Savvify

Once the summer is over and school starts again, we slowly switch gears into fall. For most people, that conjures up memories of harvest time, smells, apple pie, pumpkins, acorn squash, family gatherings, and playing in the leaves to name a few.

It is amazing what your memory will reveal when exposed to a familiar scent, such as a crisp fall day and apple pie. For me it is a memory of my grandma, what is yours?

Every year, traditions are practiced from Halloween, Thanksgiving to Christmas, it is a busy time, and every year we have our tried and true recipes that we whip up for these great feasts that come with these holidays.

How about adding a new one to your fall line up? Just to switch it up a bit?. Try this great Acorn Squash recipe.. You never know, it may become part of your family recipe collection for those amazing holidays with family and friends.

Acorn Squash with Apples

 

This recipe sounds complicated and fancy to your guests but it’s really easy!

Ingredients:

 

2 large acorn squash 3 cups apples, peeled, cored and cut in 1/2″ pieces (about 4 large apples) 2 tablespoons honey 1/4 teaspoon ground allspice 1/2 cup raisins

Instructions:

First cut the squash in half and clean out the seeds. Bake these halved squash in the oven for 20 minutes at 350 degrees F. While those bake, get out a mixing bowl and mix all the remaining ingredients together for the filling. Fill the hot squash and return to oven to bake for another 30 minutes at 350 degrees F

Ta-da! A colorful, pretty and delicious filled squash.

Happy cooking!  free holiday recipes

All over the world and since time immemorial, it has been the lot of several women, children and men, to suffer some form of abuse in their relationships. The question then is what amounts to abuse in a relationship? First, let’s attempt a definition of the word ‘abuse’. The new Websters Dictionary (2004) says that abuse means to use badly or wrongly, to ill treat or injure, an instance of injustice or corruption (corruption in the sense of  morally perverted, or destroying someone’s moral integrity, e.g. corruption of a child).  We will take Websters’ definition  as our premise and  contend that an abusive relationship is one that is characterized by abuse; which can be in the form of ill treatment, injury, cruelty, insult , neglect, misuse, violence and exploitation of one person by the other person in that relationship. The perpetrator never ceases to find ways of putting the victim down, often verbally. This is one of the signs of an abusive relationship.

Often, abuse is of a domestic kind and at other times, it is at the workplace. In a typical case, it is the result of one person treating the other in an unacceptable and demeaning manner.  The perpetrator refuses to see the victim as an equal and at the same time feels some form of superiority over the abused person. In our global society today, the most common forms of abuse include spousal abuse, child abuse, and workplace abuse (a boss perpetrates it against an employee). Child abuse is typically committed by parents and relatives. It could be sexual, emotional, physical, economic or social. In the instance of spousal abuse, the term is used loosely to refer to all forms of abuse committed by a partner against the other partner in a relationship, e.g. boyfriend-girlfriend relationship, fiancé-fiancée relationship, and husband-wife relationship.  Spousal abuse could be physical, emotional (and psychological), financial, social, and in some cases sexual.

Having been at the receiving end of spousal abuse for twenty years, I can without exaggeration say that it is one of the worst things that can happen to a woman. Most people in abusive relationships lose their identities; many forget that they are created to live a happy, dignified, and prosperous life. They become zombies without a mind of their own. They live to satisfy the whims of their partner who isn’t even appreciative of their selfless service and sacrifice.

This is the first part in a series of write-ups focusing on matters pertaining to spousal abuse. Perhaps, the most deeply entrenched abuse in human history is that by husbands against their wives. Without intending to sound subjective, I will assert that while men are sometimes victims of abuse in relationships, in our contemporary society with loudly proclaimed liberty and equality, women continue to be at the receiving end of abuse. One may ask: is it because women are said to be the weaker sex and so are taken advantage of by men? Or is it because men often have higher earning power? To me, none of these factors are attributable. A man who perceives women as the weaker sex will be protective of the woman in his life. A man who is by nature abusive will be abusive whether he earns more money than his wife does or not.

Also, the truth is that there’s no category of women among whom spousal abuse is not present. Let me categorically state that just as many women are abused, there are many women who are not in abusive relationships. However, you’ll find that worldwide, there are abused women who are doctors, lawyers, stay-home moms, business executives, you name it. Sometimes the culture of the people, especially in Africa and Asia, acts as a catalyst to the abuse.  I have been an academic of over two decades and yet it never ceases to baffle me the kind of spousal abuse many female academics experience. Interestingly, you meet female academics from virtually every continent and it is the same story – in diverse forms. These women keep a stiff upper lip and go about their careers exuding confidence; but on the inside they’re hurting. You may ask ‘Why do they remain in such relationships when they are well paid and can afford to take care of themselves and their kids?’ My answer to that is that financial independence does not generally provide the impetus for a woman to end her marriage. In other words, a woman who is brave enough to walk out of an abusive relationship will do so regardless of her economic status. Women are by nature emotional and so are often unwilling to abandon a relationship they have been in for sometime even when it is hell. I stayed in my marriage for twenty years in spite of the fact that right from the first year of marriage I was abused by my husband emotionally and financially. He was a lawyer and although I taught at the university, I was ignorant of the law! I suffered one form of abuse after another – I will give you the gist of some instances as the series progress. My husband would decide what I did with my money (if I kept some to spend as I pleased, he would start raging and nagging me) but he did whatever he liked with his. Also,  he verbally abused me many times in our children’s presence, hollering stuff like: ‘Who do you think you are? You are not even up to the women who are interested in me out there.’ ‘Look at you, if you were walking past me on the street I wouldn’t even look in your direction.’ ‘You were thrown out of your last boyfriend’s house before I met you.’  ‘You know I am ahead of you economically and socially.’ Please tell me, who is competing with him? All these were said to me because I used some of my salary to pay for my doctoral studies.

Getting back to the question of why women choose to remain in abusive relationships. Let me speak for myself here. In the first place, I thought that by staying in the marriage, I was ensuring that my children grew up in a stable environment where both parents were together. Upon hindsight, I can tell you categorically that there was nothing stable about the home. The fact is that an environment where the woman is abused, regardless of how young or old the children are, they get to be traumatized in diverse ways. It was when he began to abuse the kids physically that I made up my mind that it was time to end the relationship. In fact, he was shocked that I called the police when he flogged and injured my sixteen year old daughter for answering a question in a way he considered rude.

Another reason why I stayed in the marriage even when my family and friends felt I shouldn’t was that I used to believe I still loved him and that he would change. I guess the years of abuse had made me so emotionally dependent on him for my happiness that I feared leaving him. The years of abuse had made me lose my sense of self worth and that must have contributed to my total dependence on him. I feared to face the world on my own. I now know that it is wrong to try to make my happiness and success dependent on another person. The keys to my happiness and success have been given to me as a person and it is my choice whether to unlock these good things or not. It is commonsensical to know that your detractor will not want to see you happy and successful, anyway. An abusive person is a sadist, consciously or subconsciously and is selfish.

Thirdly, I believe I stayed in the abusive relationship because I was afraid of what people would say. In the community where we were, divorce was frowned at. It means then that I valued what people would say over my happiness. But now, I can honestly tell you that I don’t care about gossips so long as I am doing the right thing. A clear conscience is more important to me than people’s commendation or admiration.

Thus, women remain in abusive relationships for many reasons, mostly irrational. Women will often take quick decisions when it comes to protecting their loved ones but when it comes to protecting themselves they appear to have no clues or are just not willing to take action. Many women are used to being left out of the list. They’re used to being no one’s priority. They’re accustomed to not being taken care of.

An abusive relationship, like I had said earlier is a relationship where one person treats the other as unequal. The person perpetrating the abuse is egocentric, unappreciative, and in most cases have serious personality disorder. In an abusive relationship one person gives and gives and gives; and the other takes and takes and takes and still believes (s)he is entitled to more than (s)he is being given. Reality, however, is that just as it takes two to tangle; it takes two to make a relationship work.

If you’re in a marriage where you can’t live your life doing the things that make you happy and your spouse is so controlling that you don’t even have a say in anything including things that concern you as a person; then you are in an abusive relationship. Imagine a case where a husband who neither did any cooking nor received culinary training, begins to dictate to the wife how the different kinds of food ought to be prepared. What is he trying to say? He knows everything better than she does. Men like that find it difficult to admit to mistakes. It’s not just in them to do so. Even when they attempt to do so, they cannot sustain it because it isn’t in their nature. But the fact remains that real men are honorable guys who are bold enough to admit their mistakes and try to make amends.

As long as you remain in an abusive relationship you will never be free and happy. There will always be that feeling of isolation, sadness, regret, and lack of love. The pain runs deep. If you had an abusive husband like I did you will understand what I mean by his insults being capable of disrobing me of every dignity I had. Here is a text message he sent to me as I was teaching in class:

‘Remember I’m not the first man in your life. The first one ended with you in bitterness and chaos. I know far more than you told me. Do our kids know? No. Try and tell them one of these days.’  What’s baffling to me is that this guy’s fiancée jilted him and he was so devastated by it that, although I met him over a year after that, I sometimes wondered if his sadistic treatment of me was a way of paying back for what that lady did to him. I never said bad things to him based on his past. I must admit, I remembered distasteful things about him but probably because I was not brought up to engage in bitter exchanges with people; I could not bring myself to say those things to him. I didn’t retaliate by reminding him of how he foamed at the sides of his mouth spewing the abuses, I did not remind him that he had foul breath 24 hours a day or the body odor or the potbelly, such that my daughter’s teacher asked her if her father drank- as she was teaching them about signs of a drunk. In addition, he ate noisily like a dog, among other dirty habits. I did not remind him of these; rather I remembered that I am made in the image of my creator. I believe it and that settles it. By any standard, I am a beautiful lady.  In spite of all the emotional abuse, which is sometimes worse than physical abuse, I remain a confident, grateful and happy lady.

Spousal abuse isn’t something you can wish on anyone. Yet the reality is that in spite of the many women protection agencies and non-governmental organizations, the abuse of women remains widespread. There is so much that the agencies can do and they are doing all that is within their mandate but they can’t move in with you to protect you and fight your battles. It is you who has to cause a shift to happen. You have to say ‘enough is enough!’ and take action. We’ll talk more about knowing when to let go of an abusive relationship in one of the following series.

                       What would you add to this piece? Ever found yourself, a friend or family member in similar situation?

Anee3

Email: Annabelle@spousesanonymous.com

Website: http://www.spousesanonymous.com

Barack Obama was coming to my hometown, Colorado Springs, Colorado. It had only been two days earlier that I learned he was here to do fundraising and talk to an invitation-only crowd of people in a city that is known for its conservatism, large military presence, and fundamental Christian population. I told myself I had 48 hours to find an invitation. My efforts to contact people began instantly. My tenacity was relentless, but no amount of persistence seemed to change the responses I was getting, which were, “I’m sorry, I want to help but I simply can’t”…

The day of the event arrived and I still did not have an invitation to the event. That particular day of work, my boss told me to dress down because we’d be getting carpets ready for cleaning.

Readying my hair, I looked at myself in the mirror, and that’s when the conversation with myself began. “Dianne, you aren’t giving up now, are you?!”

“Why in God’s name should I have any hope left at all? Today’s the day of the event, I don’t even know what time he’s speaking, I don’t have an invitation, and anyone who’s connected with the event is certainly not sitting at a desk thinking about contacting me!” I shouted back at myself.

“Dianne…has Barack taught you nothing at all about hope?” I retorted.

So, without a reason for hoping, I began to once again. I decided I better take to work with me a nice dress, shoes and jewelry, just in case. I then called for my girls. “Girls! Guess what? I’m going to see Barack Obama today!”

I must have been quite convincing because my 10-year-old said, “Oh my gosh, Mom! When did you get a invitation!”

I enthusiastically said, “I didn’t!” Her face fell.

“Thennnn, how are you going to see him today?” she asked.

I told them, “Because I just am, that’s how!” Oh, how the grins returned to their faces, for they knew what Mommy was up to. “Now I want you to say,’ Mommy is going to see Barack Obama today!’ three times.”

They said, “Mommy is going to see Barack Obama today. Mommy is going to see Barack Obama today. MOMMY IS GOING TO SEE BARACK OBAMA TODAY.”

It was TRIPLE stamped!

I drove to work, with my dress confidently riding in back, and arrived in Manitou Springs at 9 a.m.

My boss knew how disappointed I was to not be attending the event, so she began to console me by telling me about the other times I might be able to see him. I tried to remain upbeat as the minutes ticked by. By 10 a.m. and no miracle in sight, I admit, I was even worrying about the triple stamp.

But then….

A call came in at 10:15. a.m. It was a woman whom I had been e-mailing back and forth about the event. She had been so very kind and helpful to me, even though getting me an invitation was beyond her abilities. She simply said, “Dianne, here’s the deal. He’s speaking at UCCS at 11 a.m. When you get there, you can try to get in on a stand by basis (there is only room for 400). But you better go right now.” I thanked her profusely and then did a “Superman” quick change and was out the door.

I got to UCCS, they showed me where to park, I walked right toward where the event was and told the security I was on stand by. With no hassle, they gave me a ticket to fill out. It was totally surreal. My hands were trembling. Security wanded me over and then said, “Go right on in, Miss.”

It just couldn’t be true, but there I was, at the event. I found one lone seat in the far back. When he came out, my entire body got goose bumps. His speech was outstanding. My eyes and ears drank in every precious moment.

Afterwards, he moved to the inner circle of the crowd. I’m not really sure how I did this, but I snaked my way near the front where he was shaking people’s hands.
I think it was my height that helped me out. As he got nearer to me, I stretched out my hand as far as it could go. He saw my arm first, then me. Then he took my hand and shook it. I looked him straight in the eye and said “Hello, I’m Dianne Perea.”

He said, “It’s nice to meet you, Dianne,” and off he went.

I shouted out, “Are you going to the top of Pikes Peak?” His eyes twinkled, but he stayed focused on who he was meeting and on his momentum toward others.

Seeing Obama and shaking his hand was the most exhilarating experience of my life. He is bright, warm, magnetic, inspirational, and has those eyes that say, “I really want to be here, I really want to engage with you, I really want to help all of you.” There is nothing “politician-like” about him.

I can see why he is so good at community organization. He draws you in and instantly ignites a passion inside you to be a part of something larger than you, something that seems impossible, but made probable because of the efforts of the people. He makes you want to be a part of a movement that is changing the world for the better. He makes you want to be the best you you can be.

July 2 will be forever known as “Barack Obama Day” for me. When I talk to my kids about this, I tell them the moral of the story is treat everyone kindly, no matter what, because that’s just the right thing to do. And never give up your hopes and dreams.

To the forces and the people that made this happen, I thank you a thousand times.

Just the mention of child support conjures up images of lawyers, judges, and endless legal expenses. Nevertheless, of all the considerations in a divorce none equals the importance of determining the correct amount of child support.

Some divorcing couples come to an agreement on child support. It is always best to seek legal advice from an attorney before entering into such an arrangement. For those that do not agree, a court must determine the amount to be paid. Most jurisdictions have a formula that the court applies. Some Judges consider one third of the paying parent’s gross income plus an additional $150.00 to $200.00 for each additional child per month as a minimum.

The amount to be paid is not clearly stated in child support laws. The law simply states the child must be maintained in the style to which it is accustomed. It is this vague pronouncement in the law that leaves parents and some Judges pondering the amount of child support to award.

Once the amount of child support has been determined, by agreement or court order, there arises the question of collection and enforcement. Many resources exist to facilitate the collection of child support. The parents may agree between themselves and have the non-custodial parent authorize a bank transfer once a month. Alternatively, the child support-paying parent may send the payments by other means. The court may order the paying parent to send the payments to the court and the court will forward the payments to the custodial parent. Some states require that payments be sent to the Child Support Enforcement Agency for that state if the custodial parent is receiving public assistance.

If the child support agreement is in default, the custodial parent may attempt collection by several processes. The first is to speak with the parent in default. If this does not resolve the problem then the next step would be to retain a professional (i.e. lawyer, child support enforcement agency, etc.).

Most states have authorized the State Attorney General to enforce child support payments. The Child Support Enforcement Division of the State Attorney General’s Office has numerous tools at its disposal to encourage compliance with child support orders.

The office of the Attorney General may bring a civil suite in state court for the collection of child support owed. The Attorney General’s office has the power to suspend any license issued by the state to the parent in default, including driver’s licenses. In extreme cases, the Attorney General may move the court proceedings from civil to criminal court. The non-complying parent runs the risk of being charged with “Criminal Non-Support”. In most states, this charge is a felony punishable with jail time in the state penitentiary.

Many people think of child support as punishment for the non-custodial parent. This is far, far from the truth. Firstly, child support is meant to provide a certain measure of food, clothing and shelter for the child. Secondly, child support is intended to keep children off public assistance and thereby easing the burden on taxpayers.

The parent receiving the child support payments is, by definition, in a fiduciary position. Great care must be exercised to ensure that the funds are expended only for the benefit of the beneficiary.

At the minimum, a custodial parent seeking child support should consult with an attorney. At the first consultation, the parent should bring the following:

* Birth record of the child(ren)

* Prima fascia evidence of paternity (marriage document or birth record)

* Name and current address of absent parent

* Current place of employment of absent parent

* Social Security Number of absent parent

* A DNA test should be requested if the child was born out of wedlock

Every child deserves a loving caring family. Sometimes that is not possible. At the least, the child should have a safe, warm place to sleep and healthy nutritious food. To this end child support exists.

““““““““““““““““““““““““`

Pancho Villa - a bleeding heart liberal Revolutionary. Work with nature - plant a tree for more oxygen and less pollution. Save $$ on gas here

Children are great teachers, if you listen to them. When I am tired and stressed, I am a useless parent. If my younger daughter, Bethany, marches into the living room and accuses her older sister of hitting her, I will call Natasha into the room, shout at her and send her to her room. Later, I will go to see her, explain that I was tired and stressed, and listen to what she has to say. If she’s not too angry with me, she’ll tell me and we’ll reach understanding. If not, I just have to live with doing her another injustice.

But when I am not tired and stressed, we deal with Bethany’s accusations in a completely different way. I call Natasha into the room and ask her to tell Bethany why she hit her. It usually goes something like this:

Natasha: “You bit me!”

Bethany: (Looking sheepish at first, but then defiantly). But that was because you called me stupid!

Daddy: Is that true, Natasha?

Natasha: Yes - but she is stupid.

Daddy: I told you to never call her stupid. Why is she stupid this time?

Natasha: Because she is.

Daddy: (Exasperated) Bethany, why does Natasha think you are stupid?

Bethany: I’m not stupid - she’s just calling me that because she thinks I laughed at her drawing.

Natasha: (Talking to Bethany). That’s right - you laughed at my drawing! You made me feel stupid.

Bethany: I didn’t laugh at your drawing. I laughed at your face!

Natasha: And, then you called me stupid.

Daddy: Bethany, did you call her stupid?

Bethany: (Silence)

Daddy: Bethany?

Natasha: See! She’s always telling lies about me.

Bethany: I do not - you’re always bullying me.

Natasha: That’s because you are stupid.

Daddy: (Hands in air) Natasha! Stop that.

Natasha: See - you’re always taking her side!

Daddy: That’s not true.

Natasha: But you do. You always do.

Bethany: No he doesn’t!

Daddy: Is that what this is about? You think I am taking her side?

Natasha: (Silence)

Bethany: He doesn’t Tash. He sends me to my room sometimes too.

Natasha: (Moody silence).

Daddy: I’ve got one thing to say to you both.

Both: (Silence)

Daddy: (After a pause, and in a thick Yorkshire accent). I don’t like gravy….

Both: (Laughing)

Daddy: Come here….

(Hugs both children).

The reason little people (kids) are great teachers is that they are pretty useless at hiding their emotions (unless they have already suffered emotional trauma). They show how they feel and this makes it easier in a dispute to read what is going on. Adults, on the other hand, are practiced at “dramaturgical performances” - a phrase coined by Erving Goffman (1969) to describe the acting abilities of big people. A more recent phrase that is easier to understand is “deep acting”. Adults have had years more experience practising how to conceal their emotions (and had more time to grow afraid of expressing them). Their performances are much more convincing than a child’s but are not perfect enough to fool all people all of the time.

Another reason kids are great teachers is that they stay emotionally engaged with the person they are arguing with (at least in my house they do) and do not go off in a huff and refuse to speak to the other person. Adults, I find, withdraw quickly or go silent if someone questions their integrity or values. That makes it much harder to have a conversation like the one above and to trace what triggered feelings of hurt or rejection. Another way to look at this, however, is to consider the level of intimacy. We have intimate relationships with other family members, and this makes it easier to argue. With people we know less well, it is not possible to argue in the same way (at least, not until an intimate relationship has developed) so the style of disagreeing has to be more diplomatic and subtle.

We are often told that not behaving like children is a mark of maturity and “being civilised” but I want to suggest to you that the reverse is closer to the truth. Think back to the opening quote in Chapter 1 of Emotion, Sedcution and Intimacy (Ridley-Duff, 2007): “the meetings would get so violent that people almost went across the table at each other…People yelled…they waved their arms around and pounded on tables…faces would get red and veins bulged out.”

This was a description of the behaviour of top executives and technicians in one of the most ’successful’ companies of their generation resolving differences over business plans. There is, therefore, a view that “excellent” companies allowed for, and took advantage of, the most evolved part of our capabilities, namely “the emotional … side (good and bad) of human nature”. Good and bad! Or perhaps, calm and excited, quiet and loud, passive and assertive, reflective and activated.

What these executives have in common with my children is two things:

• They are not frightened of their own emotions
• They are not frightened of other people’s emotions

Both are signs of emotional maturity.

Natasha, our first child, was the first of her generation. For two years she was the centre of attention from parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, and family friends. Then others in our family had children. Four years later we had our second child, Bethany. The day her younger sister came home from hospital, Natasha told us at the end of the day: “you can take her back now!” We sat down to explain that Bethany would be staying with us, and that the nurses at the hospital were only there to help with the birth.

Gradually, Natasha got less and less attention as the younger ones got more and more. While growing up helped, there are still times when she feels vulnerable because she does not get all the attention she used to have. Sometimes, instead of complaining to dad (Rory) or mum (Caroline) she takes her frustrations out on her younger sister. In her more secure moments, she admits this is because it is easier than getting angry with a grown up.

But Bethany, I found, is already a smart cookie herself. It was only when we were old enough to track back events that I realised just how selective Bethany is in truth telling. She does not lie so much as only tell part of the story. To her credit she is an honest soul - if challenged she admits the other side of a story. In our quieter moments, she tells me that the reason she does this is to compensate for being the youngest and smallest. In her words, “I can’t ever win”. Make a note of this - she is economical with the truth because others are all stronger and she can never win a physical fight. She can, however, sometimes win the verbal fights. If she catches us when we are tired or stressed, she can sometimes control her older/bigger sister.

The technique we use to resolve arguments owes a debt to Staying OK by Amy and Tom Harris, sequel to the bestseller I’m OK - You’re OK (Harris, 1970; Harris & Harris, 1986). It is a technique called ‘trackdown’ where you go back over the events that have fuelled an argument until you spot how it started. That way, you can deal with the root cause - emotional hurt caused by perceived exclusion - rather than superficial behaviour that constitutes a reaction to feeling hurt.

Adults, however, often refuse to engage in trackdown because they want to hide the emotions and thoughts that drive their behaviour. Sometimes, they may not even be aware of them (which is the value of using trackdown as a diagnostic tool). With Natasha and Bethany - as with most people, whether young or old - the root cause is almost always that one thinks another is getting favourable treatment. This triggers one to attack the other directly (hitting, shouting, verbally abusing) or indirectly (telling tales). In the workplace, physical violence normally results in an immediate sacking, verbally abusing could lead to being disciplined, this leaves tale telling as the principle way for work colleagues to discipline and control each other.

Now here is why children are as emotionally mature as the executives in the opening quotation. They find ways to express, then process, strong emotions while remaining emotionally close to the people with whom they are in dispute. During a decade or so of school, however, children are socialised to repress strong emotions and work in silence to make it easier for teachers to control them. The workplace has no need of such tight controls because workers are not in a one-way learning environment with a 30:1 ratio between teacher and learner. This makes school-like disciplines particularly ineffective. A much better approach is to bend and flex so that expressions of emotion are not only permitted, but point the way toward mutual understanding and the pleasures of making up after an argument. As Aronson (2003) reports, the most enjoyable and satisfying relationships, as reported by adult couples, also have higher levels of conflict.

If using this article, please mention the source as:Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2007), Emotion, Seduction and Intimacy, Bracknell: Men’s Hour Books, pp. 84-88.

Other References

Aronson, E (2003) The Social Animal, New York: Worth Publishers.

Goffman, E. (1969) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life, Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Harris, T., Harris, A. (1986) Staying OK, London: PAN.

Harris, T. (1970) I’m OK - You’re OK, London: PAN.

For a person attempting to understand a conflict, the question that could start every investigation is “how is the accuser hurting?” or “why does the accuser feel a need to make an accusation?” It may be wise not to widen the scope of a dispute until the circumstances of the accusation are understood. To accuse, there must either be a moral principle at stake, an interest that has to be defended, or an anger than seeks an outlet. Initially before shifting focus to the accused, establish the balance between these three.

If possible, search back through events (Harris and Harris, 1986) with the accuser to trace any source of emotional hurt (remembering that it may come from somewhere else in the accuser’s life and is not necessarily the outcome of their relationship with the accused). If you cannot shed any light, start to involve the accused. Initially, you are still trying to understand the reason for the accusation from the point of view of the accuser, not the accused. If you bring the parties together, let the parties be emotional as it provides information. Avoid taking sides: the objective is not blame. The objective is to stimulate dialogue so that you, and they, can understand the source of emotional hurt and shed light on the hidden dynamics of the conflict.

If you find yourself displaying emotions, consider how the outcome of the dispute affects your own interests. Does your emotionality betray a desire for a closer relationship with one party? Is one party particularly important to achieving your own personal (or organisational) goals and objectives? Talk to someone outside the dispute about your own emotions to shed some light on them. No-one is completely impartial and you may still be the best person to mediate.

If it is a gender dispute, remember that most men want close relationships with women more than with other men, and women want close relationships with men more than other women (except for lesbian and gay women and men). “The other” is often perceived as the source of emotional hurt but this does not necessarily mean it is true. Hurt is a reflection of our own desire, our own sense of loss. We hurt most when we cannot fulfil our desires (and the bigger the gap between our desires and reality, the greater our hurt). Find out, if possible, what event changed the relationship. What did each party say to the other? Could it be an outcome of changes outside work?

If somebody is deeply distressed, establish if it comes from a sense of loss, remembering always there is a 60% chance in the case of a woman, and possibly also in the case of men, that they will not divulge their sexual feelings (McDowell, 1985; India Today, 2003). Talk carefully. On a one-to-one basis, ask them to describe the relationship from the beginning. This will give you a sense of how the relationship evolved and changed.

Support people through loss. If no loss is found, find out why people feel violated. Does the person need protection? If not, then mediate as soon as possible. If yes, then seek professional advice.

Both women and men hurt - it is not women’s or men’s problem alone and is best resolved together. Men fear showing their feelings, not always because they are ashamed, but because experience has taught them that expressing feelings will lose them the respect of the woman (or women) they currently want to love them, or their male friends and colleagues. Women and men teach men this by calling them “losers”, “wimps” or “sissy” whenever they show feelings that reveal their vulnerability. Men and women, on the other hand, teach women to be submissive’ by rushing to comfort them when they become distressed. The more beautiful the woman, the quicker people will seek to help. Bear in mind that these responses are fairly automatic internalised during childhood/adolescence (in much the same way as Pavlov and his dogs). They are continually reinforced during courtship and through films, TV programmes, magazines, books and stories (Farrell, 1986).

They can also be unlearnt (see Berne, 1963; Holland, 1999). Gendered responses are not a good indicator of who is being truthful and who is truly hurting. Women may cry to avoid having to talk. Men may cry, but are more likely due to cultural conditioning to become angry as a way to get (or deflect) attention. Both crying and anger may be genuine or affected responses. They may be honest or a “performance” to win hearts and minds.

When we know that women are no more likely to be physically harmed in personal relationships than men (Fiebert, 2005), our attitude to both men and women changes. When we know that men’s feelings are hurt as much as women’s (Pease and Pease, 2004), but they do not show this, our attitude changes again. When we understand that women are more creative and convincing liars (because they cannot resort so readily to physical force to win their fights), and that men are less good at hiding their lies (because they are punished more readily and frequently for lying during childhood) our attitude changes even more (O’Connell, 1998; Pease and Pease, 2003). We start to understand that men need as much protection from tale telling as women need from physical violence or rape (Farrell, 2000).

Women who understand men are no more inherently violent than themselves will no longer feel a need for special protection. Although they will continue to fear violence from men more than from women, they will begin to understand this is the response of any person who desires to be with them, but cannot be so. Men who start to understand that women are as violent as themselves will no longer feel such a need to give them special protection. If they do, they will come to understand this as a product of their desire to be a hero to the women who watch them, and part of their own need to win approval from them.

The Case for Mediation

Mediation offers a solution that is consistent with the values and goals of both democracy and gender equality. It affords protection to all parties regardless of status, ethnicity or gender. Critics of mediation (or “restorative justice” as it is called in criminology) worry that mediation simply gives the perpetrator another opportunity to intimidate the victim. At the start of a dispute, however, it is not clear who is perpetrator and who is victim. The apparent victim may be the perpetrator - it is the mediation process that helps to determine this (Roche, 2003).

Mediation is hard work: it may involve participants coming to terms with deeply held prejudices, or face up to the full impact of their behaviour on others. But it also gives them a chance to explain their intent and for others to learn why they responded in a particular way. The process may not be quick or easy. The alternative, however, is a workplace culture and society generally that pays lip service to fairness and equality but takes refuge in defensive approaches to conflict.

To support change, build the process of mediation into employment and trading contracts so that investors and entrepreneurs, employers and employees, customers and suppliers, face penalties under the law for authoritarian approaches to conflict resolution. These laws are the ones we can create for ourselves, for our own organisations. They are not imposed by government statute. Consequently, no acts of parliament need to be passed for these laws to come into effect: they can be brought about by changes in management understanding and practice.

This way, existing laws will stop favouring the party who unilaterally withdraws and start favouring those committed to reconciliation. The laws will start to reward compassion and tolerance. Individual businesses taking initiatives to switch to mediation as a tool of social control will be entrenching democratic values without ever having to involve a politician! What greater incentive do you need?

If reprinting this article, please include the following citation:

Based on Ridley-Duff, R. J. (2007) Emotion, Seduction and Intimacy: Alternative Perspectives on Organisation Behaviour, Bracknell: Men’s Hour Books, pp. 228-232.

References

Berne, E. (1964) Games People Play, Penguin.

Farrell, W. (1986) Why Men Are The Way They Are, London, Bantam Books, Chapters 2 - 6.

Farrell, W. (2000) Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say, New York, Tarcher/Putnam.

Fiebert, M. (2007) References Examining Assaults by Women on their Spouses or Male Partners: An Annotated Bibliography, California State University. http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

Harris, T., Harris, A. (1986) Staying OK, London: PAN.

Holland, R. (1999), “Reflexivity”, Human Relations, 52(4): 463-484.

India Today (2003) Sex and the Indian Woman, September Cover Story.

McDowell, P. (1985) “False Allegations”, Forensic Science Digest, 11(4): 64.

O’Connell, S. (1998) An Investigation into How We Learn to Love and Lie, Doubleday.

Pease, A., Pease, B. (2003) Why Men Lie and Women Cry, Orion.

Pease, A., Pease, B. (2004), The Definitive Book of Body Language, Orion.

Roche, D. (2003) “Gluttons for restorative justice”, Economy and Society, 32(4): 630-644.

Once again a religious retreat has been raided by the U.S. Government. Over 400 children taken from their family and placed in a stranger’s house.

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is an organized religion. It has its roots in the Mormon Church. Much the same as the Episcopalian Church has its roots in the Catholic Church.

The Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a doctrine which allows men to take several wife’s. The Muslim religion also has this feature.

Not everyone wants to practice this type of religion. I for one do not agree that a man should have more than one wife. Nor do I agree that a person should marry more than once. But the fact remains that I cannot impose my morals and beliefs on my neighbors. Many of my neighbors have married and divorced 3, 4, even 5 times. This is something I view as an American version of polygamy.

Our Constitution guarantees us the right to religious freedom. The first amendment reads in part: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;…” What happened to the part about “prohibiting the free exercise thereof”?

I also take issue with the words used to report this incident. Children being sent to bed without supper is the same as children being deprived of food. Children being left in isolation is the same as children being placed in a time out box. A religious retreat is the same as a religious compound. Sect, Cult and Religion all describe the same thing. A man with a gun can be a “terrorist” or a “freedom fighter“, just depends on what side of the fence you are on.

The authorities have now disrupted forever the lives of 400 plus children. These are children that for the rest of their lives will remember the U. S. Government as the force that took them from their family. The force that placed them in a stranger’s house (yes house not home). These are 400 plus citizen that will always feel a resentment towards the government.

As for the raid justification? Authorities say a phone call to a women’s shelter from the wife of one of the men led the court to issue a search warrant, even though it was reported she recanted in a later phone call. Could this be just a disagreement between husband and wife? However, and something very important to remember, is that the caller cannot be found. Is this just a ploy by our government to justify their interference into the lives of law abiding citizens that practice a different religion?

Media reports indicate the wife was threatened by hell fire and eternal damnation if she left the family. Is this the same hell fire and eternal damnation that befalls Church of Christ members that stray from the Church teachings? Same goes for the Baptists, Catholics and most religions.

In my part of the world, here in Texas, a lot of children go to bed hungry. A lot of children have no clothes to wear for school. Some children have a prostitute for a mother. Some children have no father, or if they do have one he is a drug addict. UNCLE SAM WHERE ARE YOU. THE CHILDREN OF THIS COUNTRY NEED YOU. Why then does the government not take those children and put them in safe foster homes? Those children are in much more danger than those at the religious retreat.

Instead of persecuting those that have a different religion, how about lending those resources to the ones that really need them.

In the old days… a Shot Gun Wedding, was usually a wedding that was whipped together in less than a month… If a bride was pregnant, the wedding would be done and over with before anyone knew, and the father of the bride would keep a keen eye on the groom to make sure he did not escape!.

Wow! times have changed. But, if you are looking to save money on your own wedding, not giving yourself a lot of time, will actually force you to keep a lower budget.

If you have been engaged for a while, and you just have not got around to setting the date, you could either elope and save money on a wedding, or you could plan a quick wedding, that in actual fact could be the best wedding you have ever been a part of. Here are five good reasons to try it.

1) You won’t be stressing about a dress, because you will have to find a ready made one, or borrow one.

2) You won’t be trying to get rid of that 10 pounds, because there won’t be time, and you will not have to go through the dieting and misery of starving yourself to look great on your special day. No wonder some brides look like they are going to faint!

3) You will have to find a restaurant that will cater to your small wedding reception, or have it at your place. This will be the deciding factor in how many people will be invited.

4) Invitations will either be store ready, home made or phone calls only!.

5) You can get some great last minute deals on honeymoon packages.

Have you ever had a spare of the moment party or gathering that was very memorable, compared to parties that you agonized over for weeks that just caused you stress and were over before you knew it?..

Sometimes if you have too much time to plan a wedding, then they get more and more detailed, and the more details you have to worry about, the more stress it causes until finally you are almost in tears and lose sight of why you were getting married in the first place! You do not need to go deep in debt to have a nice wedding. You do not want to be paying for one day for decades to come. You should feel great, happy, and have a good time.

It is your special day, you are the one in control… enjoy it! save big bucks on a wedding and have fun