PARENTING PIVOT: MOM! I AM AN ADULT.

It is not an oversimplified and overused statement, that parenting is the most rewarding and most challenging undertaking of the human experience, especially when you are committed to doing it “right”.   The way I see it, parenting is a kaleidoscopic experience of multiple emotions and rewards and disappointment that continuously intersect at any given time and without warning.  Parenting has had me in a chokehold and has challenged me to extend love that keeps evolving in every parenting experience that I have had with my child.   Parenting requires unconditional love.  Parenting requires introspection; parenting requires self-awareness; parenting requires honesty; parenting requires fearlessness; parenting requires self-love, and parenting requires sacrifice.

As I have observed, especially in the last decade, I am not alone in my parenting quest, blunders, and varying forms of success.  Many other parents, especially mothers, with whom I have conversed, have admitted that parenting has been their most challenging undertaking.   Aside from the obvious financial (and other societal) challenges that many of us face, I have found that parenting is also quite the task for other pertinent reasons, to include (but not limited to):

  • Personality differences:  more often than not, we are learning to adjust to living with children whose personalities are forming and who sometimes become completely different individuals to who we are and who we thought or wanted them to be.  When this happens, there are often personality clashes, and it is the parent’s responsibility to manage the parenting process and make the parent-child relationship less combative.
  • Unhealed traumas:  Those unresolved issues in us prevent us from approaching certain parenting challenges with the correct parenting posture.
  • Unrealistic expectations:  our children are unique individuals who are learning.  In that learning process, they will make mistakes.  They will also choose different paths than those we want for them.  We must accept that this is a part of the life they are called to live and not force unattainable expectations unto them.
  • Ignorance:  If we don’t know, we can’t grow.  When our children display certain behaviors, instead of blindly defining the issue, investigate the issue so that the appropriate tools can be utilized to reach an effective resolve.
  • Conflict resolution deficiencies:  parent-child conflict is inevitable, which requires a deliberate approach to achieve an amicable outcome.  Even though we are the “real adults” in the situation, and often with our degree(s) in tow, we do not always possess the specific know-how to resolve ensuing parenting issues.
  • Lack of awareness:  Many of us operate blind to who we are and our shortcomings and even blinder to who our children are becoming.  Because of this, we parent with a lack of understanding on how to navigate the parenting space, unique to the child we are parenting.  Invariably, the outcome will be counterproductive, in spite of our genuine intentions.

Honestly, if I were to delve into each reason extensively, this blog could go on for pages.  Aside from the inevitable, we are called to revisit our parenting styles when things change with our children, and these things can include anything from mindset to mental health challenges and personal growth search (because they are trying to find themselves).  But my focus is how do we pivot our parenting practices in the face of the onset of adulthood.  My daughter is 19 years old, which makes her an adult – well technically since she is currently college-bound and still reliant on her parents.  She has been at the stage, for almost two years, where she wants to do her own thing with her peers, and in her own time within her own boundaries.  But this is what I am talking about, because why did I even need to qualify her state of adulthood by interjecting that she is “technically” an adult.  Therein lies the problem.  But I digress.

This is not, however, a unique requirement of a young adult and certainly not unique of the challenges parents face across borders and cultures. Those of us who are trying to do right by our children will encounter many roadblocks as they themselves navigate their own growth journey.  We are all just people, despite our unique oppressions or access, trying to figure this parenting thing out. When asked about her parenting role in a recent Oprah interview, Kerry Washington stated “it is a requirement in parenting to be willing to be uncomfortable in order to allow your child to grow; it is a requirement to ask yourself what you need to do better for them and not what they need to do better for you.”  This statement made me ponder on what I have often deemed my parenting imperfections and shortcomings to be and that which has caused my daughter her own set of frustrations with me.    If we are willing to address our parenting blunders as we go along, the specific frustrations will not linger.  They may, however, morph into another frustration because of the complex nature of the parent-child relationship.

As I examine my own parenting journey, I am the very first to admit that I sometimes feel lost – like I have not a clue about what I am doing, which makes me feel as if I am in a constant state of confusion and failing-forward.  Fortunately, God has kept me in those moments as I wear my prayer like a second skin. What choice do I have?  Still, there are some tough times, because there is no parenting-specific manual; each child is unique to your context/environment/who they are and are becoming and therefore requires a different parenting strategy.   Yes!  I said it.  STRATEGIZE, because yuh affi siddung inna silence and tink careful bout yuh next move (you must sit in silence and think carefully about your next move).

My daughter has been my greatest blessing and my greatest lesson.  She is one of the smartest human beings I have ever met; she is beautiful, and as complex as she is smart as she is lippy.  Parenting her has made me question everything about my capability, my capacity, my potential and my resilience.   But that’s not because of her; it is all because of me.  There are many things in me that needed to be addressed in order to be better to her and for her.  Some of those things I brought into the parenting process, while others I developed in the process of becoming a mother and while being a mother (internal and external of me).  In this realization, I see that I am sometimes ill-equipped for some of the reasons itemized earlier.  It could also be that I have not prepared myself sufficiently enough to parent a child whose many facets are so different and unique and new to me.  For example, I am an introvert (and this is not as sanitized as an example as you may think).  I cherish and sometimes crave being alone.  I don’t always want to speak and sometimes I literally cannot speak.  Even though she gets my introversion now (in the last year), in the past, this was a challenge because she always wanted my attention, and I could only give as much as my brain allowed, and my brain could not do “all the time.”  As she now transitions into adulthood, she continues to learn that her mother is an actual human with her own human concerns; but more importantly, I am still learning that I need to transition the ways in which I actively love her within the ambits of her evolution and her requirements.  Naturally, she no longer requires the “parenting” she did two years ago, and I see that. I am also learning to establish new boundaries as well as to respect the boundaries she has set for me.  I say “learnING” as opposed to “learnED” because a nuff time mi affi wheel and come again (check myself and then execute a do-over). The conundrum is for us both to find a balance` in her new adult space.  In my estimation, she doesn’t quite understand that my concerns about her safety are contextual to the crazy climate.  Obviously, it is not always possible for me to know what she is doing and with whom.  This is where I must trust my prayer and my well-wishes for her and allow her to operate within the parameters of her own standards, without having to report every action to me, regardless of my intention.  Because we have not yet fully established/found a happy medium, we sometimes butt heads.   Apparently, mothers and daughters butt heads in a more intensely than daughters and dads, even when the “parenting blunders” are similar.  Psychologists argue that once there is the lack of acceptance (or the perception thereof), on both sides, then there will be a relationship challenge.  Mothers, they say, must learn to respect their daughters’ choices, values, personality, and opinions.  I’m sure that many mothers, like me, will argue that it is not necessarily a lack of respect, but a desire to protect our daughters (children) from the vulnerabilities that we KNOW are unique to women and girls. 

Be that as it may, the parenting pivot becomes necessary at each stage of the parenting process if we are to sustain the relationship we want with our ever evolving offsprings/wards, and especially necessary if we want them to become well-rounded adults with good mental health. Anything outside of a deliberate consideration for their changing mindset and needs, will yield a less than favourable response to our parenting “interventions.” This becomes even more urgent once they get to the age when society deems them adult, whether they can financially afford to fend for themselves or not.  Honestly, once we have gotten to this point, it is now time to allow them to teach us how to parent them in the wake of their becoming….

SHAME, ON YOU!

One of the most devastating things that can happen to anyone is to be in a space (public or private) where shame is used by someone to inflict punishment. When public (or even private) shame is observed as a common theme in any relationship, it is often a solid indicator that it is time to skedaddle.  But that is not often the immediate response, especially when love is present (by the shamed), and in instances when the shame act is subtle and by someone from whom it is least expected.  One of my most hurtful adult experiences was when a close friend publicly humiliated me in her home.  For someone like me who does not like going into people’s personal space, this was traumatic.  Needless to say, I was so ashamed, I could only cry in the moment and have only spoken about that particular shaming to one confidante (RIP) over a decade ago. To make matters worse, despite this person’s follow up “love presentation”, we have never had a discussion about THAT shaming.   

Having witnessed the ways in which shame (through humiliation) is used as a hurt-tactic by “well-thinking” professionals and having undergone and overcome a series of “shame” attempts and events, I now understand its effects and why people do this. Still, “I shame you see!”  is a sentiment used by many, in jest, when describing an event – public or private – that brings a disruption to ones self-worth and makes us question who we are within context of the incident that brought us the shame.  This response is often a protection mechanism designed to minimize and compartmentalize the true effects of shame.

According to Oxford online dictionary, “shame is a painful feeling of humiliation or distress caused by the consciousness of wrong or foolish behaviour.”  Obviously, this wrong or foolish behaviour can be of our own doing and/or by someone else, but often brought about as a result of what has been done to us.

Since many of us will only openly admit shame in jest, hardly are we willing to openly discuss the silencing nature of shame and the ways in which it is used as a weapon to:

  • assert positionality
  • silence others,
  • keep someone in their place
  • isolate/alienate others
  • chip away at a person’s self-worth.
  • inflict emotional and psychological harm. 

Even though we publicly undermine the potency of shame to protect ourselves, those who commit acts against others to deliberately cause shame, understand its effects.  The American Psychological Association agrees that shame, not to be confused with guilt, has a myriad of emotional and psychological negative effects that ranges from a “withdrawal from social intercourse” to “retaliative anger.”  It is not hard to imagine that anger will occur as a defense against the shame that results from an attack[1]. When shame happens as a direct result of someone’s deliberate intentions, we want to curl up in a ball and hide, lash out, or immediately protect ourselves. From my perspective, our response is incumbent on several things to include who, what, where and when, simply. Notwithstanding, if we understand the posture and deliberation behind the shame-attempt, there is a chance that we will be able to respond more positively (internally and externally), thereby minimizing its effects and disarming the “shamer.”

Shame as a weapon

The people (shamers) who are adamant about and rely on the damage of shame, understand its effects at varying degrees.  These are sometimes those who may want to physically harm you but won’t or can’t for several reasons. Based on the position they occupy, they may not be able to survive the inconvenience of having to answer to a legal system, so the next best alternative is to inflict pain through strategic acts of humiliation that cause shame.  The truth is, those who understand the damaging effects of shame are more likely to be strategic at their attempts and will utilize everything and anything in their environment to ensure that the “shame message” is effectively received by the intended victim and by those who are supposed to witness the shaming (since shaming often relies on an audience).  But this very potent weapon has been around for ages; shame, for a long time, has been the weapon of choice for many, and the extent to which they shame and humiliate you is usually connected to the amount of hurt, disdain, desire, or anger they may feel toward you.  The curious and surprising thing about shame is that you never know when the feeling will occur as it is often brought on by something internal or triggered by the acts of those with the understanding of what it will take to cause you shame – typically someone who is close to you.  But it doesn’t always occur with immediacy.  If you are a compartmentalizer, like me, your response may be delayed.

As I navigate my own shaming, I was recently discussing with a friend that the “keep your head up” posture in the midst of shame is not always a flat-affect indicator nor is it always a real expression of unshakeable self-esteem; these acts are often performances to get you through the public effects or to minimize public scrutiny of your handling of the shame and its effects on you (keep in mind that shamers more often than not rely on an audience/their environment for the shaming to be effective). After all, we all experience different feelings about ourselves situationally. Understandably, those who have experienced shame learn how to publicly navigate the feeling whether internally or externally.  In my quest to keep my effect internal or relegated to a “safe space”, I, in happenstance, discovered that confidence is a skill that we can all learn.  This confidence performance does not, however, minimize how we feel internally.  It simply serves as a buffer for public scrutiny, since the confidence appearance often masks the shame-effects to onlookers (usually a part of the shaming process).  While I agree that we can use this skill to minimize the physical manifestation of shame, it is a more complex and nuanced undertaking to eliminate its internal effects.

Shame, who?

Psychologists assert that shame is a natural part of the human experience.  Therefore, those who use shame as a weapon understand the effects of shame and/or are typically closely connected to you and therefore know what will trigger the feeling or what acts of humiliation will bring about the desired outcome. But shame is not only caused by the external; shame comes from within.  Shame is often hinged on regrets as well as those expectations you have of yourself and others.  For example, one of the most difficult things for a person to admit is that the people you choose to have in your life do not necessarily want you there….  It is difficult to admit that the people you love see you as beneath them and only need you to fulfil a certain role beneficial to them.  The recognition of that can bring about internal/private shame. 

It is important that we understand that shame can come from perception (internal) as much as it can be brought on by reality, and intention (external).  But these are not mutually exclusive since the ways in which perception and intention intersect is incumbent on access.  In other words, those who have access to your perception of self, pain, life, etc. can use that access to intentionally inflict a trigger that causes shame.

Manoeuvring Shame

To manoeuvre shame, as debilitating and as negative as the feeling is, one must first accept that shame is a natural part of the human experience, especially since it is connected to how we view ourselves as well as how others view us.  Rosko (2020) makes the point that shame is impossible to avoid as much as it is invaluable to growth.  This author asserts that shame is an excellent teacher that serves as a useful gauge that lets us know where we fall in the ambits of society and that lets us know when “we fall short of our own values as well as others’ expectations….and tells us who we are and who we expect ourselves to be.”  This excerpt, when unpacked, indicates a few things; one such, is that shame highlights who we are (fundamentally) as well as who they are NOT to us. 

When we carry shame (allow it to linger), it shows up in different ways, and “The Body Keeps the Score”.  Shame affects:

  • Our brain
  • Our face (we look old and haggard; we barely smile).
  • Our bodies (When we are depressed/sad from shame, we barely move/exercise; or we may eat more or less than we usually do). 
  • Our posture – the way we walk/talk, etc.
  • Our self-esteem/mindset
  • Our capability/capacity.

A smart person somewhere on social media said “shame works if you let it,” and they are right! Therefore, regardless of the source of the shame one feels, we can navigate shame in the following inexhaustive ways (in no particular order):

  • Examine and understand why you feel shame (this requires honest introspection)
  • Keep your affect to a “safe space.”
  • understand the intention behind each shame attempt and combat that with the Word of God.
  • Accept that the feeling does not have to linger (you actually have control over how you respond to shame).
  • Acknowledge the shame and release it.
  • Learn how to compartmentalize so you know, where, how, and when to physically respond.
  • Articulate (verbally to self) the shame you feel; do not pretend it away.
  • Heal your shame trauma and triggers through a mental health professional.

Those who use shame as a weapon are often very strategic at their shame-attempts to destroy you and will not stop until they see or feel that you are mentally decapitated.  I assert that “shamers” have, themselves, been shamed and are most likely walking around with shame, etc. The key to managing shame is to acknowledge the feeling, as well as the attempts, etc. and learn how to get through that feeling without letting it follow you around and keep you into the gutter.  Ultimately, to buffer shame, you must believe that you are ENOUGH and operate in God’s Grace!

[1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/2786667?origin=crossref

“TRANSACTIONAL NECESSITY” – Take it or leave it!

All relationships do not require depth.  Some are classified as an interaction to serve a purpose – to help you achieve that which you desire (temporary gratification or a long-term goal).  It could be as simple as getting ice-cream at your favourite parlour or the one you have with your supervisor/boss/coworker.  Once we understand what a specific interaction brings and what we are willing to forego to maintain it, I believe that our lives will be better and less stressful. 

Whatever our reason for the interaction, we all have standards by which we operate and those that we hope to maintain throughout our interactions, superficial or otherwise.  Because we have very little control over how a person operates within the context of our standards, we must decide what it is that we are willing to tolerate at any given point.  We must, however, bear in mind that people do not always have access to our standards, because 1.  We have not let them in or 2.  They simply do not have the brain capacity to appreciate our standards, and 3.  They are not interested in knowing or meeting our standards.

That is not to say that a person cannot develop a deep and rewarding relationship with an interaction that started off with the specific intention of receiving a thing.  Those relationships that we engage in for the sole purpose of getting that which we require, because of something that we are giving, despite our personal feelings or preference, can be referred to as a transactional necessity (TN).  It is also prudent to point out that you can also have a rewarding relationship from one that lacks depth.  The reward comes from the thing that the transactional necessity brings or even the temporary gratification one might achieve from the interaction itself and not necessarily the object of the transaction.  Psychologists postulate, for the most part, that our relationships with others fall under one of four categories with six relationship subtypes.

The conundrum with TN is that some of us give the wrong impression that the relationship means more than it does, while others of us are simply unable to read the transactional necessity room.  Then the relationship dilemma ensues.  Unfortunately, many of us are pulled in by “pretty talks” – those conversations that spark your interest because they appear to feed our mental and emotional needs.  It is, however, the consistency of reconciliatory actions that determine the true depth and (often) longevity of the relationship.  In other words, the detriment or success of that relationship is incumbent on talk-the-talk reconciling with walk the walk, or the lack thereof.  This is something that most require for long-lasting relationships, which usually occur once both parties have an interest in genuinely meeting each other’s needs.

Regardless of the nature of the relationship, boundaries are still necessary. When you go to dinner at a restaurant, you must pay to receive the food.  Whatever the established system between yourself and the proprietor, you must operate within the set boundaries.  In our dealings with others, we must, however, apply context to know what those boundaries are.  Often those boundaries are explicitly established, or they can be alluded to.  Whatever the case, we all know that regardless of our preferred modus operandi when dealing with others, there are some relationships that are only there to serve a transactional purpose.  This means that there is something that you have that I want, and I will pay you in cash or kind to get that thing from you.  The same is true when the roles are reversed.  I may have something that you need – a service that I am offering, and you pay, in some way, to access that service, and then I give you the goods or service, without any other expectation.  The word “pay” (along with service) is being used very loosely to mean giving up one thing (for another) which in some cases could mean the expending of one’s dignity, peace, silence, time, laughter or joy for the need/want.

Even if you enjoy deep relationships with people, transactional necessities are unavoidable.  How many times have you been in a situation that you would rather not, but you are forced to engage because there is something in that space that is beneficial to your long or short-term needs?  Case in point, the fruit vendor.  For you, the experience is partially daunting, because you like to engage and get to know people.  While you have never gotten more than platitudes or a pasted-on smile, you continue with the routine because an important need is being fulfilled.  Essentially, while she makes you uncomfortable (which may even be because of your skewed perception of her), she does offer the best goods, and having your daily intake of fruit is important to you than the temporary discomfort.  Ultimately, the benefits outweigh your discomfort; therefore, you do what you must to maintain your relationship with your fruit lady.  This is a transactional necessity.

This “fruit lady” anecdote can be applied in any situation that we are required to continue, despite our discomfort or preference to cut all ties.  This can be with any person with whom we interact at work, school or even in our own families.  It can even be with someone with whom we have had a close relationship.  Let’s be honest, many of us have had to endure transactional necessities at some point.  How many of us have had to bite our tongue and understand that not every situation requires a complete cutting of ties, especially if we are to achieve one of our goals?  In addition to this lady selling the best fruits, she is also in the best location because there are many parking options.  Therefore, you will endure her “unfriendly nature” to achieve a need.  Similarly, for whatever reason unique to us, we may be called to shift/redefine/relax our boundaries/standards as it relates to our relationships to facilitate a long-term growth, want, or need.  Let me hasten to say that I am by no means suggesting being a hypocrite and faking a friendship.  The point is, we do not always have to completely sever ties.  There are times when we must change the trajectory/nature of our relationships to continue to meet our needs, so that we can live peaceably and protect our mental health.  Depending on the context, it may simply serve you and the specific environment better to accept the shift (from friendship to TN).  We may have to change from being friends to being friendly, without a conversation or a falling out.  Unfortunately, we are often way too emotionally invested to make that switch.

An existential crisis is mistaking a transactional necessity for a relationship of substance, loyalty, and love thereby developing, in your mind, a closeness that for the other person never existed.  With this awareness, comes even greater pain and disappointments than those that are actually built on mutual love, loyalty, trust, and respect (even healthy relationships experience pain and disappointments too).  That’s one side of the transactional necessity coin.  If you are the person doing the shift, from a relationship that once appeared to be one of depth, it is important to your righteousness (if you are so inclined) to make it clear the way the fruit lady has to you and you to her that the relationship is what it is.  In this case, the transactional necessity is not void of kindness.   Some people have mastered the art of faking friendships, marriages, etc. and fooling others into thinking that there is more to the relationship than the performance of it.   Either way, we can either take the relationship for what it is, or we can shift the dynamic, without fuss, when we find out that it is NOT what it pretended or once was.  Bottom line, our relationships do not always have to be deep for it to be rewarding.  Notwithstanding, we need to establish what it is or we can shift into the TN mode so that we fulfil what we need to without strife.

A MOVIE AND ME-TIME

I was in a public setting having a light-hearted chat with a friend of sorts and another person I just met. As most impromptu chats go, one topic led to the next, and we started chatting about movies.  It was revealed that I had gone to see Equalizer 3 by my lonesome.  Amid sharing my utter delight about how much I enjoyed the film, especially in my capacity as the self-appointed Equalizer Trilogy promoter and Denzel Washington, the actor, supporter, I sensed the confused energy of the person I had just met.  As soon as the words “I went to the movie by myself” fell out of my mouth, I immediately felt judgement energy.

“You went to the movies alone?”  She asked.

“Yes, I did, and I do all the time,” I said matter-of-factly.

“Why would you go to the movies alone?” She was concerned.

“For the same reason I would go with you.  To see the movie.”

I guess I could say that we were both operating in varying degrees of ponder.  It was obvious that she didn’t understand why anyone would deliberately go to the movies by themselves, and I was slightly curious as to why this would confuse her.  The truth is, her perspective is not unique, as I have heard this before.  People would never eat alone, go to the movies alone, take themselves to a concert, travel alone, drive to the beach alone, etc.  Those who wouldn’t somehow believe that those of us who do, suffer some kind of affliction.  She went further to say she always believed that people who went to the movies alone were depressed. 

I think I should have been offended, but I wasn’t – not even slightly.

In the same way she has her theory about people like me – those who have no issues going to the movies alone – I, too, have my own theory about those who are unable to take themselves to the movies and about those who think something is “wrong” with those of us who do.  While my theory is nothing near as sinister as to assume a mental illness, per se, I have always imagined those people who wouldn’t (or couldn’t) as missing out somehow.  Fundamentally, I assume a “to each his own” stance on the matter.  

As she continued to search out my face in utter surprise that she was meeting someone who would do such a thing (I am assuming), the “depression” conversation ensued. 

I said, “The same way you are asserting depression unto solo movie attendees is the same way I cannot say that those who go to the movies with a date or friend are NOT depressed.”  By her argument, one could easily deduce that those who have movie buddies/dates, etc. are not depressed.  From what I know about depression, it is such a complex thing to pinpoint just by looking.  Accordingly, depressed people get married; depressed people get first class honors; depressed people are CEO’s; there are depressed people who have gone to the movies with a partner/friend.  Conversely, cheerful and happy (are these the opposite of depressed) people are single, poor, rich, loners, etc.  We are too complex to think we can look at one thing about someone and determine what is going on with us.  If only that were true, then the mental health epidemic would not be in existence since there are way more movie-goers who attend with someone or a group of people than there are solo-movie-goers.   The truth is, I have gone to the movie alone under many circumstances:  when I was as happy as a lark, when I was sad, when I was depressed, I have even gone alone when I just completed my Masters and wanted to celebrate.  But my fundamental reason for going to the movie alone is plain and simple – I want to see the movie, and I don’t always want company, or I don’t always have company, or I don’t want to wait to see it.  Some of us are just like that and some of us aren’t.

As strange as people find this solo movie-going phenomenon, there are benefits to be derived from going alone, to include (but not limited to):

  • Getting to know yourself
  • Using the activity as self-care
  • Eliminating chatter/distractions
  • Being completely immersed in the film
  • Protecting/enjoying ones peace
  • See other benefits as discussed by someone else here.

The conversation tapered off with me encouraging her to spend time with herself and sharing how beautiful I find it to be, especially within a certain context applicable to her.  I told her that the stares I get from the few people I do are not bothersome to me – not in the least.  I let her know that the only discomfort experienced is by those who find it strange that I am there by myself, which is none of my business.  In other words, I couldn’t care less.   Honestly, I love myself, and I love my own company. I am also an avid movie buff, so I am enjoying the best of both worlds. Be that as it may, while I am there by myself, I do the same things I would do if I were with someone else, including comment or exclaim about a scene.   The only drawback (if I was forced to find one) is that there is no one to hold my handbag (if I am coming from work), while I use the restroom or go to the concessionaire’s. Best believe, I am enjoying every ounce of the film (along with the associated emotions of the film) the same way (or even more than) partnered movie goers do.

Next up on the movie-watching list – Retribution – and I am going alone!

The Dangers of Forgiveness

Many solid-appearing relationships (platonic, romantic, etc.) are sustained by different motivations that do not require any depth or real considerations of forgiveness when things go awry.  Then there are those relationships where there are regular emotional check-ins with private and public acts of respect.  In these relationships, people hold themselves and their “relationship partners” accountable and forgiveness, self-awareness, humility, and love form the basis of the interaction. 

Regardless of the nature of our relationships, we, at some point, will offend the person(s) with whom we are friends, lovers or family members and therefore want to be forgiven for that act(s), and we are also expected to forgive others when those roles are reversed.  I don’t foresee any relationship occurring without one person doing or saying something to the other that have caused hurt, in some way, whether intentionally or unintentionally.  Notwithstanding, once the relationship holds some semblance of importance to us, forgiveness or the lack thereof plays an important role in the progression of the relationship.  While I agree that forgiveness is a main ingredient in sustaining long-term relationships, with the people we opt to have in our lives, there are dangers in forgiveness.

The Bible mentions forgiveness numerous times and encourages the seventy times seven forgiveness rule.  We are even told that we are harming ourselves when we hold a person’s “blunder” against them, because we are carrying toxic energy.  But how can this very integral and fundamental concept cause harm?  What is forgiveness anyway? Psychologists agree that forgiveness is the deliberate and intentional act of letting go of any ill will or negative feelings toward a person who has wronged or offended you in some way and be able to operate with love and kindness toward that person.  Forgiveness, many argue, should mean the continuing of the relationship as it were before the offence without repeatedly mentioning the offence.  Others believe, however, that forgiveness is not simply the acceptance of the offense or the denial of its seriousness nor does it mean an automatic reconciliation; this statement is the perfect segue for where the dangers lie.

Despite societal constructs or Biblical instructs about forgiveness, many of us have not fully deconstructed or established forgiveness within the context of our boundaries.  Hence, we are blinded by the platitudinal “I love yous” than we are guided by or responsive to the genuine acts of love.  In lieu of this, we often forget our standards or boundaries because we believe the words more than we require the actions that depict or is a direct result of love.   Thus, when “loved ones” overstep boundaries in ways that offend us at our core, for example public and/or private humiliation that causes shame, we latch on to the nice sentiments that follow the offence without having or being given the room to have a real discussion about the offence itself.  Either this, or we operate in silent forgiveness without the involvement of the “offender” and return to the relationship as normal; thereby leaving room for an inevitable repeat offence and ultimately secret resentment to set in.  Herein lies the dangers of forgiveness.

“Forgiveness Monitors” (FM), argue that forgiveness is not about the “offender” but more about the “offended.”  For them, this means that there is no point harbouring unforgiveness because there is more harm to be done when you do that.  If we operate with the definition of forgiveness purported earlier, then I accept this as one component of the forgiveness truth.  The problem, however, is that almost everyone with whom I come into contact has their own interpretation of how forgiveness should manifest.  For example, if you say you forgive someone but refuse any type of interaction, that somehow signals to FM your failure to forgive, thereby rendering you unforgiving.  Although many won’t have access to what is happening with your mental state and your feeling toward the person with whom you have no contact, FMs do not believe your assertion of forgiveness to be true.  But is that so important to the forgiveness process?  I say no.  The danger of forgiveness, in this instance, lie in you seeking to validate your forgiveness against the backdrop of someone else’ forgiveness interpretation, instead of your unique mental wellness requirement. 

I assert that although forgiveness has one body, it wears many outfits.  Therefore, a person’s lack of contact is not always an indicator of unforgiveness.  So too is the person’s return (to the relationship after an offence against them) not always a true indicator of forgiveness.

Many of us operate with boundaries, or at the very least, aspire to.  In other words, there are certain things that warrant walking away from and never looking back without ill will.  Even while having those boundaries that may or may not be clearly established, we tend to operate against what we know to be right for us, because we do not want to be alone, are unilaterally working to sustain the relationship, or we have simply forgiven the “offender” and have ignored the standards we have set for ourselves.  In situations like this, we believe it more important to please, praise, or love others more than we do ourselves.  Maybe this is the real outfit of forgiveness, regardless of the ensuing detriment of repeat offence, which is usually more potent than the time before.  The danger in forgiving here (what others require of us in the forgiveness space) is we may lose ourselves and our value is diminished, which leads to self-loathing or something more sinister.

The minute we establish a bond with someone, we open ourselves up to being hurt or wronged. Despite our best efforts, we have also been guilty of hurting the people we love. During the hurt stages, the revelation of who a person is NOT to us is revealed.  In which case, we are forced to let our forgiveness modality take the natural progression, which may ultimately mean cutting ties, for good.  But forgiveness is not so clear cut.  Forgiveness requires the processing of the offence, which we may not be able to do in an “appropriate” timeframe. There are times when life’s occurrences require us to compartmentalize, and it is months after that we can process the offence for what it was.  In that case, the appearance of forgiveness when the event first happened was not that, it was simply the shelving of it to deal with other life’s challenges that may have been misread by both you and the person who is guilty of the offence.  Notably, to truly forgive requires deep thought, because a part of true forgiveness is the understanding of what happened and the decision on how you will proceed to honor yourself; this is applicable to both the offender and the offended.

The danger of forgiveness occurs when we allow a person who has wronged us back into our lives/sacred space, and the offense is repeated.  For most, the shame of finding themselves at square one often prevents us admitting to others and to ourselves that we were wrong in our assessment to allow them back in, so we remain in the space and suffer in silence.  Thus, the forgiveness we extended in the first place is slowly replaced by resentment.

Don’t do that!

My observation is that the person you are required to forgive is the person to whom much is given.  When others “offend” you, it is easier to brush it off and carry on as normal.  It seems easier to get over anger than it is to navigate hurt; the masses say only those you let in can truly hurt you.

Ultimately, everyone must decide how to proceed after their own unique scenarios. Folks struggle with maintaining relationships while honouring themselves.  The truth is, the closer you are to someone the more information you give them to hurt you, vice versa.  It follows that forgiveness plays an important role in how those relationships progress.  As important as forgiveness is to ourselves and to others, there is no point in the expressions of forgiveness if we have not assessed the situation and honestly decided on how to proceed within boundaries. The danger in forgiveness, therefore, lies in a blind return with little or no consideration of a repeat offence especially when there is the lack of accountability.  The danger in forgiveness comes from allowing society to determine the attire of your forgiveness.  The danger also comes from a lack of self-awareness or a dishonesty about our role in the offence. In other words, forgiveness, with the intention of carrying on as normal, requires discussion, (re)establishment of boundaries, and self-respect, which will have long-term benefits to all parties involved.  The opposite of this is also true:  you may need to forgive someone silently and from a distance.

He is huMAN; let him cry!

I happened upon a snippet of a poem by T’Sleeveless on Instagram, called “Teach A Boy To Cry”.  The few lines I heard caught my attention, so I went in search and found it in its entirety.   The poem, so raw and beautifully executed, articulates what I have always argued to be how most men feel about the expectations that society has thrust upon them.   Ultimately, they all want the same thing – allowance to be and feel how they do at their core, without being labelled weak or unmanly.  

Needless to say, many of the ways that men have been taught to love and execute masculinity are problematic and toxic with devastating outcomes; this leads to a vicious cycle which is passed on from generation to generation.  The perpetuation of toxic masculinity is rooted in the fear of being chastised and seen in a manner that renders them anything other than what society instructs.  Essentially, toxic masculinity dictates how he should be:

  1. He has been told that he MUST be strong – that crying is weak. When he suffers loss of any kind, he should “man up” and avoid vulnerability, which include withholding his tears and any other manifestation of pain that could be deemed as feminine energy.  Because of this, men are forced to perform strength through acts of violence, caused by the lack of problem-solving skills.

The outcome is that he ends up with unresolved emotions/issues with pent up anger that is usually released in less than favourable places and ways.

  •  He has been taught that a woman’s love must be accompanied by sexual favours.  If it isn’t, his interest wanes, and he quickly move on to the woman who will fulfill this expectation.

The outcome is that he ends up with transactional relationships with females that are typically void of real friendships, or worst, he ends up contributing to the rape culture.

  • He has been told that to have one woman is weak.

The outcome is that many men have associated their self-worth to the number of sexual partners.  In his mind, once he “gets it”, his self-worth increases and so does his value among men, so he continues on this trend, thereby decreasing his lifespan.

The outcome is that he is empty and lacking real support with foundational value from the relationships he pursues.

  • He has been told that to treat the woman as equal contributors to life in general is weak; he learns that the woman is beneath him and that she should occupy a certain place and operate in specific gender roles, which ultimately renders her less than him.  The outcome is he continues to perpetuate misogynistic ideologies in the workplace, among his peers and at home.  Ultimately, women typically come to their own realization about what is acceptable, in society in general, but especially in relationships and end up leaving, if not physically then mentally and he ends up leaving from relationship to relationship.

Despite what he has been taught, and how much he tries to fit in so that he is playing his role well, those of us who pay attention know that the man who operates in awareness of himself, despite societal dictates, feels deeply and wants what the rest of us wants – to be at peace and to have a life free of drama – one that is consistent and stable – and we are not talking about a life where women stay hush about indiscretions (on the job, in his personal or public life) and does not hold him accountable.  They, like their female counterparts, want to be seen AND accepted for who they truly are, without the emotional restrictions that have been placed on them.

T’sleeveless, who describes himself as a “mental health poet,” explores the male dynamic by highlighting the notion that most men are afraid of opening themselves up and showing the pains they experience out of fear of how they will be perceived and received.  That, for me was the thesis of his piece and central to the toxic masculinity ideology.  He asserts that the “manufactured masculinity,” while dangerous, is what is expected but the effects of which are lonely because while society judges what men have become, no one deconstructs how they have become who they are.  He further states that the man has become accustomed to using jokes as a conduit for his pain because his pain “has to be transformed into an art form to be worthy of observation.”  Men have been taught that pain is private and to outwardly express pain is a sign of weakness.  Because of this, the man’s go-to expression for any type of emotional/mental discomfort is to engage in a physical war or to suppress how he feels from fear of being ridiculed.  As T’Sleeveless points out, “nobody taught the boy to cry, but they taught him how to fight.”  This observation of toxic masculinity is seen in every space the male occupies; for example, he teaches his sons what he knows, and the conversation among his friends and colleagues perpetuates this dangerous narrative.  Furthermore, women end up expecting this “strong man” ideology without understanding its dangers until she herself suffers at his hands or she ends up raising a son to become a man she would never date, in her quest to raise him to be “strong.”

As T’Sleeveless aptly puts it, “everybody judges the weak man, and nobody checks on the strong one.”   The conundrum seems to be the ways in which to change the mindset of all in the face of what is generally accepted to be masculine:  He doesn’t cry; he fights.  He doesn’t constructively address his losses, he quickly moves on from them.  He doesn’t partake in any activity that may render him feminine, he subscribes to gender roles, even when they do not make sense for his unique situation.  He suppresses emotions in his effort to appear tough; though he yearns unconditional love, he confuses the act of sex as a care indicator, and the list goes on.

Who then is the strong man, and who is weak?

Like the poet, Latteras R. Whitfield from The Dear Future Wifey Podcast bore his soul by highlighting his recent heartbreak and its impact on him, which he openly said was caused by a failed relationship.  The episode, which has been viewed approximately two hundred thousand times by people all over the world, garnered hundreds of comments from men and women who applauded him for his refreshingly honest bravery (he openly cried during the podcast) by thanking him for using his personal situation to bring awareness to what men experience in REAL LIFE, which many viewers (male and female) believe will encourage more males to express the truth of what they go through.  One of the toxic traits highlighted from the comment section is that most men, instead of being honest about the impact of a breakup (to themselves and others), would instead, quickly replace that pain/hurt with someone else, which many have admitted to be a lonely and dark space riddled with the lack of self-esteem and self-control, which many have also admitted is less than what they make it to be.

Hopefully, as T’Sleevless through his poetry, and Latteras R. Whitfield through his podcast, continue to shed light on the TRUE experiences of most men, we will see a shift in the expression of masculinity to that which is more positive and indicative of that which will allow us to redirect our thoughts on what it means for the men to be masculine.  As I imagine it, a man who operates in his awareness of his pain and struggles, regardless of his orientation, and is not afraid or ashamed to acknowledge them by crying if he needs to, and is working on making himself a better version of himself for himself, his family and the wider society and one who doesn’t have to hide his pain, needs and desires because of an ascribed gender expectation, is a “strong man.”  The man who respects himself, his family, and the wider society and who is not contributing to the demise of an individual or community is a strong man.  The man who is not afraid of his tears, despite what he has been forced to believe, is huMAN.  For this to happen, however, there needs to be male/female collaboration toward a changed mindset, which may also include deconstructing the notion of toxic femininity and the ways in which this works in perpetuating toxic masculinity.

KNOW yourself so you can “NO!” them.

“You are a whore!” 

I guess this was her way of operating in her flying monkey role; she was on the attack and wanted to hurt me, in any way possible.

Though my interaction with this woman was very minimal, to say the least, she felt it necessary to do so, at the instruct of someone else.  The first time she attempted to define me, I laughed because I knew this was part of her continued efforts to denigrate and frustrate me.  But it wasn’t a real laugh.  It was the kinda laugh you do when you are beside yourself with shock and anger.  At the time, I didn’t understand how any of this worked, because I hadn’t begun my learning journey about things of this nature.    I just figured that this is what many women do, unfortunately, when we want to hurt another woman; many use the vilest words to attack the target, especially against the thing that they assume she holds dear.  Needless to say, by dictionary definition and by societal standards nor the standards I set for myself, a whore I am not.

Be that as it may, one of the things I have learned from being the target of a long-term smear campaign is that you must be resolute in who you are and stand firm in that.  A smear campaign, by design, will break you if you do not truly KNOW who you are and how to operate in that knowledge of who you ARE.  The beautiful thing about coming to that level of self-awareness is that once you are there, you are UNSHAKEABLE and UNBREAKABLE.  But, it takes work, which involves uncomfortable honesty and which can only occur from deep introspection, self-evaluation, and acceptance.  Once this occurs, you will have come to terms with every aspect of who you are, which involves the good, the not-so-good, and the bad.  This is typically done when a person wants to improve themselves and ultimately be better to themselves and the people in their lives; it is also done by those who are serious about validating who they already know that they truly are, despite what people try to make them out to be.  Be mindful that both reasons can exist simultaneously.

For those of us who are truly interested in being “better” to ourselves and to others, the process of getting to a space of self-awareness is a complexly interesting and scary one, because, in the end, we don’t always like what we see (arguably, no one is all good, and no one is all bad).  Furthermore, most of us are also not sure what to do with what we discover.  Now, that is where the real work begins, regardless of where our discovery falls on either end of the spectrum (good or bad).  Let’s think about this before we throw it out the window.  For example, the good that we may have discovered may force us to walk away from situations that we deem to be our comfort zone, the same way the bad may dictate that we “fix” ourselves so that we can sustain that which is important to us.  None of it is easy.  To say that we are all flawed is like saying we are all human beings – we know this; they are one and the same.  The problem is that some of our “flaws” are more detrimental to ourselves and to others than the discovery of a “simple” issue.

The point is, regardless of what happens after self-discovery, it is important for us to KNOW who we are, that when the agenda-fulfilling among us attempt to incorrectly define us in order to hurt us, we are not fazed because we either KNOW exactly who we are (good or bad), or we are on our way to self-betterment.  Let’s face it, liars KNOW that they are liars, and a thief KNOWS that he/she is a thief.  While they likely will not readily admit it, they KNOW, even while not understanding the “why”.  On a more complex note, there are other traits within us that require digging (meticulously scrutinizing) for us to truly KNOW what defines us.

The benefit of the knowing process is that though some of us may be exactly what they say we are, we would have already gotten to a state of self-acceptance, so it cannot be weaponized.  It is my belief that for us to address a thing, we must first accept it to be that thing. For example, even if you are, in fact, a “whore” or any other unpleasant definitions that they attempt to let stick, no one can use it against you, because you would have begun the process/work of delving into that specific thing (good or bad) in a way to understand and establish several things, such as:

  • why am I the way I am?
  • Is being this way beneficial to my growth?
  • Is being this way harmful to the people in my space?
  • Am I harming myself by being this way?
  • What steps do I need to take to depart from my ways?
  • What steps do I need to take to enhance my ways?
  • What do I need to do to commit to my personal growth?


In the end, when we KNOW who we are, no one can define us or use what they don’t know or know about us as a weapon against us.  Even if they do, we will be able to reject all notions, which doesn’t always require “noise.”

Shhh! This is PURE MATH.

The pandemic did many things that hurt, but it also provided access we wouldn’t normally have.  For me, I was able to have intermittent fly-on-the-wall experiences with my daughter’s classroom shenanigans and serious discussions.  Having to go to work and school from home gave many parents that type of access, regardless of how big or small the home space was.

In my case, the offspring decided that she would “attend school” at the dining table.  This was part of her way of breaking up the monotony of always being in her bedroom.  It worked.  Except, there would obviously be times when I was in the kitchen preparing breakfast, etc. while class was in session.  While I tried my best to not “be present,” there were times when topics of discussion among teachers and students would pique my interest, and I would intentionally pay attention.   From time to time, my observations would form part of a discussion that either I or my daughter would later initiate about whatever the topic was.

In my usual fashion, I gingerly navigated the pots and pans to minimize the disturbance to her “classroom.”   Although my daughter was having a robust discussion in English with her teacher, I realized, on this particular occasion, I could not grasp anything they were saying.  Despite me having mastered English – the concept, the analogies, the examples, and the problems being presented in the discourse were way over my head.  There was nothing in my degrees that prepared me for understanding the banter between pupil and teacher; I was out of my element.

They were having a Pure Math discussion/debate.

The context in which I operated is simple.  In high school, a few decades ago, I, along with a few other students, was approved to do the Basic Math external examinations, while other students were doing General Math.  The difference between the two is vast from my perspective.  In layman’s term (which is the best way I can explain it), being approved for basic math meant you were, for whatever reason, math-averse/dense (or dunce); while general math meant that you were able to grasp major concepts with greater ease.  Us basic math students could add, subtract, divide, multiply, and do simple worded equations that didn’t necessarily require formula application that the math gurus would have mastered.  Even so, I ended up failing. 

As I listened to my daughter banter with her teacher, whom I could tell was delighted about the exchange (every teacher wants the student who is excited about learning), it became pretty evident to me that I did not possess the brain capacity to understand.  If this wasn’t a metaphor for life, I don’t know what is.

HEAR ME OUT, PLEASE:

We often find ourselves trying to interject our ideologies in situations that are beyond our capability.  The fact that we may possess the gift of gab or just the mere ability to speak doesn’t automatically qualify us to provide feedback on every issue.  There are some things, that regardless of our educational achievements or proximity to the thing, we simply do not have the brain capacity to understand.  

This also extends to the validation we often seek from those we have no business seeking validation.  We crave the approval/assessment of our “pure math” problem by someone who barely grasped “basic math.” 

“STOP IT! GET SOME HELP!”

The simple truth is that some person’s capacity to deconstruct a situation can only occur from a basic math perspective, when the situation, and what it presents, is occurring in the “pure math” space.    This could be for a myriad of reasons to include the following:

  1. Lack of context:  If we do not have the necessary information, it is difficult to understand what is happening in the situational equation and therefore we won’t be able to provide useful feedback necessary to solve the problem or make an effective assessment.
  • Personal biases:   How we feel (attitudes/beliefs, etc.) about a person, place, or thing (whether intentional or unintentional), often prevents us from accessing that fair space; thus, when we interject our thoughts and/or opinions, it is often occurring from a limited and/or compromised perspective. 
  • Dishonesty:  a person who is naturally dishonest and operating from their own agenda-fulfilling space is unable to effectively contribute.  The conundrum is that another person who is operating with a basic math brain capacity may think that the person who articulates well (but also has a basic math understanding) is offering sound advice solely on the premise on who they perceive that person to be.  So they are both operating with a basic math background, except one is posing as having pure math understanding.  Make sense?
  • Lack of awareness/exposure:  if we don’t have access to a thing, have not been made aware of a thing, have not gone in search of the REAL truth about a thing, or attempt a knowledge-based deconstruction of a thing, we cannot speak on or assess such a thing.  This is true regardless of who we think we are against the backdrop of our “achievements”.  Our lack of awareness/exposure of that thing makes our understanding of that thing (pure math) tantamount to having a basic math education.  We remain CLUELESS.
  • Do not possess the natural propensity:  There are some things that are just not for us; it is as simple as that.  Some people can draw, some can sing, some can dance, some are gifted engineers, some are great orators, and the list goes on.  Some people are naturally great at some things, while others find that same thing the most difficult thing to grasp.  It is just the nature of human beings.  We all serve different purpose.  So what is “pure math” for some, is “basic math” for another; and what is “basic math” for one is “pure math” for another.

THINK ON THESE THINGS!

Many of us are falsely led to believe that the level of our education, access to resources, or status in life/society, gives us the automatic edge to effectively participate in every discourse.  IT DOES NOT.  I can’t say this enough:  CONTEXT IS IMPORTANT TO CRITIQUE.

There are many “Pure math” instances in life that our circumstance (background, dishonesty, lack of awareness/education/understanding, lack of context and personal biases, etc.) may disqualify us from speaking on/about/for/with, etc.  This include ANY SITUATION THAT WE ARE NOT PRIVY TO (parenting, your friend’s marriage, introversion, your neighbour’s relationship, your co-worker’s homelife, abuse patterns, narcissistic abuse, mental illness, religion, the Bible, relationship dynamics, etc.).  This list is obviously not exhaustive since no one tells anyone everything.

It’s like being given an assignment with two parts.  The lecturer tells the student to read the case study (part A) and then answer the questions that follow (part B).  Even though the questions are written in a language that the student has mastered, he/she is unable to provide USEFUL feedback because the student DID NOT READ THE CASE STUDY.  The student can make something up that someone else who also has no context will believe to be true, solely because they sound good saying it; But guess what happens in the end?  The student gets a failing grade from the teacher.

Even though my offspring lets me know that Pure Math is not as hard as I think it is, I am still not able to participate in Pure Math discourse nor can I solve the equations because I have not done anything to access and/or understand its abstract concepts nor have I made any attempts to know anything more than its name – that it exists (or does it?).  Plus, PURE MATH isn’t really my thing, and it sure aint my business. LIFE IS EXACTLY LIKE THIS.  When we insert our limited understanding into things that are obviously bigger than us, we exacerbate situations. Therefore, let’s learn to stay on the side-lines and listen to those pure math conversations/scenarios, etc. that our basic math exposure and/or brain capacity prevents us from actively participating in.  Maybe we can learn something in the end, or maybe not.  Either way, hush!

GET A “PEACE”….. PLEASE!

The pandemic did more than wreak havoc.  It changed my trajectory and forced me to operate outside of my usual modus operandi – to take control of my potential and create according to God’s instruct.  With this, the experiences of the pandemic were translated to about thirteen pandemic-related poems.  At last minute, I decided that these poems would not be included in my first anthology but would, instead, be placed in a separate publication.  This was me, once again, following a leading greater than myself.  I listened.  In March 2021 my first anthology of poems was published.

Fast forward, to June 2022, and I published my very first book of not-so-short stories; seriously though, they are more like five novellas in one book, since the stories range from 50 – 60 pages each.  Peace Hunting, as it is called, came about because I had a premonition – a leading – a nudge – a voice that instructed me to write poetry-infused short stories chronicling the pandemic, in some way.  I had no idea the direction the stories would take.  At first, I thought I would have written ten stories, but then I decided that five would be enough since my imagination was leading me down a different road than what categorizes “short story.”   Interestingly, I didn’t look at any of the poems while writing the stories, but as fate would have it, they somehow fit, and the book, PEACE HUNTING, was born. 

One of the overarching themes about the book is each character’s quest to find some sort of solace – to become better human beings – to escape their old self/life and pivot in a better state of being.  Simply put, they were all searching for peace of some kind.  This notion of peace hunting is something that I have also observed in real life.  Everywhere you turn, every guru who seeks to motivate and change lives, every human who is going through the hardships and the challenges of the pandemic, are all advocating the same thing:

WE WANT PEACE!  WE WANT PEACE!!  WE WANT PEACE!!!

Admittedly, this is something that I have been advocating for myself in the last four years – relentlessly so.  As I discussed the title with the team a few months ago, it occurred to me that the most suited would be PEACE HUNTING, since I, too have been talking about it, advocating for it, and trying to live it.  Even so, what made the title choice even more serendipitous is the fact that one of the poems, written a little over two years prior, “Force Faith” actually has the phrase “Peace Hunting,” which is the core of that piece.  This, I only realized after I had decided on the name and was finalizing the book.   Amazing!!!!

As I promote this passion project, I encourage all readers of this blog AND the book to find ways to navigate those “life-disrupters” and “pleasure-hurters[1]” that interfere with your peace.  The book’s preface provides an in-depth explanation of peace-hunting as a concept; this (preface) can be read in its entirety on  https://www.amazon.com/Peace-Hunting-not-so-short-self-discovery-survival/

Get this:  In our own peace-quest, we must also be mindful that we, too, are sometimes causing grief to others and disrupting peace.  Therefore, it is important to TRUE peace-hunting to introspect as well as change course and become better to others, so that they too can experience the PEACE THAT WE ALL SEEK AND NEED! 

NamaStacey.

[1] From the poem, “From Fear to Hope” in the book PEACE HUNTING by Stacey A Palmer

NUFF SELF-RESPECT!

The “respect debate” is an ongoing one that continues to evoke passionate responses from us, once we feel like we are advocating for what we should accept from others as well as how we are required to treat others.  However, the conversation is not as loud when we should advocate how we should treat OURSELVES.

Respect begins with SELF. 

Recently, I placed myself in a situation where I interacted with a group for about 45 minutes.  Prior to entering that space, my gut told me that I shouldn’t have, but I convinced myself that this was the “right” thing to do and went against what my inner voice (that which prays and serves God) forewarned.  The second I exited that scenario, I knew it.  I felt it loudly and I heard it as clear as day:  “YOU JUST DISRESPECTED YOURSELF.”  I disrespected myself when I agreed to be there and further disrespected myself when I showed up.

Admittedly, I was disappointed with myself, because I had no one to blame but myself for going against my discernment, which had, to that point, never steered me wrong.  I was also disappointed because I had prior knowledge about the group by virtue of lived experiences, and I did not let that be my guide and proceeded just the same.

I started to think of the many ways I could have foregone the interaction and things I could have said to not have been a part of something that I KNEW, before going in, I shouldn’t have.  I soon let it go because there really is no point belaboring the past for longer than it takes to garner a lesson from a situation.  For me, the lesson came almost immediately, and after a day of wallowing, I let it go – with my lesson in tow, of course!

My cautionary tale is that we must learn to respect ourselves by loving ourselves enough to say “no”, even when “no” is the unpopular thing to say.  Most times, people do not have enough CONTEXT to scrutinize our “no”, so we shouldn’t let someone else’ opinion about our decision guide how we operate.  Ultimately, our “no” may not make sense to others, and it doesn’t have to.  Once we are sure that we are operating in righteousness, which include, self-love, and self-respect, we shouldn’t concern ourselves about the noise of the outside world.

We all have standards that we have set for ourselves.  I argue, however, that the most significant and most basic standard we SHOULD set for ourselves is to TRULY LOVE ourselves.  To do so, we must understand what that looks like. 

For instance, not every situation that presents itself as an opportunity is that.  I have learned, first-hand, that the beauty of a closed door – even if we close it ourselves – often shows up as blessing.  In our quest, we must be reminded that toxicity does not always present itself as such.  Toxicity speaks well.  Toxicity makes promises to fulfill our needs.  It dresses well, and it presents itself in group think, sweet talk and pretty packages – toxicity is often well-liked.  To deliberately expose ourselves to toxicity, because of what it promises IS, in fact, disrespecting ourselves.

Respecting oneself is applicable across every single interaction we will have had in our lifetime.  When we disrespect ourselves by “showing up” to situations that do not serve us, we are teaching people how to disrespect us.  Be reminded, though, that “showing up” is not only specific to actual events, but giving people access to treat us in ways that go against who we are in Christ.  We are encouraged to stop letting greed, lust, lack, fear, status, etc., force us to disrespect ourselves.

We also disrespect ourselves when we don’t trust ourselves enough to honor our God-given talents to serve in ways that honor Christ…. But this is for a separate blog post.

Nuff  (SELF) respect!