I have a number of bones to pick with my stepson, Gillman, and now, with the recent indication that he’s on the war path once again, I feel a need to shore up my defences by providing my side of the story.
I know that many of his outbursts originate from insecurity, however much of these stem from feelings of entitlement, and I know that at this time in particular, since he has not been successful in achieving his goal of landing a full time University teaching position, that he will look for someone to blame... someone he can lash out at in a way that makes him feel powerful and generates sympathy from unsuspecting people in his periphery. And so he continues with his age old tactic of driving the wedge between his mother and I deeper and deeper.
I'm not worried about Gillman’s partner Pam, trust me, she's one tough cookie, he'd be hard pressed to try the suicide card on her-- she'd show him the door !! I do worry about his step daughter, Emma, though-- a very soft person who regards Gillman as her dad. I know that he loves her, butt I also know that he loves his own mother, and yet this didn't stop him from demeaning her-- making her grovel so shamefully. I worry that Emma being so much like his mother in personality will make it hard for Gillman to refrain from targeting her, especially if she starts to show teenage rebellion at a time when he feels insecure. The one good thing is that he presently works in another province and so travels back and forth every other weekend. However the job is just for a year, and the year is almost up, and so his insecurity is likely mounting.
As for Gillman's feelings of entitlement, my perspective is that this has much to do with his mothers “overcompensating” for his threats of suicide that began when he was around just 4 years of age. Whatever “seemed” to be the issue when he was verbally attacking and hitting her (in his younger years), if she ever had begun to challenge and reprimand him, it was cut short the minute he began pulling out the "suicide" card-- a tactic that I saw bring her to her knees EVERY time!! So she learned to avoid the reprimanding part of parenting as best she could, and one way was to simply agree with him on whatever had set off his anger (right or wrong), she simply learned to steer him away from mentioning suicide, although it didn’t work all the time. It wasn’t until I came into the picture and began being the one to “reprimand” Gillman where need be. The biggest problem with that however, was he was 13... the bad behaviour was well established. Most of the time when it came to reprimanding Gillman, it was to step in the middle as he verbally attacked his mother. And don’t get me wrong, I know the difference between regular teenage “acting out” and “abuse”. Gillman and I on many occasions had quarrels that were perfectly okay/normal, and in fact I encouraged level headed, passionate... albeit “controlled” arguments— the bantering/negotiating back and forth that I saw as part of child/adolescent development, especially since our world is such that these skills are beneficial. Keep in mind though, that part of the bantering involves parent and child respecting one another as they put forth their differing views. Both my son and daughter had a very early introduction to this style of negotiation, and there were many times that I conceded or at least bent in their favor. There were times however, that I had to lay down the law— no is NO!! In the case of Gillman and his mother, there was no respectable bantering on his part, and mostly grovelling on her part.
And so this brings me to the profession that Gillman chose-- Philosophy. And so I did some googling and found hordes of articles relating to discrimination against women in the field of Philosophy. Note the following excerpts from just 2 of the articles:
Perhaps, by putting Gillman to task ... and by revealing the truth and standing up for myself, the abuse will end. And if by chance it doesn’t work that way with him, than at least I feel better for having put it out there, it gives me a sense of peace knowing that other have an opportunity to be forewarned. I’m not worried that what I say here will have an effect on Gillman’s ability to find a University Teaching position, because from what I’ve read out there from other’s he did have the opportunity to teach as part time professor, he has a long way to go in learning the fine art of teaching. And honestly , doesn’t it make sense that the best teachers are the ones who learned to be respectful to others at an early age.
I found this interesting portion of a comment from an article, Tell Us How to Fix the Lack of Diversity in Philosophy Journal :
I know that many of his outbursts originate from insecurity, however much of these stem from feelings of entitlement, and I know that at this time in particular, since he has not been successful in achieving his goal of landing a full time University teaching position, that he will look for someone to blame... someone he can lash out at in a way that makes him feel powerful and generates sympathy from unsuspecting people in his periphery. And so he continues with his age old tactic of driving the wedge between his mother and I deeper and deeper.
I'm not worried about Gillman’s partner Pam, trust me, she's one tough cookie, he'd be hard pressed to try the suicide card on her-- she'd show him the door !! I do worry about his step daughter, Emma, though-- a very soft person who regards Gillman as her dad. I know that he loves her, butt I also know that he loves his own mother, and yet this didn't stop him from demeaning her-- making her grovel so shamefully. I worry that Emma being so much like his mother in personality will make it hard for Gillman to refrain from targeting her, especially if she starts to show teenage rebellion at a time when he feels insecure. The one good thing is that he presently works in another province and so travels back and forth every other weekend. However the job is just for a year, and the year is almost up, and so his insecurity is likely mounting.
As for Gillman's feelings of entitlement, my perspective is that this has much to do with his mothers “overcompensating” for his threats of suicide that began when he was around just 4 years of age. Whatever “seemed” to be the issue when he was verbally attacking and hitting her (in his younger years), if she ever had begun to challenge and reprimand him, it was cut short the minute he began pulling out the "suicide" card-- a tactic that I saw bring her to her knees EVERY time!! So she learned to avoid the reprimanding part of parenting as best she could, and one way was to simply agree with him on whatever had set off his anger (right or wrong), she simply learned to steer him away from mentioning suicide, although it didn’t work all the time. It wasn’t until I came into the picture and began being the one to “reprimand” Gillman where need be. The biggest problem with that however, was he was 13... the bad behaviour was well established. Most of the time when it came to reprimanding Gillman, it was to step in the middle as he verbally attacked his mother. And don’t get me wrong, I know the difference between regular teenage “acting out” and “abuse”. Gillman and I on many occasions had quarrels that were perfectly okay/normal, and in fact I encouraged level headed, passionate... albeit “controlled” arguments— the bantering/negotiating back and forth that I saw as part of child/adolescent development, especially since our world is such that these skills are beneficial. Keep in mind though, that part of the bantering involves parent and child respecting one another as they put forth their differing views. Both my son and daughter had a very early introduction to this style of negotiation, and there were many times that I conceded or at least bent in their favor. There were times however, that I had to lay down the law— no is NO!! In the case of Gillman and his mother, there was no respectable bantering on his part, and mostly grovelling on her part.
And so this brings me to the profession that Gillman chose-- Philosophy. And so I did some googling and found hordes of articles relating to discrimination against women in the field of Philosophy. Note the following excerpts from just 2 of the articles:
'Philosophy is for posh, white boys with trust funds' – why are there so few women?:
Then I learned facts – that women are only 17% of full-time academic staff in philosophy in the US (the UK’s a bit better with 29%). And I learned that this was worse than in most fields of science, where gender disparities have long been a source of concern.
Does Philosophy Have a Problem with Women?:
Seven years ago, Haslanger, wrote: “In my experience it is very hard to find a place in philosophy that isn’t actively hostile towards women and minorities, or at least assumes that a successful philosopher should look and act like a (traditional, white) man.”We'd have to wholly ignorant to believe that certain fields don't attract "unwanted" persons who fully intend to use their position of power to abuse— take pedophile priests as just one example. Of course that’s not to say that all priests are “willingly” abusive, however we can’t ignore the fact that the profession has drawn some horrible people , and that greater society needs to be vigilant.
Perhaps, by putting Gillman to task ... and by revealing the truth and standing up for myself, the abuse will end. And if by chance it doesn’t work that way with him, than at least I feel better for having put it out there, it gives me a sense of peace knowing that other have an opportunity to be forewarned. I’m not worried that what I say here will have an effect on Gillman’s ability to find a University Teaching position, because from what I’ve read out there from other’s he did have the opportunity to teach as part time professor, he has a long way to go in learning the fine art of teaching. And honestly , doesn’t it make sense that the best teachers are the ones who learned to be respectful to others at an early age.
I found this interesting portion of a comment from an article, Tell Us How to Fix the Lack of Diversity in Philosophy Journal :
Phil Tanny| :
... Professional philosophy reminds me somewhat of the Catholic clergy. Very intelligent, well educated, highly articulate, and of generally good intentions. But becoming steadily less relevant over time, lacking an ability to truly connect with the population it seeks to serve.AND Phil saying “generally”!! My Tou Sense worth: the Catholic Church promotes Misogyny in our world, and their true goal is not so much to serve the people as to subjugate them ... and women in particular ... into serving THEM.... no “ generally” good intentions there!! So the Church promots “tithing”— believers should pay 10% of the money they earn?! WHAT?! So the rich benefit yet again and the poor are held to task. The Catholic Church needs a serious overhaul, they too promote “entitlement” among males, and that is why to this day, so much injustice is found in religious dogma... and philosophy!!
No comments:
Post a Comment