Learn how to accept all of yourself, your past and your future

The self-acceptance process is a method for accepting the parts of yourself that you may feel bad about. Think of some part or aspect of yourself that you don't like--especially some aspect that you can't change immediately. Use the following process to increase your self-acceptance of that part. Even if you do choose to change that part, gaining acceptance of it as it is now is an important first step to change. The first thing that Alcoholics Anonymous requires of new members is for them to admit that they are alcoholics.

Step 1: CHOOSE TO VALUE TRUTH ABOVE ALL--Including honor and pride

The words "pride" and "honor" can mean many things. In certain contexts they can be functional concepts that enhance our lives. The idea of taking pride in our work and caring about what we do are examples of using the concept of "pride" functionally. Similarly, honoring or specially recognizing someone because they have achieved an important goal can be functional.

However, placing values best confined to specific situations above more important values can lead to dysfunctional results. When we put our honor, pride, or any other self-image above the truth, then we are inviting disaster--in the form of guilt hammering at our peace. Trying to drown guilt with alcohol, work-ahol, or play-ahol instead of facing the truth are dysfunctional results of putting pride above truth. Being completely honest with yourself is the first step toward self-acceptance--even when it means facing the worst truths about yourself.

Step 2:  EXPLORE THE SELF-EXPECTATIONS--SELF-PERCEPTIONS GAP

Ask yourself questions like, "What do I expect myself to be like?" "How does that differ from how I am?" and "How are my beliefs, thoughts, and actions different from what I expect them to be?"Explore conflicting expectations from different subparts. You may find conflicting answers to these questions from different parts of yourself. One part may expect you to make a lot of money, while another part may think that money is not important. In other words, you may have conflicting expectations from different parts of yourself.

Step 3:  EXPLORE THE UNDERLYING CAUSES--Knowing "WHY" increases acceptance                                                                                                                             One way we give more control to our healthy parts is to understand our dysfunctional parts better. We can question and change these beliefs and learn more functional beliefs. Some important questions to understand why we keep performing unproductive habits include:

1	When does it occur? What situations and stimuli regularly precede it?
2	What thoughts and behaviors occur?
3	What thoughts and images are associated with these thoughts?
4	What overall themes, beliefs, or assumptions are behind these thoughts or actions?
5	What internal or external outcomes may be reinforcing the thoughts and behaviors?
6	What are the historical causes of the habits? (Eg. Parental or peer modeling, instructions, reinforcements, etc.)

Step 4: USE HIGHER BELIEFS TO REDUCE THE EXPECTATIONS--PERCEPTIONS GAP

If two lower courts conflict over federal law, then the conflict is referred to a higher court. Eventually the case may go to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court relies upon the U.S. Constitution as the ultimate code of law.

The same principle applies to resolving conflicts between lower parts of ourselves. We can choose to make our Higher Selves our Supreme Courts. We can give our Higher Selves this authority by choosing to resolve inner conflicts with questions like, "Which alternative will create the most happiness for me and others?" or "Which is the most honest?" "Which will lead to the most growth?" Our "Constitution" consists of values and beliefs such as these. (If you have not done so, make your own list of higher principles from earlier chapters.)

For every old or dysfunctional belief, question it, confront it,
explain it, or persuade it with a more powerful Higher Self belief.

We cannot unlearn old beliefs and habits. We can never entirely erase an old belief or habit, because we can never completely unlearn something we have learned any more than we can forget 2 + 2 = 4. However, we can get better control of these dysfunctional parts by (1) understanding them--especially their negative effects--and by (2) acting on messages from our healthier parts.

Accept the past as past--focus on the present and future. One client came in because he was almost 40 and had been in college for almost 20 years without ever completing all the courses he signed up for! He was intelligent, but had always lacked motivation. He typically set very high goals, and started semesters with a bang. If he had problems or lost interest, he would fall behind and then drop out when he was not making "A" grades. Many of his friends were professionals with high incomes and jobs he envied. He said, "I think I'm as smart as they are, but I've just wasted my life."

One thought that had haunted him for years was, "Look where I would be if I had just worked hard and finished college in my early twenties." This thought was so strong that it was a powerful impetus for his constant dropping out. He learned to replace that thought with a different point of view. He would put himself into the future 20 years, when he would be almost 60. He then asked himself, "How will I feel if I look back to the age I am now and say, 'If I had completed college then, look where I would be today'."

Whenever he would start to focus on the past missed opportunities, he would refocus on this new way of looking at the future instead. His new focus lite a fire under him. This was the first semester that he had ever completed all the classes he signed up for. Not only that, but he made good grades. He has since graduated and was completing his Master's degree the last time we met.

We are not exactly the same people we were in the past. One thing to remember when we beat ourselves up now for past actions is that we are not the same people that made the errors in the past. So, in a sense, we are blaming the wrong person. We have learned and changed since then, so why criticize someone that doesn't even exist anymore? Focusing on past mistakes (beyond what we can constructively learn from them) is totally unproductive.

Recognize positive aspects of yourself--including your goal of growth and your past growth. Review the sections on unconditional self-worth, your Higher Self, and the importance of measuring your life by how much you learn and grow. Focus on your ultimate concern of overall happiness, and adopt abundance motivation by being grateful for all that you have received. Identify past positive actions and aspects of yourself. Make a list of all the positives about you--as you are now.

Put this list in a prominent place and keep reminding yourself of these qualities. Convert these general ideas into clear visual images that exemplify these qualities. Never let yourself state negatives about yourself without also stating positive qualities.

Step 5: OVERCOME YOUR FEARS OF NEGATIVE LABELS

We can develop a huge fear about the truth behind a label. The fear of being labeled "stupid," "weird," "crazy," or any "whatsit" can be like a cancer eating away at our self-esteem. It can be a fear that others use to control us. It can prevent us from believing or doing many of the things that can help us grow and be happy.

One of my clients, a psychology graduate student, came in because he had low self-esteem and a combative relationship with a woman he loved. They got into arguments that started with mild disagreements, but quickly escalated into shouting matches or even physical brawls. He knew that he couldn't control his temper and suspected that it had something to do with his relationship with his father. He had tried to figure it out, but to no avail. Why did he always have to be right? Why was he so persistent and competitive--even over unimportant differences of opinion?

We explored his relationship with his father. His father was a brilliant scientist, had obtained a prestigious position at a very early age, and had achieved a great deal of recognition. But his father was very demanding. His father had hoped his son would someday become a great scientist. When my client was a boy, his father spent many hours training him to be a scientist.

Yet his father was impatient and short-tempered. Whenever his son couldn't grasp an idea quickly, he would use a negative label like "stupid." My client's mother was also very bright and had a doctorate. Intelligence and science were supremely important in his family.

 

       My client felt confused about his intelligence. Part of him believed he was intelligent. After all, he did well in school, and he thought that a high IQ ran in his family. But another part of him doubted his intelligence because his father had called him "stupid" all his life.When my client developed interests in art and psychology instead of "hard science," his father was furious and felt like a failure as a father. He told his son what a stupid choice he had made and nearly disowned him. His father was a role model of aggressive, dominating--even cruel--behavior. The goal was to win any conflict--no matter what the means or the cost. Even though my client was angry at his father, he admired him for his intelligence and accomplishments so much that part of him believed his father was right--he must be "stupid."

Yet being "smart"--even "brilliant"--was so important to him and his family, that he could not stand to think of himself as other than brilliant. He always had to be right--just like his father. To be wrong might imply that he was stupid (the ultimate sin). When a difference of opinion would arise with someone, he would either fight desperately to win and prove himself right or withdraw (out of fear of losing the other person's love.)

He, literally, didn't understand how to have a noncompetitive conversation over an issue and accept that two people could each have a legitimate point of view. He turned every discussion into a contest in which one person won and the other lost. His pride or self-image was at stake in every disagreement. This competitiveness undermined all of his relationships--especially those with women. Through self-exploration we had found that being thought "stupid" by himself or others was one of his worst fears in life. That was a major insight for him. But what could he do to overcome this fear?

Accept the implications of the worst possible self-label. Behind all of this competitiveness was his fear of a label. The idea of being stupid (or even not being highly intelligent) was about the worst possible self-label my client could think of.

We explored the origins of his fear. His family assumed that a person had to be intelligent to have any self-worth. To be accepted as a family member, a person had to be brilliant. He even said half-joking at one point, "I might as well be dead as be stupid."

We continued to explore his negative associations with the label "stupid." What if he really had a low IQ? What would his life be like? What would other people think of him and how would they react to him?

Then, I asked him to find scenarios of how he could still be a happy person even if his worst fear were true--even if he really had a low IQ. He faced his worst possible self-concept fear and found routes to happiness that were possible even with a low IQ. For example, even if he couldn't be a successful professional, he could still be happy as a carpenter.

He also confronted his belief that stupid people have no value with a higher belief that all people have value. Consequently, he found that he could still love and accept himself--even if he were to have a low IQ.

My client clarified how much "being right" and "winning arguments" was interfering with his relationships and life. He chose to make intimacy, empathy, and happiness more important values than winning and being right. He lost much of his need to defend himself against perceived attacks on his intelligence. He began to listen more, be more accepting, and be more supportive.

 

 

    ACTION :"ROOTS"  in Serbia

The Effect of Personality on PTSD

Provided byPsychology Today

It was once called "shell shock" or "battle fatigue" because its symptoms were first identified in war veterans. But one study suggests that, whether a veteran of combat or a victim of accident or crime, your chances of facing the anxiety or depression of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) may hinge as much on your personality as on your experience.

Inge Bramsen, Ph.D., a psychologist at Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam, tested 572 men who participated in the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in the former Yugoslavia for PTSD. Men who reported seeing the highest number of stressful events -- shootings or dead people, for example -- showed the most severe symptoms. But those who rated highest on personality traits such as negativism and paranoia before deployment also tended to show more signs of PTSD later. A hostile person may see more personal menace in events than others do, says Bramsen. An anxious person may also cope with stressful situations less effectively.

Bramsen believes that a better understanding of what causes PTSD might help to protect soldiers and others sent into harm's way. But, "I think we will never be able to prevent PTSD," she says. "It is a normal reaction to an abnormal situation."

By: Peter Rebhahn
Originally published by Psychology Today:Nov/Dec 2000

National cultural policy – research at Parliamentary political parties
- National cultural policy – research at parliament political parties: analysis of documentation about cultural policy, public statements of party leaders (April 2002 – February 2003)

Our research of the parliamentary parties activities starts with the interview with the vice-president of the Parliamentary Board for Culture, members to which are representatives of the most of parliamentary political parties. The interview was held on April 25, 2002. and dealt with the possibilities that the parliamentary political parties realize their party programs within the Parliament. We were informed that each M.P. might initiate development of certain legislation proposals regarding culture, but the not one legislation act regarding culture had been made during mandate of new democratic assembly elected in 2002.

The review and analysis of party cultural programs was continued by colecting relevant documentation about activities in the field of culture of the Democratic Party of Serbia, one of the biggest parliamentary parties with a Board of Culture of its own. In the same time this is the only party with explicit document on the cultural policy issue - "Declaration on cultural policy" from October 2001. The research was completed between 7th –15th of May. Research continued in December 2002 with colecting documentation and interviewing the presidents of the Boards of Culture of other relevant parlamentary political parties under the political coalition in power named "Democratic oposition of Serbia". Research continued in that period because of presidential elections in Serbia that took place during second part of the year - for the first round in autumn, and for the second round in December 2002. Second year students of Theater and Radio Production at Faculty of Performing Arts on the course Cultural Policy gathered documentation and interviewed presidents of the Boards of Culture, education and sciense activities of Social democratic party – Ratislav Kambašković, Civil Union of Serbia – Evica Busarac and Democratic party former president Jovan Despotović, who is after the elections 2000. on high position in the Ministry of Culture as assistant Ministar of culture. Other relevant parties at National Assembly who are the oposition for the coalition DOS refused to participate in the research – Socialist party of Serbia because of the party congres preparations and SRS because they have no Board of Culture, but they suggested that all questions concerning cultural policy issue has to be adressed to the party's president, Mr. Vojislav Šešelj (?!). This research led to conclusion that the most of political parties have their resource boards for culture and some kind of activity in the field of culture and arts (mainly in forms of public debates as "Mass culture and new cultural strategy" organized by GSS in June 25th 2002). There are no records of reports from Boards for culture meetings and their statements for public. Parties have no direct impact on decision-making process in Serbian Government or Ministry of Culture (for example protest of DSS for dismissing of director of Serbian Archives in January 2003. published in media, but director was either way dismissed along with several other directors of cultural institutions).

Non-governmental organization cultural policy – research
- interview with the member of Executive Board involved in culture, analysis of documentation about institutions, programs and projects financed by NGO, interviews with the directors of cultural institutions and projects financed by NGO (November, December 2002)

During non-governmental sector research, Fond for Open Society which is biggest foundation in Serbia, provided us with documentation on financing individuals and programs and with document on management structure of the Fond in Belgrade. We delivered to Sarita Matijević, Funds coordinator for cultural programs, a questionnaire from focus group research, on her demand, because she was not able to come to group interview on October 31 to the Center.

On activities of other NGO-s (Palgo Center, Magna Agenda, G17 Plus) we interviewed team members who participated in large educational projects in the field of Building Capacities of Local Communities (Branimir Stojković, Divna Vuksanović, Ratko Božović, Tatjana Rap and others, among them is author of this research) and they gave us all relevant information and project documentation. Research team realized that 14 cities participated in project of "G17 Plus" during 1999/2000. "Innovative Models of Cultural Policy in Serbian Cities". "Magna Agenda"'s project "Building Capacities of Local Communities" had been realized during 20001/2002 in 40 cities in Serbia. From these two projects we concluded that from one hand they had great impact on more tha 50 cities in Serbia, whish is one-third from total number of towns and cities in Serbia (164 towns and 4 cities), but from the other, they excluded Belgrade. Because of that we have a situation that capacities of local cultural strategy are better in province then in metropolis