My family thinks I don't love them

My family thinks I don't love them.

The rumor mill has turned out quite a few theories that make them feel more comfortable about my absence. The current favorite is steeped in a mythology Vaarsuvius has created. It started when I was very young when they decided who I was, how I was, and they told everyone else this decided judgement. It had just enough truth in it to become an all encompassing definition, and no matter what I did or said no one would change their mind because "the truth" seemed to be so obvious. I thrashed against this for years, but it only made it stick more.

     They think I have isolated myself. They are mistaking isolation for good solid healthy boundaries. They have also mistaken this for as my trying to cause them pain, be hurtful. That is a mythology adhered to by those who don't know what healthy boundaries actually mean. Townsend and Cloud discuss this in their book Boundaries. So part of this feeling hurt on their part means they don't think I love them. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I love them, have loved them and in fact have spent years trying to chase after their love, affection, respect.  It didn't go well. While Vaarsuvius would swear on their life that they loved me and were affectionate with me, this was coupled with abandonment.

So this is a letter to them, those that think I feel no love at all.

     For you whom I have loved for so long. I've never not loved you, but at some point I figured out that I was chasing after ghosts. Vaarsuvius and Other child, you have only ever wanted me when I was able to give you something in some way or another, it was always about your "needing me", but you didn't respect me, value you me. I was a resource you liked to have, your comfort when you had bad days, your therapist, but as soon as you were done you dropped me like I was nothing. I waited till you would want me again, greedily snapping up any attention you would throw my way, chasing after you like a puppy dog, waiting and hoping for approval and validation. You didn't respect me as a person, you thought I was weak, over emotional. You didn't value my natural talents and accomplishments.
Dear Family everything in our relationship has always been about you. When we have problems you don't see how you in any way contribute them, you take the defense, you feel "emotionally devastated". You only ever want a relationship with me when I am willing to agree with you on everything, be happy, cheerful and not rock the boat.  When you say to me you just want me to be happy, you don't mean it. You want me to happy in the way you define it. You don't want to be mutually responsible for the relationship, you don't want me to have any feelings, you don't want me to tell you when I've felt you hurt them.  You can't handle accepting responsibility for any of your behaviors, you deflect, defend and I walk on eggshells.  Your lack of understanding regarding a healthy dynamic in which boundaries are normal was shown by the smallest boundary requests being rejected and resulting in  temper tantrums. You were unwilling to compromise, you took it as a personal assault, my needs didn't matter at all, it was all about you, how hurt you were by the situation. You have not cared about what was really good for me, only how you felt and were affected. Requesting something from you is an imposition, my being dramatic, "why can't I just do this one thing for you".
I have tried everything I can think of, even though you won't believe me. I finally figured out that you were not going to change, so I had to. I distanced myself from the relationships in the family The dynamics have been unhealthy to say the least, and the energy I expended trying to fight that dynamic resulted in me being sucked in and it took its toll on my life.

Quite honestly it's not that I don't love you, but that you don't really love me.

Normal Childhood exploration; The List

 Lena Dunham's memoir release and the subsequent scandal makes this the perfect time to address the next thing on the list: Normal Childhood exploration.

     I was recently reminded by a well meaning individual that all kids go through a phase of being curious about their bodies. While they meant it to mean I had misinterpreted
this simply life fact and using it to support my case of childhood sexual abuse was using air to hold up my case; they are not wrong. Kids do go through their normal stages of development being curious of their bodies and their peers/family members. When we think of babies or even toddlers stumbling about their homes, dropping to the floor and putting their face into the carpet because the are curious about the texture and how the view of everything from the floor is different, so it follows that they would look at themselves and what must seem like odd and fascinating features to them and be filled with the same curiosity.
     
      Kid's health says "By preschool, most kids have developed a strong sense of being a boy or girl, and continue to explore their bodies even more purposefully. It's not a good idea to scold them when they touch themselves — this will only prompt a sense of guilt and shame.Parents may, however, want to explain that even though it feels good, touching should be done in private — preschoolers are old enough to understand that some things are not meant to be public. They're also old enough to understand that no one — not even family members or other people they trust — should ever touch them in a way that feels uncomfortable.
Your preschooler will continue to learn important sexual attitudes from you — from how you react to people of the opposite sex to how you feel about nudity.
Parents may, however, want to explain that even though it feels good, touching should be done in private — preschoolers are old enough to understand that some things are not meant to be public. They're also old enough to understand that no one — not even family members or other people they trust — should ever touch them in a way that feels uncomfortable.
Your preschooler will continue to learn important sexual attitudes from you — from how you react to people of the opposite sex to how you feel about nudity.

     Parents may, however, want to explain that even though it feels good, touching should be done in private — preschoolers are old enough to understand that some things are not meant to be public. They're also old enough to understand that no one — not even family members or other people they trust — should ever touch them in a way that feels uncomfortable.
Your preschooler will continue to learn important sexual attitudes from you — from how you react to people of the opposite sex to how you feel about nudity."

http://kidshealth.org/parent/growth/sexual_health/development.html#

   
     Due to the belief that organizations like CPS are anti family, anti Christian Home School I have often heard this idea that parents are afraid of being victims of the system because their child engaged in normative sexual development behavior, and it being seen as a sign of them molesting the child. In fact the well meaning individual went on to tell me that they knew of examples of where this horrifying tale became reality and that parents where falsely accused. It comes with this presumption and fear about the system and there is always some incident that seems to confirm the fear, even if the actual incidents of false accusation are a very small percentage.  I am also fairly certain, but I will have to do a little more research into the process, that CPS would not base a whole case of childhood sexual abuse based on normative incidents of sexual development.

So if that being the case, aside from a belief perspective why the fear? Is it that hard to differentiate between normal and abnormal sexual behavior in children? Yes and no "(...) when a child engages in sexual behaviors, it can be difficult to decide when the behavior is natural and healthy, and when it may reflect a problem or disturbance. The normative behaviors of childhood and adolescence are of concern when they are extensive or suggest preoccupation, or involve others in ways that are not consensual. Sexual behaviors in children present a special concern when they appear as prominent features in a child’s life, or when sexual play or behaviors are not welcomed by other children involved in the play. This is the point at which sexually harmful and aggressive behaviors most closely and clearly hinges." http://www.mnadopt.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Recognizing-Healthy-Unhealthy-Sexual-Development-in-Children.pdf

When a child's sexual behavior seems to spill out all over their life, that is when to put up the red flag. Also in my personal opinion certain types of self exploration paired with other factors can also be indications of abuse, and a good time for parents, teachers to tune into what is going on in the child's world.  I believe that is what organizations like CPS begin to take into account when their is concerns about child sexual abuse. In working with parts of the educational system I have observed that things like sexual play, or self exploration will be usually noted and general observation of whether or not in other factors seem to present will be made. If there is nothing else it stays in the child's file as a simple behavior note.

     As a survivor when you are looking over your history and trying to piece together what happened those are the things to keep in mind. You can begin to discern between what was normal and what really caused by abuse. And while you will be told by abusers and their defenders that "it was all normal" you can stay strong in what you know, re-visit the facts and look at all the puzzle pieces that come together forming the truth.

     
     Now we come to Lena Dunham and her now infamous memoir passages discussing sexual behaviors during childhood. In light of knowing that sex exploration is normal, why is Lena's account troubling? They way she describes what occurred shows a level of preoccupation about sex that seems to have existed in childhood and persisted in adulthood. It is possible that she chose to write about normal sexual development incidents in a provocative manner to incite drama and get excess amounts of press coverage. But personally I think it is more than that, taking into account what she describes, what we know about her parents, her upbringing, it all comes together as a portrait of someone who was abused.  Books like the courage to heal will back me up when I say that the possible types of sexual exposure Dunham experienced was childhood sexual abuse. 

     Her mothers lack of concern when she found Dunham and her sister engaged in sexual play shows that she was not necessarily a parent who was in tune with her children. I don't think she was simply unconcerned because she found the behavior to be normal. In fact her reaction mimics a pattern of disconnection by one parent when the other is being inappropriate or creating an inappropriate environment. This could be because their is spousal abuse in play, or they are coping with the situation through disconnection and denial.

     Dunhams age at the time of the incidents means that she was not yet in a developmental stage where she would have come into her own sexually. Her actions seem to indicate premature sexual behavior due to external influences. Age 7 is not old enough to be thinking about masturbating next to someone without other influences in play.
      
     The Courage to Heal says " Sometimes children who are sexually abused molest other children. When children mimic and repeat what was done to them, this is called abuse-reactive behavior. Sometimes these victims are too young to understand that what they're doing is wrong and can harm the other child. Most children who act out sexually with children feel an enormous guilt and shame."


     I don't think Lena wants to cause shock and awe in the sense that we might assume. I think there is that inner child in her that is still trying to sort out what happened in her environment,  I think she is trying to find ownership over her sexuality and find ownership instead of shame about her interactions with her sister. If she comes off as sexually independent and edgy then she doesn't have to feel the shame. Much of this probably occurring on an unconscious level.
I think that is why she included those things in her memoir, she is still acting out and that the little girl in her still trying to make sense of what she was exposed to. Again from an unconscious place she might be trying to pass it off as provocative, or normal to make herself feel better. 
Do I think her memoir was appropriate? No, and I do not think she should be defended as someone who is just sexually empowered, I think the opposite is true.
 
     Dunham has acted out in a very public manner, trying to express herself even if on an unconscious level. She is trying to get someone to hear her, to acknowledge her experience. Perhaps she is trying to acknowledge it to herself. She also might be projecting it outward because it is too much to hold on to internally.  There is a lot of discussion going on about boundaries, consent and raising children who are healthy in their sexual development. I think this is a great opportunity to engage on those subjects. However as a survivor I feel that childhood sexual abuse is not yet an important enough part of the general discussion. 

     I think what she is expressing is an uncomfortable subject for our culture. We don't like to deal with sexual abuse, especially not graphically. That's why Dunhams memoir has for the most part formed three groups of thought, that she is either a sexual revolutionary (a feminist), she is a predator, or was simply not taught good boundaries. It would make our culture happier to couch her behavior in terms of bad boundaries, by doing that it excuses us from having to take a deeper look. It's almost like comparing it to a child growing up without ever learning to clean up after themselves.
The truth is her behavior during childhood was likely more complicated than a lack of boundaries, or being a predator. And in no way is it simply about Dunham writing about childhood sexual development in a feminist fashion. In fact their was nothing feminist about her choice to write about her experience in the manner she did nor in her descriptions. 

     While Dunahm may be unconsciously acting out, she is still engaging in unhealthy, dare I say inappropriate behavior. I am concerned about her lack of understanding about consent and am somewhat horrified for her sister.  I do not yet know if her sister gave her permission to write about their childhood interactions, but even if she did Dunham's descriptions are in my opinion disrespectful and do not paint a portrait of child's play or consent, but of objectification. It was not thoughtful or reflective, her dialogue was highly sexual and erotic in tone.

      I had looked up to Dunham as an empowered feminist of my generation, I was excited that fashion magazines chose to put her on the cover, a normal curvy woman. Now I feel sadness, and concern. I hope, even though I disagree with her behavior, is that as a culture we are able to open a broader discussion up about childhood sexual abuse. I hope we don't just shuffle aside Dunham's blatant way of engaging in a difficult subject ( even if poorly done) for what makes us comfortable.

Trusting your memory; The List (trigger warning)

So while we now know that having a false memory is highly improbable and almost always associated with intentional outside influences, how do we trust the memories we do have or what if we don't have any specific memories at all?

     One of the first things we often read as a survivor beginning the healing process is  The Courage to Heal, so lets start there. In the chapter titled the Healing Process their is a section titled The Essential Truth of Memory, its on page Eighty four. This section deals with how we remember things and suggests that memories are often not a perfect tool to understanding what happened. Distortion occurs "a common example is in the description of size. A small child may remember the abuser as being huge or the abuser's genitals as filling her whole field of vision. One survivor who was abused by a teacher remembered that the school was enormous, with extremely high ceilings and wide corridors. When she went back as an adult, she was shocked at how small it really was"(Bass & Davis, 2008, p. 84). Often these distortions are simply a protective mechanism blocking more traumatic memories.

     Despite inaccuracies in what we remember, those memories are not any less important "although inaccuracies may exist in your memory, you can still work with what you remember as an indication of what you felt (...) she assumed that he penetrated her vagina-perhaps with a finger or his penis-and the feeling was so painful, so cutting, that she, in her child's mind, had no concept for it other than a knife"(Bass & Davis, 2008, p. 84).

     To me most important is understanding that this indication of what you felt is a guide, it is a marker that says something happened to you. You don't have to remember perfectly to know that something happened, or that you strongly believe it was sexual abuse. Those memories do not come out of nowhere, they are not the product of a twisted imagination. They are your mind trying to deal with and make sense of what happened and it's way of communicating that to you. We don't have a reference for sexual abuse at a young age or know how to process it, so our brilliant minds store it away and protect us from remembering, or scatter the pieces of memory about in a hide and seek sort of fashion but the clues are changed to fit what we can handle.
     
     Another major indicator about how we felt is our body and its memories.  Our body is a permeable sponge with thoughts and feelings of its own "memories are stored in our bodies- in sensations, feelings, and physical responses. Even if you don't know what took place, memory fragments of what you suffered can endure. You may be assailed by unexplained physical pain or sexual arousal, fear, confusion or any other sensory aspect of the abuse"(Bass & Davis, 2008, p. 76-77). Body memory has been one of my indicators of abuse, as well as my overall health during childhood and the years leading up to my decision to heal. My body had always been screaming loudly in its own fashion that something was terribly wrong and that something had happened. This along with how I felt in my home environment and the memories I have of the abuse has helped to create a really solid map that says, "yes this happened, and it happened to me".

     What if there are no memories? If there are no memories but you are suspicious that something happened, that feeling is a red flag to pay attention to. I would then begin to look for those other indicators, such as discussed above. "You may not recall particular incidents such as the one this survivor describes, but you may discover that you know more than you think you do about the environment in which you grew up"(Bass & Davis, 2008, p. 86). So if you feel de-railed by doubt or because their is pressure and doubt from others, or your abuser is trying to discredit you, take heart. Not having memories does not make you crazy or in anyway say you have an imagination that has run wild.
     This is the point in time to take care of yourself and start paying attention to what other indicators there might be. If you are unsure and have not told anyone yet, seeing a therapist can be really helpful. I would recommend taking your time and take all things into consideration. With something as serious as sexual abuse preparing ourselves and standing solidly in what we know is of great benefit when we come forward and voice what has happened to us, and if we choose to confront our abuser(s).


Kali Munro M.Ed psychotherapist wrote a lovely blog post (2001) titled Trusting Your Memories of Child Abuse. You can read her post here:http://kalimunro.com/wp/articles-info/sexual-emotional-abuse/trusting-your-memories-of-sexual-abuse

      Abusers and their defenders often cite that the child never told anyone about the abuse, and us it as  evidence to say the abuse never occurred and them only doing so now means they made it up. This Psychology Today article; Why don't child sex abuse victims tell, discusses false memory. "Of course memories fade and become less reliable over time. Of course memories of specific details of events can be wrong. Of course memories of events that are witnessed for the very first time are subject to observerbiases, missed aspects of the events, and sensory information that is misinterpreted. However, the big picture is unlikely to be misremembered" (Allen, David, M.d, 2012).
 http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/matter-personality/201210/why-dont-child-sex-abuse-victims-tell

Further resource reading:

Is the Child Victim of Sexual Abuse Telling the Truth
http://www.secasa.com.au/pages/is-the-child-victim-of-sexual-abuse-telling-the-truth/

Myths/Facts Regarding Child Sexual Assault
http://www.porterco.org/index.aspx?nid=341

If you are a survivor you might need this someday; the list

There comes a day when all the careful considerations you have made as to why you know that you were really and truly sexually abused get assaulted.

    Even though you have read books, made your therapist explain over and over why you are not imagining things, there will be a day when you stand shakily on not so solid ground. So when you get there, because I have been there, I want you to have this methodical list to read over and over to yourself. Make it your mantra. I am going to help you systematically defend against every manipulative, destructive thing used against you to try and discredit you and make you doubt yourself.

Let's start with a favorite shall we. The first line of defense by abusers and those who support them; False Memory Syndrome.

Here is the wikipeidia definition: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory_syndrome

 I would not recommend going to the FMS foundation site, there is plenty of resources concerning them without you having to suffer the "ick" factor of using their site.

Truths about False Memories:

- It has been found that in a scenario such as a bank robbery individuals may not accurately remember details of the incident or the perpetrators. They may even wrongly describe what the perpetrators look like. However no one was ever confused as to whether or not the robbery occurred.

- Researchers have successfully implanted false memories of minor anxiety/trauma into individuals as well as non anxiety/ trauma memories. However what you need to understand is that none of these were childhood abuse or childhood sexual abuse memories. It is not ethical to subject subjects to such a test.
One study got adults to remember details of being lost in a mall as a child even though they had not. But even this is not black and white, because it relies on memories that are common occurrences. What child has not at one point been lost or thought they lost their parents for even just a moment in a crowd? And we know that we do not accurately remember things so the researches suggesting details that feel real to that scenario makes it easy to understand why the subjects would have thought it a real memory. It felt like a real memory and it even relied on a very real memory/feeling. In other words it took root because the subject probably did have a moment in childhood were they got lost or lost site of their parents in the crowd.
As I understand it, this means that the researches are not able to implant a false memory that does not have connection to a true memory. And just like with the bank robbery, abused individuals may have fuzzy details but are not confused as to whether or not something happened.
It has also not been proven that they could truly implant a false memory of something so traumatizing as abuse.

- In a therapy setting due to the consideration of suggestion affecting what the survivor remembers therapists in most cases don't use guided questions/ suggestions about abuse or go digging to see if they can find any memory of such trauma.

- External factors and influences would need to be present for a false memory to exist.

- Getting subjects to use their imagination was also needed for some studies conclusions.

Sources:
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/dallam/6.html

"The "False Memory Syndrome" is a controversial theoretical construct based entirely on the reports of parents who claim to be falsely accused of incestuous abuse. In 1993, the FMSF noted that "False Memory Syndrome" is "a condition that needs to be considered and then confirmed or rejected when further information emerges" ("Our Critics," April 1993, p. 3). The current
*page 30*
empirical evidence suggests that the existence of such a syndrome must be rejected. False memory advocates have failed to adequately define or document the existence of a specific syndrome, and a review of the relevant literature demonstrates that the construct is based on a series of faulty assumptions, many of which have been disproven. Likewise, there no credible data showing that the vague symptoms they ascribe to this purported syndrome are widespread or constitute a crisis or epidemic.
This does not imply, however, that memory is infallible or that all people who are accused of sexual abuse are guilty. Both continuous and delayed memories are subject to distortion, and there are valid reasons to be suspicious of memories that are recalled only after the extensive use of suggestive techniques. Nevertheless, common sense and professional practice dictates that claims about a new diagnostic category reaching epidemic proportions require scientific substantiation. The public policy issues impacted by the false memory controversy are so important, that they deserve the most careful and intellectually honest scholarship that the academic and professional community has to offer. In the absence of any substantive scientific documentation, "False Memory Syndrome" must be recognized as a pseudoscientific syndrome that was developed by an advocacy group formed by people seeking to defend against claims of child abuse."

http://faculty.washington.edu/eloftus/Articles/sciam.htm

"We found this "imagination inflation" effect in each of the eight events that participants were asked to imagine. A number of possible explanations come to mind. An obvious one is that an act of imagination simply makes the event seem more familiar and that familiarity is mistakenly related to childhood memories rather than to the act of imagination. Such source confusion when a person does not remember the source of information can be especially acute for the distant experiences of childhood."

How often are Reports of Abuse False

http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/csa-acc.html

"Research with children whose sexual abuse has been proven has shown that children tend to minimize and deny abuse, not exaggerate or over-report such incidents."

Some great things to read on this subject:

Woody Allen and the History of False Memory Syndrome

https://overland.org.au/2014/02/woody-allen-and-the-history-of-false-memory-syndrome/

A Child Abuse Investigators View

http://thedailybanter.com/2014/02/a-child-abuse-investigators-view-of-the-woody-allendylan-farrow-case/

In consideration of adding a lot of links/resources I am going to break the list into a series of connected posts.

October; The beginning of the Holiday blues

     Last year I was in the storage closet searching for the bin I had put the Fall/Halloween decor. I had to move quite a few things around, and then mistakenly opened up the Christmas bin thinking it was the one I wanted. Bang! the smell of the cinnamon pine cones stuffed between paper wrapped ornaments hit me. It was like someone punched me, the powerful smell followed by the sight of Christmas things, totems for memories. I think I cried.      

     This year seems to be no different. I care a lot about my home, it's like my temple. Similar to the Goddess Hestia; it is core to my being to maintain the hearth fire and be a center place for others to gather and be warm. It could be seen as something more traditional, but for me this is spiritual. I deeply value my temple (home) as a quiet place that I take care of and feed my own soul as well as being a place where others can gather. So decorating, cooking and planning holiday events for friends and family is something that pulls me in, and with the loss of family it pulls on my heartstrings; I feel a lot of grief.    

      Not only is there grief about not being able to fulfill these inner values in the ways I have before, there is a lot of stress related to the holidays. Giving and being that hearth place is  one of my greatest values, and primary love languages. The family I come from had large gatherings especially around the holiday's. I miss that hustle and bustle, feeding everybody and sitting down to play card games that were a well rooted pastime. And without those things I feel the loss, it stings.      I know I look at the past with rose colored glasses. The stress that plagues me now was just alive back then, and not all those holiday events were warm and fuzzy, even though I desperately needed them to be. I really worked hard to get all those needs met and create the warm and fuzzy feelings that I wanted. I ran myself into the ground. I wanted my family to love me, to show me that all that work and effort was worth it because my gifts and efforts made them happy. But emotional response was not always their strong suit, especially Varsuvius.   

         I have this switch that flicks on inside me each year at the start of the holidays and it is the start of three months of tension, anxiety and running around burning myself out. Now even though I don't have my family I find myself  still trying to distract myself from the negative things just like when I was a kid. And now instead of trying to get Varsuvius to love me, to show appreciation when I give them a gift I do that with my husband. Though I must state that while not a super bubbly person about getting gifts, he is worlds away from being anything like Varsuvius and tells me he loves me all the time. It's really my program and fear that comes up on repeat and not that I have found someone else to fulfill the role of Varsuvius in my life.   

     This program didn't use to hit until December, at the earliest it was after Thanksgiving when I would normally put a tree up with my family. But now it starts out in the beginning of October and peaks out at Christmas eve which is filled with a lot of anxiety. What makes this year and the last different is the accompanying grief and dread of the start of the Holiday cycle. It begins in October leading to Halloween and rolling into Thanksgiving and Christmas. This is the first year in which I dread having to make it through the next few months of Holiday chaos.Normally all the running around and throwing myself into the holiday spirit would keep me from despairing.       

      I have come to loathe Thanksgiving due to tainted memories and epic family drama, and now I partially loathe the idea of Christmas. Something that I have always held onto so tightly and made such a huge effort to make sure it was perfect, and now I honestly don't even want to put up a tree. I thought about the people society labels as humbugs because the holidays are too painful for them, and I feel a respecting sympathy. I also feel a kinship in rejecting the favored trite advice that seems to get dolled out during the holiday's, and understand the seemingly "harden hearts" of these individuals due to their wish to not feel pain. I don't want to feel pain either! And I now quite honestly have to say with new perspective that the advice to “open up your heart”, “feel the joy and love of the season” is not always the answer.       

     I can't ask myself to ignore how I feel and shove it under the rug, I have to honor my grief and respect that the next three months are painful and sad. I feel I need to find a balance. I may not want to do some Holiday activities this year, but feel okay doing others. I think it is most important to find out what it is you need during the holidays. While I do love the Fairy tale, holiday stories of Debbie Macomber "Mrs. Miracle",

 I know that holiday broken hearts don't fit into a one size fits all cure. Yet our culture expects such an angel to make us change without taking into account our very real situations and feelings. People get very sensitive about quote “Holiday haters”, and they feel offended “if only we would open our hearts”. But here's the thing, grief is very individual, so is the timing and the cure. Yes sometimes we need family and friends to prod us a little, but not beyond respecting our boundaries and acknowledging the validity of our feelings and that we have our own timing for these things.     Also as an abuse survivor what is really important to me is others respecting the validity of my boundaries with my family. Holiday Fairy Tales of forgiveness are swell, unless they undermine the validity of the victims feelings and boundaries. Forgiveness is not a sedative you take so you can forget all the violations that occurred, it does not mean that everything is okay, and it is not about the people who hurt you. It is a tool to empower you to move forward, and does not even have to involve those who hurt you. Choosing to re-connect is also a very personal decision and is really on a case by case basis. Abuse survivors do not need to be goaded during the holidays with “if only you would forgive, and reconnect”.   

   I have done some research to try and help myself get through the next few months, and have looked for practical advice that actually takes into account the real feelings of going through the holidays as a survivor and the many obstacles with family estranged and otherwise we might face. I wanted to include a few resources that I have found to be especially helpful.

I am re-gifting Christmas; By Christina Enevoldsenhttp://overcomingsexualabuse.com/2010/12/24/im-re-gifting-christmas/

"I developed many more ideas about what Christmas was supposed to be. Christmas was supposed to be white with snowmen and glistening trees, though seventy degree Arizona winters made that unlikely. Christmas was supposed to be extended family gathering from the corners of the globe, though through feuds and disinterest, that never happened."

Pain Surrounding the Holiday; By Christina Enevoldsen
http://overcomingsexualabuse.com/2011/11/23/pain-surrounding-the-holiday/

"In the past few years of healing from childhood sexual abuse and separating from my abusive parents, I’ve approached each holiday feeling a little anxious. Holidays used to be times for gathering with family and now they are reminders of the loss. Even though I’ve worked through most of my grief, I never know when another layer might surface. It’s especially hard to be grieving when it seems that everyone else is celebrating."

I do not yet have permission to link a couple other sources yet, but I want to encourage you to read Faith Allen's blog and her discussions of being a survivor around the holiday's. 

The Tribal mind

This is an interesting section from Women's Bodies, Women's wisdom by Christine Northrup. It is really helpful in understanding the dynamics of families when abuse is involved. 

     Though it is important to note that Northrup's use of the word "tribe" is very specific and focuses only on a family unit. It is not meant to refer to tribes in a cultural sense, it is a reference to the sociological structure and function of individual families. These individual families could be said to have a tribal structure and pattern to their functions, and cultural influences will certainly help to inform what those patterns and functions are. However a true tribal (cultural) structure cannot be pinned down to but a few consistent elements, as cultures are so varied. But from a sociological and even archetypal viewpoint, the individual family structure does have consistent elements to the structure, and is the reason Northrup can apply the term "Tribal mind" here.

     “The tribal mind is not an individual mind. The tribal mind is primarily a collective brain that seeks to hold onto its own and fight for its own survival in the world. The tribal mind is concerned with loyalty, not love, kindness, or tenderness. What the tribe refers to as “love” is really obligation to the tribe. An example of this is a family member who says to another, “If you really loved me, you'd come to visit your family and me more often.” Tribal consciousness, then, is not a high-level, highly evolved consciousness. Yet we all share it to some degree, and many women admit that as they get older, they can hear that tribal mind within themselves. “I sometimes hear my mother's words coming right out of my mouth, and I can't believe it,” patients often tell me. Above all, the tribal mind seeks stability by keeping everythingthe same, e.g., family holidays and birthdays become “obligations,” not joyful times of sharing.I sometimes refer to the tribal mind as “crabs in the bucket.” If you have a bunch of crabs in a bucket and one crab tries to escape overthe edge, the other crabs will always pull the escapee back down with the rest of them. The same sort of thing often happens to women and their families as the women decide to break free from limiting patterns. Almost invariably, family members try to sabotage her efforts- at least initially.     Countless women have had the experience of confronting their parents about abuse or incest soon after remembering these events only to find that their parents deny these allegations outright. The unconscious motive to preserve the tribe is the reason so many parents deny having ever violated a tribe member. At some level, their tribal memory bank has absorbed the memory very differently form the waythe individual member records the same event. The person who is waking up from the tribal trance is almost invariably seen as a “traitor” to the family.(…) Most tribes or families do not deliberately try to poison their members-they are merely handing down what they recognize as tribalwisdom, even in the form of limiting and painful ideas. It is useful to think of yesterday's tribe as today's dysfunctional family.”Christiane Northrup M.D.

Packaged with modern flair

     They way I was raised, I understood  things as how they were supposed to be because my parents told me so. What I did not understand or know at the time was that these beliefs they had followed had a prescribed pattern. Some of the beliefs I slowly began to untangle, but others took reading blogs by other Spiritual abuse survivor's to see and understand. I think the reason is that the type of Evangelical Christian ideology my family followed was supposed to be more modern but the rigid traditional fundamentalism was hid beneath the surface. It wasn't straightforward, it was subtle. However when you look at some Evangelical's that are Quiverfull the beliefs are very straightforward and seem to be in plain view. They don't hide that they prescribe to a very traditional fundamentalist type of Evangelical Christianity. It is becoming more apparent to me that much of what I grew up with was Fundamentalist Christianity in sheep's clothing. I think this is why institutions like Focus on The Family embrace those such as the Duggar family, because at the root the beliefs are very similar. They are just dressed up, hidden and packaged with modern flair.

     Reading the blogs of other spiritual abuse survivors I was in awe. I had thought I was raised with more modern  Christian philosophies, but here were all these connections between fundamentalist christian beliefs and my own experiences. I saw that although I was raised Evangelical Christian I never understood what that meant outside of just being a Christian. It took reading Libby Anne's blog Love Joy Feminism to begin to see Evangelical Christianity from a new perspective and what exactly it is.  I think part of the reason for my lack of understanding aside from my parents forgoing a solid education on spirituality; is that in today's world of Christianity education about spirituality, discussion, research and other things that would raise young people to better understand their religion are almost non existent. Sure you are taught everything you are supposed to believe and all the bible stories and sermons on Sunday, but it is usually one dimensional and you are supposed to embrace it as truth. Even in bible studies "understanding scripture" is not really in depth or created to really ask hard questions. I have always felt that it was a surface study meant to solidify all the other teachings you were supposed to take at face value.

 I have always wondered where is the type of place that Jesus would have gone to, where he debated scripture and truths with the priests, where asking questions was encouraged and part of the faith? And most especially where is this type of place for women and girls? There are many women who are theology scholars and I am immensely thrilled at that, but education costs money and we are faced with an issue of only those with money or power are able to really educate themselves about their beliefs. That tends to lend itself to only a few controlling information in an academic bubble. In a way it is the same problem as with Christianity of the dark ages; where no one could read or write so they believed whatever the spiritual leaders told them.

     In the Evangelical Christian community I grew up in, it was like living in a cube. Except you didn't know you were in a cube because there was a virtual reality in place around you that gave you the illusion of being a somewhat free and independent modern individual. The only time you would realize that you were in the cube is if you began to question how things were or push the boundaries; only to find that you were contained by four walls. I was allowed to wear pants and be creatively fashionable. I had modern Christian music and even pop music that was deemed to be not morally bankrupt (And I somehow managed a Madonna Album). However self ownership did not go much farther than that. I was still owned by my parents, in particular by the head of the house Other Parent. Other Parent did not want me dating, or seeing boys. Vaarsuvius had gotten me I Kissed Dating Goodbye. The abuse was mixed in with the traditional Christianity, but in Other Parent's treatment of Vaarsuvius, Other Child and Myself  as a "harem" they owned was not just abuse, or sexual abuse, it was a very Christian philosophy. Certainly many Christians would say that they would never think or do that, or that they respect and honor women but at its roots that is a basic tenant of Christianity which is a patriarchal model. The illusion that women are not treated as "owned" objects is like my cube illustration. Only this time those that uphold the rules are lying to themselves about it and the benefits they receive from it.

     Despite supposedly being a thoroughly modern Christian girl, Other Parent would make jokes about marrying me off and getting a dowry from me. And if I did ever want to get married I would have to ask their permission and by all rights could be refused. They somewhat paraded me about for their friends as their object, and jokes were made by these church friends about how pretty I was getting and that Other Parent would have to watch out. One of these friends was a child molester themselves. If you think that this kind of behavior is only of that of truly evil people and not Christians then you have to go back and examine some of those basic beliefs.

     Yes Other Parent and the friend were child molesters, however their treatment of their children as objects in particular girls is ingrained in that set of beliefs. Parading me about as sexual object or good Christian parent parading about a child whom they have supreme ownership of, mind, body and soul really leaves only some distinction- the act of psychical violation. The complete ownership of another person is slavery and abuse; add biblical reasoning to sanctify it and you have spiritual abuse. This might seem like an extreme example and I know the comparison I am making is harsh. However christian parents are deemed to have supreme authority over their children in every facet. Those basic tenants are already there, and parents like Other Parent take it to another level.

    Other parents behavior was never questioned, part of this was because much of the abuse was behind closed doors but the other reason was the way our Christianity functioned. Other primary parents had an unspoken club they belonged to, one in which they respected the function of role as primary parent and authority in their individual families. Part of that respect meant never questioning each others supreme authority over their families or the decisions made. It was seriously wink, wink, nod, nod.
   
     I will never forget a day trip with another family (another abuser friend of Other Parent). This Primary Parent was engaged in a game of tag with their children and Other Child and I were about to join in, but Other Parent pulled us back to the sideline because we were part of their "unit" and not the other family so therefore we were not to engage in an activity that the other primary parent initiated. It was somehow this "respect" policy playing out over something minute. Other Parent was like "these over here are mine and those are yours, I respect your ownership". That is the only way I can describe what happened, and it sounds insane but that is exactly how it was. You could also add in the element of control and that it was not just respect but territorial. How could Other Parent herd us about and control our actions if we were running about playing tag with the other family? And while they respected the club code they didn't want their stock mixing with another "owner". Your seeing the cattle metaphors right? No they are not an exaggeration.

     Let's go back to the cube, and running into the walls. This did not just happen over things like freedom but also what to believe.  Children are to be seen, not heard and they are certainly not to question the families religious beliefs. I ran squarely into this wall when I was a teenager. I was tired of the problems with our small church and I no longer wanted to go to church. This was met with the full force of Other Parent, who was not going to have it. I was to obey and love God, respect my family and attend church as part of the family unit. Oddly Vaarsuvius in one of their moments of clarity intervened and I stayed home. Not all the time of course, and I eventually got them to let me go to another church with friends. That ended when our two churches merged. I later would still try attending another local church to escape but it was toward the end of my parent's marriage. Other Parent would have never permitted the whole family to switch churches. This control over where you could worship is a continuation of spiritual abuse as is being told what to believe, what that belief must look like, and fear as a weapon to enforce belief.

   This fear to "enforce belief" was how Vaarsuvius understood our faith. I was told I must be either hot or cold for God or he would "spit me out", I would be exiled. This terrified me as a child, how did I know I would be safe from this exile and eventual decent into hell that would await me? I didn't and in some ways I felt myself giving up, I thought I would never be good enough or believe hard enough to escape that fate. I did try even though part of me felt resigned, and I any time I felt like I was headed straight for hell I would say the "saved prayer" to myself, over and over. So many times. It never felt like it was enough, but not doing it could mean getting scorched. Even though this felt terrible I was taught that it was the only way, and the only definition of God and grace. Not being given any other options is being walled in, and living in a cube. Even though you are supposedly being give choices it is either to believe in the God defined by your parents and live in good faith while in the cube, or step outside those four walls into hell. I never understood how this was a choice? I never understood God supposedly defining these as true choices.

    The fear as enforcement tool was not just simply for whether or not I was saved (which was already really hard to define, because what really equals saved?) but in what manner I was saved. In other words baptism. I have always been shy in some regards about personal things like my faith and sharing it. So I loathed that in order to be a true Christian you would have to be willing to give testimony and worse yet get baptized in front of God and everyone. I did not want to, for me it felt like a circus of embarrassment. This made Vaarsuvius angry and frustrated. They themselves were poached by the Navigators in college. A wispy kid with no self esteem suddenly had found their path and they took to it determinedly. They felt our faith was black and white, it was absolute. They believed that there was only one way to do things and so when their child did not want to get baptized they not only felt my soul was in peril but they couldn't understand why I felt the way I did. They thought I showed a stubborn unwillingness to submit to God and obey him, by doing what he supposedly prescribed. They thought something must have been wrong with me, they didn't think I was really saved and what did it say about them that their child did not want to get baptized? A family friend finally intervened with a second opinion that baptism was optional and did not mean I would go to hell if I didn't do it. But for the longest while this was a huge battle, and Vaarsuvius took it very personally. It wasn't about my faith, it was about theirs and their interpretation of what is right.

     That interpretation was applied to child rearing philosophies. With a black and white, rigid interpretation of what it meant to be a child of God was seamlessly passed onto what it meant to be child to Christian parents. There was no gray area, it was heaven or hell, obey or disobey. I do think my parent's believed that children are born inherently bad and you have to teach them to be good, and beat out the stubborn or bad. There were plenty of books on how to do this, and while I could not be certain there was not a copy of the Pearls book To Train Up A Child I am strongly suspicious there was. And if there was not, my current understanding of Dr. James Dobson and his recommended child rearing practices means that I essentially was raised with the Pearls philosophy just dressed up a bit and made to seem legitimate by his Doctoral degree.  But there were other books equally concerning as far as healthy parenting advice goes, Cynthia Tobias and her books on strong willed children and, strong willed women.  If Vaarsuvius was not wining a parenting battle with any of the above at their disposal they could switch to an emotional manipulation and spiritual abuse tactic such as telling me that every time I was bad I was responsible for God's feelings and making him grieve over my defiant and ill willed behavior. Other Parent was less for doling out spiritual punishment because our faith had already given them supreme authority, they had no need for the guilt trips they had a horse quirt!

     One of my final encounters of running into one of those four walls was dating, and the rigid fundamentalism applied to it. I dated a Navigator missionary in training. There is not enough information out there on what the Navigators can really be like. Among its members you will hear the occasional story about leaders breaking up a dating couple because "it was not God's will they be together", or in my parents case they pushed them into getting engaged and defining the relationship so there wouldn't be anything impure. But those were just horror stories, until I experienced it firsthand.
     Now the boyfriend in question turned out to be of weak character, but at the time I had not figured that out yet. He got into the relationship with me and confessed right off the bat to having slept with a married women in the local Navigator group. I figured this was past stupidity and not that he wasn't past stupidity so I went with it. I was also underage, but the relationship was sanctioned by my parents so no big deal. We were going to get married as soon as I turned eighteen. He wanted me to be the missionary wife and I quote that "when we run out of money you can nag me to go drum up support". He was broke but Vaarsuvius said we could live in our home basement. He wanted six kids, a Saturn SUV and a wife who would ride on the back of his motor bike. I happily followed along with this, after all I was essentially raised to be a traditional christian woman.
     Then his past transgression caught up with him, and the Navigators essentially made him attend workshops to address and punish his behavior. He was also told to break up with me, and could not touch me, hand hold etc. We were simply to be as brother and sister in Christ during his punishment. This brought out the inner jerk in him, he started being rude and grumpy with me, as if all of this was my fault. It continued downhill from there. He was angry when I did not want to do an activity he was pushing me to do, he defended Other Parent's reprehensible behaviors, and finally he told me that I needed to start wearing skirts and covering myself up, Apparently I was too tempting for him. That was when the inner feminist in me had it. Goodbye Mr. Navigator Jr.

     After that began my slow but steady revolution in how I thought about my faith, dating and everything else. I would make my escape from those four cube walls when I turned eighteen and I eventually never went back. I now question they way things are supposed to be and through reading more of others experiences I can really come to terms with my own.I can see not only the abuse, but the spiritual abuse as well. This is like a light turning on for me, and I am starting to feel more free. I can also feel really angry at the beliefs I was subjected to. I feel lucky to be on the other side now, but also feel it is important to create and engage in discussion about fundamentalism and how it can slip under the radar, and that it is not just an isolated experience of Evangelical Christianity.