10-26-2024, 06:31 AM
[A personal foreword]
Since I am not of the culture, I suppose my observations should be restricted...
it's too easy to conjure offense although none is intended,
it's too easy for my ignorance to be regarded as stubborn brutish insensitivity,
I've too often been sucked into an argument I never sought to be in.
This OP... the message within it, reflects some kind of tragedy... I mean, even if nothing were to come of it, it appears to represents a painfully tragic state of affairs; my humble interpretation:
I feel alone,
I don't want to be alone,
It makes me furious that there are others who I perceive choose not to reach for me,
No one can 'reach' me, and no one wants to.
I'm going to shit on everyone, and everything,
I can't experience self-satisfaction.
My self-image haunts me.
This is not what I want...
I will lash out against all who approach me as my errant image.
(Anger and frustration seem to be the message, threats and rage go hand in hand.)
Common responses would evoke remedial engagement, focusing on self-harm mitigation, and then likely heavy medication. (In other words, a materialistic approach)
Once reduced to a lumbering, drooling, lump... materialists would walk away and call it a day... stupidly proving the message author's point... and ironically 'proud' of themselves, perhaps even virtue signaling about it.
A spiritual approach might risk engagement on emotional terms, and an appeal to the ideals of time and patience... but that does not address the 'feeling.'
A religious approach calls to demand adherence to a body of tradition, or a structured set of precepts... but that is an imposition on the message author, and the time for such a thing is not now.
A different approach might an attempt to provide the author with the room to explain... (but to whom?)… room to explore the complaint... (but with whom.) Once anger and frustration are evoked, the willingness to believe in resolution must override the passion to embrace it. This message is a form of relief... the relief anyone could offer must be more attractive than the passion of the complaint. That position can only be real if someone reaches the author in the light of conciliation, the faith of a friendly voice.
I have no understanding about the relationship this person has with the message recipient (or was it recipients?) but I am certain that relationship is an element of the message more pertinent than "I'm an angry frustrated transgender who simply wants to scream into the night sky." Even if this is just a 'performance piece' the recipient choices are relevant. Do you really want to help? Or, it is just an exercise in voyeuristic observation?
My instinct is to say that such a message is a very plain "Please do something. Talk to me... please make me believe that you could care about me."
I don't know anyone like this personally (which is to say, no one I know has ever openly shared such agitation, primarily focused on existential disaffection.) If I did, I would be compelled to engage... which is to say that his message was effective, for someone like me. It evokes empathy... although not sympathy.
Why send it? Could it be desperation? Might it be solely a 'test' of the recipient's ability to be caring, as the sender conjures the idea of 'caring?'
My thoughts lean my response towards the idea of encouraging a separation from obsession over what we want, a dismissal of 'centering' only on what we feel, and the actual acceptance that those things are not now, nor ever are, rightly at the center of anyone's reality. I would gently suggest experiencing a different focus... at least insofar as not obsessing over sex, sexual attractiveness, the social dance of desirability, or the notion that there will ever be a perfect state of affairs in that light.
But then that supposes I do care... and isn't that alone the actual constructive answer to the message?
Maybe the first short answer to that message should be "I care."
Simple, short, direct.
If and when the sender responds that the "I care" answer isn't enough, only then can you find what the cause and fire of the message really is.
The message itself screams 'slamming the door closed.'
It must be opened again before any healing conversation can continue.
[personal closing statement - I hope I've offended no one, I understand that the principle component of the OP is the transgender element... but I think this message isn't really about transgenderism... it applies regardless of social choices... it's likely the social reactions that inflame the problem. And at least as my opinion, transgenderism is not a useful point of focus, any more than heterosexuality could ever be. Again, no offense intended.]
Since I am not of the culture, I suppose my observations should be restricted...
it's too easy to conjure offense although none is intended,
it's too easy for my ignorance to be regarded as stubborn brutish insensitivity,
I've too often been sucked into an argument I never sought to be in.
This OP... the message within it, reflects some kind of tragedy... I mean, even if nothing were to come of it, it appears to represents a painfully tragic state of affairs; my humble interpretation:
I feel alone,
I don't want to be alone,
It makes me furious that there are others who I perceive choose not to reach for me,
No one can 'reach' me, and no one wants to.
I'm going to shit on everyone, and everything,
I can't experience self-satisfaction.
My self-image haunts me.
This is not what I want...
I will lash out against all who approach me as my errant image.
(Anger and frustration seem to be the message, threats and rage go hand in hand.)
Common responses would evoke remedial engagement, focusing on self-harm mitigation, and then likely heavy medication. (In other words, a materialistic approach)
Once reduced to a lumbering, drooling, lump... materialists would walk away and call it a day... stupidly proving the message author's point... and ironically 'proud' of themselves, perhaps even virtue signaling about it.
A spiritual approach might risk engagement on emotional terms, and an appeal to the ideals of time and patience... but that does not address the 'feeling.'
A religious approach calls to demand adherence to a body of tradition, or a structured set of precepts... but that is an imposition on the message author, and the time for such a thing is not now.
A different approach might an attempt to provide the author with the room to explain... (but to whom?)… room to explore the complaint... (but with whom.) Once anger and frustration are evoked, the willingness to believe in resolution must override the passion to embrace it. This message is a form of relief... the relief anyone could offer must be more attractive than the passion of the complaint. That position can only be real if someone reaches the author in the light of conciliation, the faith of a friendly voice.
I have no understanding about the relationship this person has with the message recipient (or was it recipients?) but I am certain that relationship is an element of the message more pertinent than "I'm an angry frustrated transgender who simply wants to scream into the night sky." Even if this is just a 'performance piece' the recipient choices are relevant. Do you really want to help? Or, it is just an exercise in voyeuristic observation?
My instinct is to say that such a message is a very plain "Please do something. Talk to me... please make me believe that you could care about me."
I don't know anyone like this personally (which is to say, no one I know has ever openly shared such agitation, primarily focused on existential disaffection.) If I did, I would be compelled to engage... which is to say that his message was effective, for someone like me. It evokes empathy... although not sympathy.
Why send it? Could it be desperation? Might it be solely a 'test' of the recipient's ability to be caring, as the sender conjures the idea of 'caring?'
My thoughts lean my response towards the idea of encouraging a separation from obsession over what we want, a dismissal of 'centering' only on what we feel, and the actual acceptance that those things are not now, nor ever are, rightly at the center of anyone's reality. I would gently suggest experiencing a different focus... at least insofar as not obsessing over sex, sexual attractiveness, the social dance of desirability, or the notion that there will ever be a perfect state of affairs in that light.
But then that supposes I do care... and isn't that alone the actual constructive answer to the message?
Maybe the first short answer to that message should be "I care."
Simple, short, direct.
If and when the sender responds that the "I care" answer isn't enough, only then can you find what the cause and fire of the message really is.
The message itself screams 'slamming the door closed.'
It must be opened again before any healing conversation can continue.
[personal closing statement - I hope I've offended no one, I understand that the principle component of the OP is the transgender element... but I think this message isn't really about transgenderism... it applies regardless of social choices... it's likely the social reactions that inflame the problem. And at least as my opinion, transgenderism is not a useful point of focus, any more than heterosexuality could ever be. Again, no offense intended.]
