I purchased
a clinical book. I read it slowly. It took me three months. And then, I reread
it. Those marginal highlights—this marginal existence, where we argue for
center page.
I will
be honest concerning a fear—I don’t want to see us this way: us, is so vague, humans
are so casual, and when they aren’t, we feel warning signs. The book spoke to
blackmail, misogyny, and worshiping the one that hurts us. It seems
counter-intuitive, but the writer is a psychologist, well-renowned, and, thus,
has studied too many cases.
Let’s
imagine, Glenn: this battle-zone, this interior war, this unsuitable guardian. If
mother is primitive, or pernicious, Will Glenn be able to forge a loving and
careful relationship with women? Moreover, if father has abandoned Glenn, Will Glenn
be able to trust his male friends?
Sore
sounding dolphins—while eyes are mythos—where interior was restructured!
There
is this Swan, we can’t imagine such reach, where there are several male figures
playing mentor; not in a bad vein, but more as feeling a void, but will the
Swan have particular gulfs where father is concerned? (An unruled determinate?)
Let’s
get a bit rawer…if Alex can’t stand his mother, and nothing polite can be conjured,
will Alex come to despise all women? (that seems raw enough.) At the other
spectrum—if a daughter can’t identify with father, will she distrust men, and
always sabotage her relations with them?
(It
is a touchy understanding.)
It seems
there is an argument—a running deer, a gunning marksman.
Lisa
was five when her father died. Those good memories are buried; for Lisa did not
process death accordingly. Lisa considered it abandonment. Lisa is now
twenty-two. She has been with partners—but something forbids her from intimacy—as
it is described by physicians. Lisa has lost components. When she makes love,
she breaks down in tears. For some, they console, Lisa; but others feel too
detached to stick around. This fortifies a notion, that men abandon women. Lisa
needs help!
What
are the rules—in an abstract structure—where existence is but un-sturdy yarn?
There
is a man named, Lion. He was deeply abused, even hospitalized. His abuse ran
twenty-eight years before he was free to seek aid. He works with a group of
therapists: they gently nudge Lion to unveil his emotions. His relationships
end horribly. He lives for quicker gratification. And he does recreational
drugs. Lion had a tender lady. They chased normality together. But when given
an opportunity, Lion slept with another woman: a wild creature, an abusive
creature, something reminding Lion of household dysfunction. The question we
examine, while keeping to rawness is, Does Lion have a chance to reboot and
live?
So many
therapeutic hours—such innocence becoming monsters, where it depends upon
something intrinsic. Some chastise physicians, while trying to deny mirrors, or
steady at retraumatizing our fragile status. (How is the puzzle missing so many
parts?)
