point was that concepts, once internalized through constant repetition and exposure, are not easily dismissed. When faced with a reinforcing statement, such statements will be accepted. The grass is green. I assume you agree with this statement. Why is this? You internalized the concept at a young age through constant exposure and direct instruction. The statement agrees with your concept of “green”. When a statement agrees with an internalized concept, it is accepted as true. For a person with an existing poor self concept, statements agreeing with that self concept are going to generally be accepted as true, and those that contradict it will be actively resisted. Note, this is not a conscious choice, but a subconscious psychological process. It’s what keeps people believing things that can be objectively proven false even in the face of overwhelming evidence. The pop psychology term for this is cognitive dissonance, and it is a very powerful psychological process.

Again, simply because you are poor at it does NOT make it impossible.

Again, I was not generalizing from myself to everyone, nor did I claim or imply that it was impossible.

With practice, could you not improve your ability to disregard such comments as irrelevant, unncessary, or unproductive to retain? If so, then you must realize that we CAN have 'perfect control of our emotions in the long run.'

I don’t want to reach the point where I can completely disregard outside critical comments. They help me to find ways in which to improve myself. Improve in how well I process them, yes, of course. This is the reason I am in therapy. Achieve perfection? Of course not. I don’t believe that’s possible.

What is the problem at the root of insecurity? At the root of 'letting something bother you'? It's your inability to not let something bother you.

It’s good to see that you concede that some people do not have ability to not let something bother them. However, I’d say that sometimes insecurity can stem from a realistic evaluation of available information. If I were playing chess against Vaselin Topalev, Judit Polgar, Garry Kasparov, or my sister, insecurity regarding my ability to do well wouldn’t be the least bit unreasonable.

A healthy view isn’t disregarding entirely outside judgments, it’s being able to balance them reasonably against self assessment.

Although the chaotic delivery of self-esteem lowering comments might seem unique, they ultimately revolve around a simple problem and solution that you've learned. My solution is the solution I've learned, certainly, but that does not mean that you or ghoastgirl1 cannot learn and practice it.

Nor does it mean that it’s a good solution for anybody else.

In this case I am not trying to diagnose specific problems or offer specific solutions, only state that these situations are not unique. If you focus on the analysis of the problem rather than the chaotic real-life solution, you can see that there is a rational and objective manner to approach ALL of the problems.

Of course. I am involved in a treatment program utilizing cognitive/behavioral therapy in conjunction with medication. This is a method that is a rational, research-based approach.

I appreciate you contributing a real example, because I think it provides the perfect platform for the discussion.

Glad I could help.

It is also easy to chose NOT to internalize those judgements, if you are aware of them and their potential impact on your pyschological well-being.

No, it isn’t easy, not for everyone.

It certainly becomes more difficult in the case of women, and even more difficult in the case of women and self-image, but that does not make it in unsolvable or unmanageable problem. You may have to become better at it than a similarly equipped man, but that does not mean you cannot ignore societal judgements.

I would not want to ignore all judgments. Some are accurate and useful. Some are nonsense. The key is not in ignoring them, but in weighing them reasonably. Young people are shamed for stealing or hurting others. They’re taught pride at overcoming obstacles. These are good things, external judgments that are hopefully internalized at an early age and acted on for a lifetime. Others are complete and utter nonsense, such as the idea that there is anything wrong with homosexuality.

People with severe self-image problems and related psychological disorders are in a position where that opportunity for balancing judgments or potential judgments doesn’t occur, or is dysfuntional. The emotional reaction occurs unbidden, the judgments, internal and external, are accepted as real when they occur. The emotional reaction is so powerful that there is little to no opportunity to judge it reasonably.

If you could truly implement a policy of "don't let it bother you" with any statement that you rationally deduced as irrelevant, do you think it would fail? If not, then it doesn't HAVE to be any more complex than "Don't let it bother you."

This takes a complex problem and simplifies it to the point of absurdity.

People with self-image problems and related disorders do see such judgments as relevant, and learning to balance what is and is not reasonable is not an easy or straightforward process. Those feelings are real and powerful, sometimes overwhelmingly so.

When someone has certain psychological problems, wherever the problem originally comes from--childhood trauma, stress, chemical imbalance--if they go on long enough, the problem becomes physical, throwing the neurochemical processes of the brain out of whack. This is a physical neurochemical problem that cannot be easily treated by “Don’t let it bother you.”

If you look anything like your profile picture, and if you truly agree with the sentiment, than you clearly mis-understand what is "factually true."

I didn’t say “factually true”.

It is not factually true, but biased by your own perception of the words "flat" and "skinny." I, for example, would not evaluate "flat" and "skinny" in the same manner as you, and would arrive upon a different conclusion. This simple contradiction means that it cannot be factual, and that you can dismiss the claim as simply as any other which could cause harm to your pysche.

That picture is pretty close to how I look currently. My hair is a bit longer, but otherwise, that’s me.

Here’s the problem. You seem to accept that people accept some outside information and qualitative judgments, but reject others. I agree on this point. What you seem to be missing is that in people with sever self image problems and related disorders, the process by which one understands which judgments should be accepted and rejected is broken. Unhealthy ones are accepted and healthy ones rejected because the mechanism for sorting them isn’t working correctly.

I do believe I’m skinny and flat chested--that is part of my core concept of myself. I believe this is a reasonable judgment based on external evidence, based on the way women with my body type are generally described by others, but where that image comes from really isn‘t relevant because it is one that I accept implicitly. When you say you disagree with this, I accept that as your judgment but do not internalize it because it does not match how I see myself, and thus, it’s unreasonable to me. When someone makes a statement that agrees with that self image, I accept it because it agrees with how I see myself. Looked at logically, I find my view of my physical appearance as more reasonable than yours and think it’s more in line with how society views women who look like me.

Let’s take another example, one that I recognize is entirely unreasonable, but is nevertheless irresistibly powerful. I cannot ride on an elevator alone with any man save my brother. It doesn’t matter who, and it doesn’t matter how rationally and reasonably I recognize the lack of danger, the part of my psyche that tells me that this is dangerous, that intense fear reaction is so powerful that it does not matter that the fear is unreasonable and illogical and that I know now, and afterwards, and perhaps even at the time that it occurs that it is unreasonable and illogical to be afraid of this situation, it feels true, and that feeling is so overwhelming that it obscures access to reason. The idea that this man is dangerous to me is both unreasonable and true at the same time.

Furthermore, even if you were to accept it as factually true, yes knowing that you cannot change it should offer consolation. If you recognize a problem but there is no solution, then you should not let that "problem" be a "problem." You either act towards a solution, or you ignore it.

Really? Do you really believe that a feeling of helplessness, of having no power to alter or improve your situation is liberating?

I’ve come to terms with my physical appearance. I’m skinny, flat-chested, and generally lacking the curves most people seem to find attractive in a woman. I accept this, and I’m fortunate that it’s mostly irrelevant to my life how attractive I am. It matters very little in my job, and not at all to my family, and has some very nice benefits in that it prevents men from hitting on me very often. This is not in any way a self esteem problem. But it still hurts a little when someone takes the time and effort to point it out, not because it’s true, but because it means that the person thinks so little of me that he/she thinks it’s ok to belittle me.

I recognize that my social phobia, depression, and limited social skills greatly interfere with my social functioning. People with a poor self image need to work on it.

Saying, “Don’t let it bother you” isn’t enough. Rationally deciding which judgments to accept and reject doesn’t work when the part that decides such things is broken, when there is a physical neurochemical problem, and/or when the emotional response is so powerful that it overwhelms rational judgments.

This is a complex problem. The solution you suggest may work for some. Others have a more severe problem whose solution isn’t as easy as a comforting cliché.

Gilda

[Toaster126]

Originally Posted by Deltona Couple

Well I can see Toaster, that you are obviously unable to be acceptable of other people's right against personal attacks. I don't know if it is because of bad experiences in the past, or just a total lack of respect for others. I am glad that I don't know you personally, because I don't have room in my life for disrespectful people. I hope that I am wrong in this, I honestly do. But by your statements in this thread, it leads me to believe that you have no problem telling someone their bad points, regardless of how it might affect them. Socially this is just not acceptable in the places that I have lived. I wish you good life and prosperity, and hope that anyone you have relations with doesn't suffer from attacks from you on their ego or self-worth as a human being. At this point I will end my discussions in this thread. Thank you all for your time and insights.

I find it interesting that not only did you not understand what I was saying at all, you personally attacked me when your post was about thinking that was bad. And it is.

I believe people are responsible for their own actions and emotions. That doesn't make me disrespectful, out to personally attack people, or require I be damaged from something in my past.

[Mantus]

Damn Gilda you sure write allot. I would be lucky to compose half as much in the course of one evening…and it wouldn’t be nearly as eloquent.

I deal with men who are going though massive life changes. Many of them require allot of work before they are able to do what some of us take for granted. So I have some experience in helping people develop themselves.

May I ask if you or your therapist has done any work on your beliefs and values concerning beauty, sexiness, charisma, social intelligence and all the other characteristics one may consider socially relevant and having influence on the context of your personal image?

[SugahBritches]

Toast made me go looking at your profile Gilda. Which I'm sure those that are following this thread have also. And you look fine to me!

May I ask if you or your therapist has done any work on your beliefs and values concerning beauty, sexiness, charisma, social intelligence and all the other characteristics one may consider socially relevant and having influence on the context of your personal image?

Ditto.

As I was reading how you say "others" describe you, you did it in more in a physical aspect. Which would be the way most folks would describe your physical traits. For example, if you were party to an incident in which many had to describe what you looked like, I'm sure that most would describe you as small framed and petite. This would also be a view point from total strangers or those that don't know you on a personal level.

I am also enjoying your posts Gilda. And I'd like to see your answer to Mantus post.

Also, what is the solution or how you would deal with "personal attacks" made to your inner self vs. your physical traits? What I mean is sometimes we build shields to prevent or protect ourselves from either the comments or those that might snub us without saying a word. And sometimes we create these shields which might have others think are insensitive or even cruel when we might react or an NON reaction towards them.

I applaude people that go out and get the help they need to go through some form of stress or trauma that might accur during their lifetime or even something that might of happened 20 yrs earlier and still affects them in their daily life without really knowing it.

Also, when would a person even "know" they needed to seek help? Or are there many that deal with their traumas and can actually walk through it without help?

[Jinn]

Really? Do you really believe that a feeling of helplessness, of having no power to alter or improve your situation is liberating?

Yes, perhaps unique to my own personal pyschology, but I believe so. There are things I can change, and there things I can't change. If I have no power to change something, it should NOT be a concern of mine. If it is unchangeable, or if I can incapable of changing it, why should I even think about it? Focusing on things I cannot change has proved extremely useless in the length of my life. Focusing on things I can change, however, has been beneficial.

In regards to your very well-written post above, I think we clearly agree on the goal, but not the process required to reach that goal. I agree with most of what you've said, but I hope to detail why I believe this "solution" to be quite easy below.

* Have you ever had something come so easily to you that it was nearly second nature? You did it with such ease that it seemed entirely trivial?
* With the understanding that you do it well, have you also recognized the ability of someone else to do the same, with minimal assistance, or instruction?
*Given the same person as above, how would you feel or behave if they claimed they couldn't do it? Claimed that it was too difficult? You know that you can do it, and you know that they can do it quite easily with dedication.

Keep in mind, again, that you've done it yourself and you've seen others do it with ease.

My reaction would be to buckle at the notion that it should be difficult for them, and work to convince them that it was not as difficult as they percieved. There's a multitude of ways to convince them of such - the most effective for me has been to make them (a) clearly identify their percieved 'problem' (b) make THEM provide the solution to THEIR problem. In such a way, it's internalized - much as you've described above.

Alternatively, I've had success (even personally) with forcing or being forced to do something I think is difficult. While I might still suck, my vision of "difficulty" erodes greatly with each attempt.

What is your reaction?

The reason for my reaction came about through the same learning mechanism as you've detailed above. I've "learned" that making the task difficult is the first defense mechanism invoked by someone not dedicated to change. If they make it difficult, they can persuade themselves they are incapable. It's avoiding cognitive dissonance, just as you've detailed above. They believe they are not suited for difficult problems, and therefore make all problems they don't know how to solve difficult.

Subconciously, I believe it's quite simple.

"I know I have a problem. I see other people without a problem. It must be incredibly difficult to get rid of this problem, or I wouldn't still have it."

If they admit that it's easy, they admit that (a) they aren't trying hard enough or (b) they're not good at doing things that are easy. Admitting either of these would be very difficult - cognitive dissonance, indeed.

In short, my belief is that the first step to removing self-esteem and self-image concerns is not to develop intricate methods, see therapists, take drugs, or otherwise plot your path to success. It is to convince yourself that the transition is not difficult but will take dedicated effort.

I believe that the largest barrier between one's current state and one's desired state is the mentality the transition would be difficult. I'd be lying if I said I was surprised by your rebuttal - not that you think you're incapable, but that you think I've oversimplified the problem or made it too easy.

People with self-image problems and related disorders do see such judgments as relevant, and learning to balance what is and is not reasonable is not an easy or straightforward process. Those feelings are real and powerful, sometimes overwhelmingly so.

I would never deny that the feelings are real, powerful, or overwhelming. However, the first step is changing "difficult" to "easy, but requiring dedication."

Pretty soon it becomes "easy" and then "so easy I don't even realize I do it."

[Gilda]

Originally Posted by Mantus

Damn Gilda you sure write allot. I would be lucky to compose half as much in the course of one evening…and it wouldn’t be nearly as eloquent.

I read and write for a living. It comes as naturally to me as a spoken conversation does to most, and is quite a bit easier. Which isn't to say that I'm very good at it, just that it comes easily.

May I ask if you or your therapist has done any work on your beliefs and values concerning beauty, sexiness, charisma, social intelligence and all the other characteristics one may consider socially relevant and having influence on the context of your personal image?

I haven't talked with my therapist about my beliefs and values related to beauty and physical appearance. It isn't a concern of mine, and it isn't something that's negatively impacting my life, so I don't bring it up. I think I have a healthy and realistic idea of how I look. I don't see anything wrong with acknowledging the truth. Having an unrealistically positive image of myself would be just as unhealthy as an unrealistically negative one.

I'm not sure how or whether charisma is related to this discussion. Assuming that by social intelligence you mean social skills, not yet. Strange as it may seem, that's a minor issue right now. We're working on the issues that are currently having the biggest negative impact on my life, social anxiety, depression, and reducing PTSD triggers. The social anxiety excercises by necessity overlap with social skills training, but aren't specific to that purpose.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by SugahBritches

Toast made me go looking at your profile Gilda. Which I'm sure those that are following this thread have also. And you look fine to me!

Thank you.

As I was reading how you say "others" describe you, you did it in more in a physical aspect. Which would be the way most folks would describe your physical traits. For example, if you were party to an incident in which many had to describe what you looked like, I'm sure that most would describe you as small framed and petite. This would also be a view point from total strangers or those that don't know you on a personal level.

I'm 5' 7". Nobody describes me as petite, but small-framed, thin, skinny, no orchestra or balcony, those are all accurate.

Also, what is the solution or how you would deal with "personal attacks" made to your inner self vs. your physical traits? What I mean is sometimes we build shields to prevent or protect ourselves from either the comments or those that might snub us without saying a word. And sometimes we create these shields which might have others think are insensitive or even cruel when we might react or an NON reaction towards them.

I have avoided social situations and social interaction in the past where possible to minimize the impact of negative attention, which has on occasion led to others developing the erroneous belief that I think I'm better than they are, and which has had the effect of reinforcing my social anxiety. This is the main focus of my current therapy.

Also, when would a person even "know" they needed to seek help? Or are there many that deal with their traumas and can actually walk through it without help?

Some can, some can't. It depends on the person. How do you know if you need help? Generally, if your problems are severe enough that they're having a significant negative impact on your life, you want to change this, and you haven't been able to or don't know how to do it on your own, it's time to get help. There are specific diagnostic criteria for various emotional disorders, nearly all of which include as one of the criteria that the problem have a significant negative impact on how the person functions. This may not mean a therapist. It could mean talking with a friend or family member, friend, or other aquaintance.

It could mean finding a qualified therapist. There shouldn't be any shame in talking to a mental health professional. If you're sick, nobody thinks there's anything wrong with going to a doctor. We even see doctors for preventive care, to ensure that we remain healthy. Going to a therapist means that you need a little help becoming emotionally or mentally healthy, or in maintaining that health.

[SugahBritches]

Originally Posted by Gilda

I have avoided social situations and social interaction in the past where possible to minimize the impact of negative attention, which has on occasion led to others developing the erroneous belief that I think I'm better than they are, and which has had the effect of reinforcing my social anxiety. This is the main focus of my current therapy.

So, where some of us have our "moods" that we don't want to interact socially, you strive to actually make it to one? What I mean is, what seems to some of us as easy to do, for you it's quite stressful?

I don't mind socializing. However, sometimes I might feel like I'm just going through the motions of it. Other times, I don't mind it and it goes quite smoothly. I'm an outgoing person, but I find that I want my space a good bit of the time. It might be that I go to work and perform the social graces expected of me and then once I am home, I really want to just relax alone.

I'm sure your issue is more than just social graces and more than just going through the motions and cuts deeper than what I have mentioned above, but I can relate to it but not as a .............ummm.....not as something that gives me great stress. Actually, it's probably more of an annoyance.

You seem to be quite knowledgeable Gilda and I wish you success on your therapy.

[Gilda]

Originally Posted by JinnKai

In regards to your very well-written post above, I think we clearly agree on the goal, but not the process required to reach that goal. I agree with most of what you've said, but I hope to detail why I believe this "solution" to be quite easy below.

* Have you ever had something come so easily to you that it was nearly second nature? You did it with such ease that it seemed entirely trivial?

Yes, of course. I'd suspect everyone has. Reading for example.

* With the understanding that you do it well, have you also recognized the ability of someone else to do the same, with minimal assistance, or instruction?

Sure. I'm surrounded with people for whom reading comes easily, both at home and at work.

*Given the same person as above, how would you feel or behave if they claimed they couldn't do it? Claimed that it was too difficult? You know that you can do it, and you know that they can do it quite easily with dedication.

Keep in mind, again, that you've done it yourself and you've seen others do it with ease.

Let's continue with reading as an example. I learned relatively early, by about the age of six, to read fluently. My sister could do the same at the age of three. The average person in the US can do this by roughly the age on eight to nine years old, or about the time they start third grade.

Some, like my sister can learn with seemingly no outside intervention whatsoever. Some, like me, learn experientially through being read to by an older person, in my case my mom and various aunts and uncles. Most need some degree of formal instruction, and learn through one of three basic methods, sight word memorization, phonics, and experiential learning. Each of these by itself is adequate for some people, which is to say some will thrive on phonics alone, others on sight words, others on experiential. Most benefit most from an approach that combines the three.

Some have learning disabilities that render standard instruction techniques ineffective and inefficient, and require specific intervention tailored to the person's individual needs by a trained specialist. Many children who grow into illiterate adults do so because they had an undiagnosed learning disorder that prevented them from learning the necessary skills through conventional methods. Some have a physical processing deficit in the brain that needs to be overcome through a specifically tailored intervention program.

It's easy and natural for me and every person in my family and all of my professional colleages, or so far as I know. This does not mean that I'm going to assume that it's easy for everyone, that one approach is best for everyone, or that there aren't a good number of people for whom it is a long, difficult, recursive process.

My reaction would be to buckle at the notion that it should be difficult for them, and work to convince them that it was not as difficult as they percieved. There's a multitude of ways to convince them of such - the most effective for me has been to make them (a) clearly identify their percieved 'problem' (b) make THEM provide the solution to THEIR problem. In such a way, it's internalized - much as you've described above.

I'm not saying that this approach has not worked for you. The pep talk, motivational speaker, life coach, self-help approach does work for some, and I say good for them. I'm glad they found an approach that works. I have no doubt that many people have problems that are not as large as they seemed before they began to actively deal with them.

Alternatively, I've had success (even personally) with forcing or being forced to do something I think is difficult. While I might still suck, my vision of "difficulty" erodes greatly with each attempt.

Good for you.

What is your reaction?

I'm happy that you've found a way to deal with your problems.

The reason for my reaction came about through the same learning mechanism as you've detailed above. I've "learned" that making the task difficult is the first defense mechanism invoked by someone not dedicated to change. If they make it difficult, they can persuade themselves they are incapable. It's avoiding cognitive dissonance, just as you've detailed above. They believe they are not suited for difficult problems, and therefore make all problems they don't know how to solve difficult.

I have no doubt that that can be the source of some inertia. It's one of the aspects of depression, the irrational belief that ones situation cannot be improved. That a problem seems insurmountable may serve as a disincentive to deal with it.

However, often the task seems difficult and complex because it *is* difficult and complex and requires a lot of hard work. For some people with more severe problems, having someone to help guide them through the process of identifying exactly what the problem is, breaking the big problem down into smaller steps that are easier to get through, and developing a systematic approach to reaching the goals is what's needed.

Subconciously, I believe it's quite simple.

"I know I have a problem. I see other people without a problem. It must be incredibly difficult to get rid of this problem, or I wouldn't still have it."

If they admit that it's easy, they admit that (a) they aren't trying hard enough or (b) they're not good at doing things that are easy. Admitting either of these would be very difficult - cognitive dissonance, indeed.

Or C: The task at hand, though easy for some, is not easy for all. If you are not good at a task, that task is not easy for you. "Easy" is relative to a person's skills and abilities, not an absolute measurement. Calculus is easy for my sister. It is complex, difficult to learn, and requires a lot of hard work for most people.

Believing that a difficult task is easier than it should be is also counterproductive because it can result in people giving up when they discover it isn't going to be the quick, easy solution they were promised.

In short, my belief is that the first step to removing self-esteem and self-image concerns is not to develop intricate methods, see therapists, take drugs, or otherwise plot your path to success. It is to convince yourself that the transition is not difficult but will take dedicated effort.

That seems to be a contradiction in your last step. This may work for some. When you say it worked for you, I have no problem believing that. Our point of disagreement is in your apparent belief that this method is universally applicable.

Therapy isn't always a long, complex process. Sometimes it's as simple as having someone friendly to talk to a couple of times a month. Sometimes it's six to eight sessions of desensitization and cognitive training to rid someone of a less severe problem. Sometimes it's one session and the client discovers she has the same fears and insecurities as everyone. But some people do have severe problems that require, or at least benefit greatly from, the guidance of a skilled counselor. Therapists have training and education for dealing with specific problems in an effective manner. Even when it may not be necessary, it can still be very helpful.

Medication treats a specific physical cause of the psychological problem. It's not a panacea, but it can make treatment of the psychological problem easier and more effective.

Making a plan is nearly always a good idea. You're even offering a plan, whether it's the first step in a longer plan or a one step plan, it's still a plan.

I believe that the largest barrier between one's current state and one's desired state is the mentality the transition would be difficult. I'd be lying if I said I was surprised by your rebuttal - not that you think you're incapable, but that you think I've oversimplified the problem or made it too easy.

I have no doubt that this is an obstacle.

I do think you are over simplifying things by proposing one simple solution for everyone for what can be a complex psychological problem, often with an underlying physical cause.

I would never deny that the feelings are real, powerful, or overwhelming. However, the first step is changing "difficult" to "easy, but requiring dedication."

Pretty soon it becomes "easy" and then "so easy I don't even realize I do it."

Not for everyone.

Gilda

--------------------------------------------------------------

Originally Posted by SugahBritches

So, where some of us have our "moods" that we don't want to interact socially, you strive to actually make it to one? What I mean is, what seems to some of us as easy to do, for you it's quite stressful?

Certain social situations are quite stressful, yes. Parties, being alone in a public place, especially one that requires some form of social interaction like a restaurant or store, informal conversations in hallways and the teachers' lounge, stuff like that. For those situations, I'm always in a mood where interacting socially is uncomfortable to painful because of a fear of being judged negatively by others, or saying or doing something foolish or offensive. I do fine in written communication like this, where there's nobody physically here to see and hear me, no fear of committing some social faux pas that I'm not aware of because of my ignorance of all the little rules of social interaction.

I don't mind socializing. However, sometimes I might feel like I'm just going through the motions of it. Other times, I don't mind it and it goes quite smoothly. I'm an outgoing person, but I find that I want my space a good bit of the time. It might be that I go to work and perform the social graces expected of me and then once I am home, I really want to just relax alone.

I can understand that. I do need something, but I generally able to get enough from my classes and from my wife and sister.

You seem to be quite knowledgeable Gilda and I wish you success on your therapy.

Thank you.

[Deltona Couple]

Toaster, I will apologize if it appeared I was actually personally attacking you. What I said was merely an observation formed of my own opinion of what you had posted. I think I overreacted, and said it in an unflattering way. I guess it just looked to me that you feel that people should be MORE accountable for how they react to what people say, than to the accountability of those who said it about them. I say this as my own opinion, for I always try to mention it in my posts as just that; an opinion, but I still think that people should be more self-accountable for their comments about others, period. Just because others in this thread think the ladies in this thread should just shrug off negative comments, and basically "rise above the comments" does NOT in any way of form negate the fact that any form of social etiquet, one should be respectfull enough to THINK before they make a verbal observation about someone.
I don't know, maybe I just still believe in Chivalry!!!

[SugahBritches]

Well, it's always nice to know chilvary is alive and well Deltona! However, I was once told (by a few young hammer knockers) that I needed to get out of my Cindrella world! Hehehehe.......that cracked me up. However, my response to that threw them off a tad bit. For some reason they thought I lived back in the 40's and 50's...............heck, they might of thought I was from the Victorian era for all I know! HOLY COW PATTIES!!

**in her Granny's voice from the Clampett's and holding a black skillet in her hand**

"OLD...........I'll show you old........why I outta..........."

Heh.

[Toaster126]

Originally Posted by Deltona Couple

Toaster, I will apologize if it appeared I was actually personally attacking you. What I said was merely an observation formed of my own opinion of what you had posted. I think I overreacted, and said it in an unflattering way. I guess it just looked to me that you feel that people should be MORE accountable for how they react to what people say, than to the accountability of those who said it about them. I say this as my own opinion, for I always try to mention it in my posts as just that; an opinion, but I still think that people should be more self-accountable for their comments about others, period. Just because others in this thread think the ladies in this thread should just shrug off negative comments, and basically "rise above the comments" does NOT in any way of form negate the fact that any form of social etiquet, one should be respectfull enough to THINK before they make a verbal observation about someone.
I don't know, maybe I just still believe in Chivalry!!!

No harm, no foul.

And I do think people should be more accountable for their own feelings as opposed to their comments and the perception of what they mean to others.

Hehe, I also believe chivalry is a direct result of sex-discrimination of the time, and try to treat everyone the same regardless of if they have a vagina.

[Jinn]

I guess it just looked to me that you feel that people should be MORE accountable for how they react to what people say, than to the accountability of those who said it about them.

If we evaluated everything we said to see if it could be offensive to someone, we'd never speak. Likewise, we'd never make social progress. After all, making social progress MEANS saying something that people will disagree with, even get mad at. Even further, we'd be a useless society so involved in being "politically correct" that we couldn't say or notice anything without being inconsiderate or sex/age/race/class-ist.

On the other hand, if everyone took accountability for their own fucking emotions, we would be a more intelligent society, one in which people didn't get upset because X person said Y comment to me and thus it means that I am A B and C. One that wasn't effected so drastically by the media, one that wasn't so afraid of everything from SARS to Terrorists, and one that had much less violent emotional reactions. Domestic violence, revenge killings, or oh-no.. terrorist attacks, maybe?

[vanblah]

Originally Posted by JinnKai

If we evaluated everything we said to see if it could be offensive to someone, we'd never speak. Likewise, we'd never make social progress. After all, making social progress MEANS saying something that people will disagree with, even get mad at. Even further, we'd be a useless society so involved in being "politically correct" that we couldn't say or notice anything without being inconsiderate or sex/age/race/class-ist.

On the other hand, if everyone took accountability for their own fucking emotions, we would be a more intelligent society, one in which people didn't get upset because X person said Y comment to me and thus it means that I am A B and C. One that wasn't effected so drastically by the media, one that wasn't so afraid of everything from SARS to Terrorists, and one that had much less violent emotional reactions. Domestic violence, revenge killings, or oh-no.. terrorist attacks, maybe?

I work with people who evaluate everything they say to see if it "may" be offensive to someone. These people speak publicly in front of very diverse audiences and have to choose their words and phrases very carefully AND do it in "realtime." In other words, they don't always get the chance to write out or rehearse these speeches.

I've watched them give these impromptu speeches numerous times on extremely touchy subjects such as racism, classism and sexism. Sometimes, they have to side with the "unpopular" choice (such as commenting that a particular sign hung up on campus is NOT sexist or racist). They don't offend anyone as far as I can tell when they make these speeches. They're very, very good at it. You might say it's easy for them.

So why isn't it just as easy for everyone else?

On the other hand I agree that people should lighten up on the whole P.C. thing ... nothing pisses me off more than watching a demonstration or art exhibit get shut down simply because it's not politically correct.

In an ideal world, people WOULD be more responsible for their own RE-ACTIONS as well as their own ACTIONS. But that's just not the case. You can choose to be annoyed by it ... or just move on.

The cliché "sticks and stones may break your bones but words will never harm me" is a good one to live by, but so is "THINK before you speak."

[SugahBritches]

Good posts guys. And welcome to this thread Vanblah. And you expressed a good point in the actions as well as the reactions of people in general.

And this is where I thought of the phrase, "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all." But then again, sometimes the less you say could also be harmful or up to further scrutiny.

I find my ownself sitting back most of the time watching both the actions and reactions of others, while I keep silent. I'm not sure if I use it as a self definsive shield or if I am genuinely wanting to see both the reaction/action of both parties or in some cases a group of many different personalities working against each other in certain situations.

I've also felt the brunt of anger (even to the point of rage) directed at me. Not for anything I did personally, but because they are upset about a certain issue, and even to the point of almost coming across the counter at me! I have no idea why or how I kept my cool (I guess because I had high school students behind me who were frightened of the man before he came at me). But, I also find that talking softly and listening, most times they will calm down a little. However, this time it wasn't working and it was my first time that I found myself in harms way. And if it wasn't for the principal and the resource officer, the students truly believe this man would have physically hurt me. Since the moment was taken out of my hands, I won't know for sure.

It's easy to take offence, it's much harder to control it. So, I've now come to the conclusion that I agree with Toaster, we all have the ability to take control over our emotions. Whether they be words that are offensive or are spoken in cruelty.

Originally Posted by Toaster126

Hehe, I also believe chivalry is a direct result of sex-discrimination of the time, and try to treat everyone the same regardless of if they have a vagina.

HA!! And THAT, dear sir, might result in another long discussion! Would you take the honors or would you like me to? **raises one eyebrow and tries hard not to grin**

[Gilda]

Originally Posted by JinnKai

If we evaluated everything we said to see if it could be offensive to someone, we'd never speak. Likewise, we'd never make social progress. After all, making social progress MEANS saying something that people will disagree with, even get mad at. Even further, we'd be a useless society so involved in being "politically correct" that we couldn't say or notice anything without being inconsiderate or sex/age/race/class-ist.

It isn't a matter of one extreme or the other. You can show others basic courtesy without censoring everything for every possible offense. Not saying sexist, racist, homophobic things isn't being PC, it's basic human courtesy. Not deliberately saying insulting things or using inflammatory language enhances our ability to communicate a clear message.

If you use language that on its face is meant to be insulting, you shoud not be surprised when people are insulted by it.

On the other hand, if everyone took accountability for their own fucking emotions, we would be a more intelligent society, one in which people didn't get upset because X person said Y comment to me and thus it means that I am A B and C. One that wasn't effected so drastically by the media, one that wasn't so afraid of everything from SARS to Terrorists, and one that had much less violent emotional reactions. Domestic violence, revenge killings, or oh-no.. terrorist attacks, maybe?

Wait. Terrorism is the product of expecting people to be polite? You're going to have to draw me a map on this one because I don't see a line from people being offended by careless comments to blowing up buildings.

Sometimes it's entirely reasonable to get upset when person X says Y, depending on who X is and what Y is. You seem to want a blanket endorsement to say whatever you want whenever you want without being in any way responsible for the results. It doesn't work that way. You may wish we had a culture where nobody ever got upset over what another person said, but we don't and we have to live in the world as it exists.

Societal norms have always shaped the perception of beauty within a culture. Nobody is free from outside influences. Being a resposible member of society means being responsible for your own actions and words and for accepting that they effect others and taking that into account. It doesn't mean censoring everything for every possible offense at every moment. There is a nice middle ground somewhere between never saying anything controversial and being free from all restraint.

It's a two-way street. People need to be resposible both for their actions and for their reactions.

Gilda

[Toaster126]

Originally Posted by SugahBritches

HA!! And THAT, dear sir, might result in another long discussion! Would you take the honors or would you like me to? **raises one eyebrow and tries hard not to grin**

Actually, I think it's been done. It sure seems familiar to me at any rate... maybe some other thread touched on this and I said that.

[Deltona Couple]

Originally Posted by Gilda

It isn't a matter of one extreme or the other. You can show others basic courtesy without censoring everything for every possible offense. Not saying sexist, racist, homophobic things isn't being PC, it's basic human courtesy.

Well said Gilda! I guess that is the point I have been trying to get across.

As far as Chivalry is concerned Sugah, It is not dead as long as I have a breath left in my lungs. It would be an interesting subject for another thread...hmmmm.

[treewoods]

I agree with most of the other poster, as we get older, I think we get more and more comfortable with our bodies, no matter how attractive other people think we are

[SugahBritches]

*snip*

That post made no sense whatsoever! I'm sorry some of ya'll had to siffle through that! Jeeze.

[Batski]

I have a far from perfect body these days, having had two kids and breastfed for three years! But if I'm with someone and the chemistry is there, I feel beautiful and desirable and I know that good sex isnt about perfection, so I feel uninhibited. In fact I tend toward being exhibitionist, if anything.

[Sultana]

Originally Posted by Batski

*snip* But if I'm with someone and the chemistry is there, I feel beautiful and desirable and I know that good sex isnt about perfection, so I feel uninhibited. In fact I tend toward being exhibitionist, if anything.

Bravo! Wonderfully stated.