feeling unable
feeling unaccepted - feeling unacceptable
archived letters from kat

the emotional feelings network of sites!

welcome to your unemotional side!

You can always continue on to:
your unemotional side 2!

Questions? Send me an email!

Send me an e-mail by clicking here!

Go to the homepage if you don't see what you need!

Welcome to your unemotional side! I urge you to use the underlined link word method of exploring the emotional feelings network of sites by clicking on any of the underlined link words that will further explain a connection to the subject you are here studying. For a complete description of the underlined link word system: click here.
If you don't see what you were looking for - please access the homepage for a menu of the other sites within the network that might lead you to where you want to be!

I'm glad you're here!
keeping things organized!

Enduring Narcissism, Addictions, And Abuse In Silence To Avoid Appearing Ungrateful
by Diane England, Ph.D.
Some women endure their husbands’ narcissism, addictions, and abuse silently because they believe they have no right to complain. They realize they are living lives that so many other women only dream about. Really, do they dare express any dissatisfaction and thus come across as ungrateful?

But all that glitters is not gold - or golden. There are women in upscale marriages surrounded by the best of everything who certainly know that. And while they might live in beautiful homes in wealthy neighborhoods, drive luxury cars, wear designer clothes, and have diamonds sparkling on their earlobes, necks, wrists, and fingers, they still might not feel wealthy.

That’s because all the real estate, bank accounts, and other investments might well be in their husbands’ names only.

Within the Walls of the Narcissist’s McMansion, Life Might Not be so Grand

If the men these women are married to are financially successful, but nonetheless narcissistic, they undoubtedly have a certain image they want to uphold. In other words, they want people to know they are as prosperous.

One way of demonstrating this is through their wives’ attire.

Indeed, you can display you have a great deal of disposable income through encasing your wife in the right clothing and gemstones. Encasing her in a top-of-the-line luxury car doesn’t come cheaply, either.

So, it’s true the wives of these men might be zipping about town and walking the aisles of stores such as Neiman Marcus looking like they have unlimited amounts of cash. And certainly, they might charge up a storm. But that doesn’t mean that in their own names, these women have access to large sums of money.

They will look good and drive expensive cars only as long as their husbands keep paying the bills. If these men get angry at their wives and refuse to pay for any reason whatsoever, something that could easily happen when you are dealing with men who display unhealthy levels of narcissism, these women might quickly find themselves up a creek without a paddle.

What is going on here? you ask.

Well, the narcissistic husbands are controlling their wives economically.

Why would they do that? you wonder.

The Economic Abuse of the Successful Narcissist

I suppose each narcissistic man has his own reasons for engaging in economic abuse. But of course, one is that this is a good way to keep his wife hooked into him and suffering silently his narcissism, addictions, and abuse. He suspects she won’t want to give up the lovely lifestyle. He impresses upon her that if she were to leave, he would see to it she became destitute.

How does that alternative sound to you? And indeed, can you understand how it might prove particularly unappealing to a woman who has been living the supposed good life?

You might say fear, shame, and a lack of faith in her own abilities to create a new life for herself, tend to keep her stuck and contending with his narcissism, addictions, and abuse - no matter how painful they might be. While she might be demoralized by the fact he denies her money for health care or makes her account for every penny she spends when she goes out to lunch with her friends - if he even gives her money to do that - she might be so depressed that she seriously doubts she has the energy to start over, either.

So, by controlling the money, these financially successful narcissistic men are inclined to get the type of behavior they desire from their wives. Yes indeed, these women will likely silently suffer things such as his verbal abuse, emotional abuse, and sexual abuse because he is controlling those purse strings.

And yes, I do label this economic abuse even though to women looking in from the outside, it might seem hard to accept this as such. After all, these women enjoy so many symbols of the affluent lifestyle, right?

But indeed for these same women, they are basically merely symbols. They are not, after all, comfortably entrenched in the wealth. These women know that at any moment, their husbands could pull it all out from under them, and for basically little or no reason, too.

His narcissism might compel him towards vindictiveness. He might well want to show her the Golden Rule he lives by. While she believes that you should do unto others as you would have them do unto you, both ns words and behavior profess what he believes instead, or that he who has the gold makes the rules.

These women might well feel they live in gold cages. And because those looking in from the outside only see the gold and won’t look beyond that mesmerizing shine, these women fear not only will people not empathize with their plight, but they likely won’t be believed, either. So often these men whom their wives finally realize are clothed in narcissism, addictions, and abuse, are so often seen by others as charming.

Will this Abused Woman Suffer Abuse Yet Again?

Because those to whom the harmed women might turn for support are seduced by the narcissist’s well crafted image, these women might unconsciously fear further abuse at the hands of friends, family, and helping professionals. Will they hear time and time again: How dare you of all women complain?

But they should be complaining because abuse in any form hurts. Verbal abuse, emotional abuse, economic abuse, and sexual abuse - all forms of abuse the narcissist is likely to embrace - are detrimental to one’s psychological and physical well being. No, none of it should be tolerated, and help should be sought.

Which leads me to another reason I suspect these wealthy abusive narcissists control the money. Remember, when their wives can hardly put their hands on a dollar, these women are less apt to go to therapists who might point out they are being abused, and to consider divesting themselves of their husbands and their marriages. When you don’t have access to bank accounts, it also makes it difficult to pay the hefty retainers of powerful divorce attorneys - the types who stand the best chance of getting wives pummeled by narcissism, addictions, and abuse some sizeable divorce settlements.

Are You Enduring his Narcissism, Addictions, and Abuse in Silence?

If you are one of these women, and you believe you have no choice but to tolerate your husband’s narcissism, addictions, and abuse, please consider that you do have options. Yes, there are always other choices to be made. Sometimes we think we won’t like the results we will be handed by making such a decision. Or, there is debilitating fear of the great unknown that looms ahead if the marriage with its seemingly good life is left behind.

But how good a life is it really? How much pleasure are those material things giving you now? Do they make amends for the results of his narcissism, addictions, and abuse you tolerate daily?

I suspect they don’t. And while you believe that you will be this poor lost person when stripped of all he provides you, you don’t know that will be the case. Sure, you will undoubtedly go through some challenging times. Nonetheless, the day might come when, because you gave yourself the opportunity to come to know and embrace your true self, you are experiencing new riches of which you never dreamed.

Ladies, I can say this with confidence because I have walked in similar shoes as you do now. I walked away from what probably looked like a good life to many. But you know, when your sense of self and peace of mind is bombarded daily by the aftereffects of his narcissism, addictions, and abuse, you don’t have the wherewithal to really enjoy the potential benefits of that lifestyle anyway.

You might live on a beautiful stage set. However, you have been stripped of what gives life meaning. Please, don’t awaken to that reality when it is too late. Experience now the joy that can be yours in a lifestyle that might be more ordinary, yet so much richer because it has not been eroded by another’s narcissism, addictions, and abuse.

source site: click here

How to Decline the Offer of Hospitality from In-laws Without Sounding Ungrateful
By Sophie, published Sep 18, 2008
Many couples who visit each other's parents choose to stay with them at their home. After all, this is a cost effective way to go home for a visit without the added expense of a hotel room for the week. But staying with in-laws is not always practical or convenient. How can you decline the offer of hospitality from your in-laws without sounding ungrateful?

Three Children, Two Cats and a Dog

When you receive the offer of hospitality from your mother-in-law she may only be expecting to see you, your spouse and the children. But if you plan to travel with two cats and a dog, then opting for a pet-friendly hotel room is often a more practical solution. Let your mother-in-law know in advance that while you appreciate her generous offer, you cannot possibly expect her to extend hospitality to your pets as well and then leave it at that. If she still insists, ask your husband to speak to his mother to explain the situation.

Still on Honeymoon Period

If you and your spouse have been married for a relatively short period of time, the last thing you may want is to stay with your in-laws when you visit them. Staying in a hotel will allow you to have the privacy you need. Tactfully explain that while you appreciate the offer of your in-laws' hospitality, that you would prefer to stay in a hotel this time. But make sure that you do not turn down subsequent offers of hospitality or your in-laws might start to wonder whether you have personal issues against them that are preventing you from staying with them.
Staying in a hotel from time to time, rather than in your in-laws' home, can give you some much needed privacy and time along together after spending the day visiting them. But you must be careful in the way that you decline the offer of hospitality for fear of offending or alienating your in-laws. Think of specific reasons why you are staying in a hotel and let your in-laws know of your wishes well in advance, preferably after you have made your hotel reservation, so that you will not be pressured to change your mind. Some in-laws only offer hospitality out of politeness and are secretly relieved when their hospitality is declined. Staying in a hotel allows you to visit your in-laws, but without the added burden of sharing a bathroom each morning and compromising on your privacy.
source site: click here

How to Deal with Ungrateful People
Step One: English Translation Quran 55:13 Then which of the blessings of your Lord will you both(jinns and men) deny?
Step Two: KJV Bible Romans 1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Step Three: Expect ingratitude. People at large are not grateful to their Creator; henceforth how could they possibly be grateful to someone who has bestowed upon them a small favor. In addition, unfortunately the predominant society of today projects ungratefulness to parents. Mothers and Fathers awake all hours of the night for their children and toil all day in order that they could eat and dress their children, only to have their children abandon them in their, what should be called "Golden Years." Disobedience to parents is rampant, due to lack of authority forced upon families due to government laws, that's another big article.
Step Four: Be Patient. Have you ever did something for someone and they just seemed to be oblivious to the good thing that you did for them? Isn't that annoying. Well, there is good news and bad news.
Step Five: Here is the good news. Did you do the good deed for earthy reward alone or did you do the good deed for the Creator and earthy gain? The good news is that if you did it for both, you may have earthy gain, but you will defiantly have gain in the hereafter. The bad news is that if your good deed was merely to gain the praise of others or for earthy gain, you may not get either. Since people are generally ungrateful, your deed may be ignored, concealed from others and maybe even claimed by others. As a person prepared for ungratefulness, you would know that, this life is short and someday you will be rewarded by your Creator even if there is no benefit in this life. In regards to the ungrateful recipient, you may find yourself boiling in anger because the person simply ignores the favor or simply may say something such as, "Well, I didn't ask you to do it." Trust me, been there, done that. The great thing is that when you do something for Allah, you don't need a "Thank You", because you know He will reward you, either in this life or the next.
Step Six: Belief in the Day of Judgment. Every good deed will be rewarded and bad deeds will be punished, at God's discretion of course. Those deeds that harm another person, will be forgiven if the person harmed chooses to forgive the offender.
Step Seven: Check out the following article: http://www.ehow.com/how_2186484_revert-to-islam.html
  • Don't forget PATIENCE
  • Don't ever be discouraged by someone who does not say, "Thank You." It's their loss.

source site: click here

Why Give to the Ungrateful?
Learning to follow Jesus' model of generosity.

An Ungrateful Nation
by George McColm
While working as an agricultural expert for the Bureau of Indian Affairs after WW II, the author co-wrote a report that revealed the desperate plight of the Navajo people who lived on the brink of starvation in the American Southwest.

"Inanition," a word unfamiliar to most people, was listed as the cause of death on many of the death certificates completed in 1947 by Navajo Service doctors who tended the residents of the Navajo Indian reservation in the Southwest United States. The word sounded better than its more descriptive meaning - "slow death by starvation" - to the federal agencies that since the Treaty of 1868 had been responsible for the care of the Navajo Nation.

The euphemism's use helped to mask the sorry state of affairs that existed on the reservation at the end of World War II, a conflict in which many Navajos gallantly served the Allied cause [See "Code Talkers" in the January/February 1997 issue of American History].

As a United States naval officer in World War II, I had been in charge of the Joint Chiefs of Staff's agricultural planning for the post-war occupation of Japan. In the fall of 1946, I was hired by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and sent to Window Rock, Arizona - capital of the Navajo Nation - to direct the soil conservation program on the Navajo reservation, where living conditions were well below the national poverty level.

I reported to Reservation Superintendent James Stewart and soon became his confidential advisor on a number of problems that he encountered. It shocked me to learn that no members of the Navajo Nation were being asked to participate in any of the decisions being made "for their good" by the BIA officials at Window Rock or in Washington, D.C.

In the late spring of 1947, when the BIA sent Elizabeth Chief to Window Rock to conduct a study and prepare a report on the welfare needs of the Navajo people, Stewart saw an opportunity "to convince Washington that we really have a lot of starving Indians out here." He told me to work closely with Elizabeth, a wonderful person who put her heart and soul into gathering detailed information for the report.

Unfortunately, it soon became apparent to her that all of her training had failed to prepare her emotionally for what she experienced on the reservation. Although it was an undertaking far beyond the requirements of official duty, Elizabeth and I dedicated ourselves to the task of writing the "Navajo Welfare Report of 1947"; we wanted the government to know what was really happening to these people.

Certainly, other means of getting the message back to the nation's capital had so far proved fruitless. When Secretary of the Interior Julius Krug toured the reservation in the fall of 1946 - the first high ranking government official to do so since the land was allocated to the Navajos in 1868 - Superintendent Stewart and tribal leaders impressed upon him the necessity of immediate funds to stave off widespread starvation on the reservation.

They also pleaded for job-creation projects, such as the building of schools, hospitals, and housing, to provide much needed income to the Indians. By May 1947, however, the $50,000 in relief money allotted annually to the Navajo Welfare Agency had been spent, and no additional funds were forthcoming. It seemed that Secretary Krug had not reported to President Harry Truman on what he had seen the previous fall. Elizabeth and I hoped that our report would serve as a reminder.

Between the signing of the 1868 treaty and the turn of the century, members of the tribe had been very happy to be left alone by the BIA, choosing to overlook repeated treaty violations. To subsist during those years, they cultivated small plots of land and made good use of native plants and herds of wild game; in addition, they earned income through sheep raising and the sale of wool, rugs, and jewelry.

But by 1920, the population of both the Navajo people and their sheep herds had increased dramatically, making it apparent that the reservation's resources could not support the growing numbers.

In response to the situation, the BIA increased government welfare, health, and medical services for Navajos during the 1920s, and in the '30s, the agency participated in New Deal projects on the reservation that generated a significant amount of income for its residents. Access to this income temporarily prevented a crisis on the reservation in 1933, when a BIA initiative threatened the food supply of many Navajos by cutting them off from a traditional source of meat.

For at least fifty years, Navajos with large flocks of sheep had been sharing with the poorest members of the tribe. But now, in order to halt soil erosion on the watershed of Lake Meade - a result of overgrazing of the reservation land - the number of Navajo-owned sheep was sharply cut from 1.5 million to 350,000. No longer would there be a surplus with which to feed the less fortunate residents of the reservation. This Stock Reduction Program destroyed the Navajos' way of life, making them more dependent on the federal government.

During World War II, more than 3,600 Navajos served in the U.S. military; approximately 10,000 Navajos left the reservation to work in war plants, and another 2,000 were employed by the railroads. The most obvious source of money flowing into the reservation during the war years was the allotments for families of military personnel.

As I recall, our studies indicated that each Navajo serviceman was sending home nearly $2,000 per year, far more than the average World War II soldier. The final discharge of servicemen in 1947, however, brought an end to this source of income.

At the same time, the various New Deal economic and social programs that had been established years before were being discontinued, with no new work opportunities taking their places. And, a prolonged drought, coupled with a ruling in both New Mexico and Arizona that Navajos were not eligible for social security benefits, made reservation life almost unendurable for Navajo families.

Elizabeth Chief had been trained to examine medical records in order to assess welfare needs, and she soon noticed a disturbing trend. We had been told that many children had died on the reservation in the spring of 1947. Subsequent examination of death certificates confirmed that there had been an increasing number of deaths due to inanition, or starvation. The majority of the victims were among the elderly or very young; most of the children had died at the Indian Bureau hospitals.

When our report was finished, Jim Stewart read it carefully and agreed to my suggestion that we make copies for the entire staff. We were certain that every Division Chief in Window Rock would send a copy to his boss in the Washington office. Their doing so, we felt, would make a greater impression than a single report. Elizabeth then returned to Washington, very much concerned, I am sure, about how the report would be received and what would be done to help the Navajos.

When the Gallup, New Mexico, Independent somehow obtained a copy of our report in August 1947, it published a wire service story about the starving Navajos that almost immediately attracted more than two hundred reporters to the reservation. I took the noted radio personality Will Rogers, Jr., himself part Native-American, on a two-day, picture-taking tour of the area, while two Chicago Tribune reporters made a trip across the reservation with George Bowra, editor of the Aztec, New Mexico, Independent Review.

The scribes told George that they had toured South America, Mexico, India, and China, and nowhere had they witnessed people trying to live in such squalor. The Denver Post subsequently published 89 articles and 4 editorials about the starving Navajos, while other prominent papers, including The Los Angeles Examiner and the Arizona Republic, featured the Navajos' story in juxtaposition to President Truman's plan to aid post-war Europe.

Politicians began to condemn the Indian Bureau for neglecting the Navajos, and the Bureau of the Budget for reducing the amount of money Congress had appropriated for Native Americans. Wisconsin Representative William H. Stevenson pointed out that "50% of Navajo children die before they reach the age of five years . . . ," adding that "After 80 years of BIA management, 90% of the Navajo Nation cannot speak or understand English; and schools are available for only 25% of the Navajo children."

North Dakota Senator William Langer assailed the president and his colleagues in The Congressional Record. "The Indian veteran returns home," he stated, "to find deplorable conditions among his people. Because of the lack of resources, there is no opportunity to establish his home. He cannot get a GI loan for his home, because the United States holds title to his land, and therefore the bank will not give him a loan. He cannot go into the sheep or cattle business, because he cannot get a permit from the government to run more livestock on an already depleted range. There is no farm land or capital available to him . . . ."

"So, Mr. President," Langer asked scornfully, "can we say that a group of American citizens in which the tuberculosis rate is five times that of the entire United States, is getting a square deal? Are Indian mothers, who went down into the shadow of death to bear the very sons who have gone out and made this marvelous record I have cited, getting a square deal when infant mortality among the Indians is five times greater than the rest of the country?

Are the people who have been dispossessed of nearly 90,000,000 acres of land within the last 50 years getting a square deal? Do senators know that Indian tribes in many states are now expressly prohibited by an act of Congress from purchasing additional land? Even with their own money, they cannot buy it; it is prohibited."

In October 1947, large quantities of relief supplies started to arrive on the reservation, initially from many private donors and later from various government agencies. The War Assets Administration furnished the Navajos with 40,000 pounds of rice, several hundred dozen cases of canned food, and 17.5 tons of flour, sugar, spices, and other commodities. Two carloads of fresh fruit were brought in by the "Friendship Train," a charity drive organized by the Mormons, while twenty tons of clothing was shipped to Gallup and distributed to Navajos by volunteers and the Navajo Service.

On December 17, as Congress debated the authorization of more relief funding for the Navajos, Arizona Representative Richard Harless castigated the U.S. government: "It is my purpose to tell why these people are starving to death. We put them on the most worthless land that could be found in the United States. At that time there were some 8,000 of them.

We captured them and gave them a treaty at the point of a gun, to educate their children and furnish one teacher for every thirty students. We agreed to furnish housing for them. We agreed to provide for their welfare. We have never fulfilled that treaty. We stand here today and talk about relief for foreign nations when we have a national disgrace in our own country."

The 1947 debate in Congress over Navajo welfare left many congressmen with a guilt complex, as indicated by Republican John Jennings, Jr., of Tennessee, who said: "[A]s to whether we should extend belated relief to these people, the spirit of Christmas and the dictates of our common humanity demand that we right the wrongs that this country inflicted upon these Indians. We should do it while they are alive and while the opportunity is ours." He added, "I want to say that I feel like my Christmas turkey would choke me if I voted against this proposition."

It was gratifying and indeed surprising to find such compassionate congressional support for Navajo relief, and that this compassion was, within a few years, extended to the establishment of the Navajo Long Range Program and the Navajo Irrigation Project. Many of the congressmen who came forward and participated in the debates had never taken part in congressional discussions of Indian affairs. In an article published in Nation magazine, author Carey McWilliams tried to explain the politicians' sudden interest in Indian welfare and noted that the Navajos' plight had become a topic of world discussion.

The government of the Soviet Union, America's Cold War nemesis, expressed great sympathy for the Navajos as "an oppressed minority in the United States." When an article from the Soviet newspaper Pravda was placed in The Congressional Record, starvation deaths on the reservation could no longer be ignored by the Truman administration, or by any member of Congress, despite efforts to dismiss the piece as "Russian propaganda."

An article with the worrisome headline "NAVAJOS WILL USE VIOLENCE TO GET FOOD" appeared in the November 29, 1947 issue of the Albuquerque Tribune. This warning, spoken by a Bishop James Moss Stoney of Southwest Texas, was widely publicized, but the rebellion he predicted did not occur. Navajos were loyal Americans, and they could see that concerned citizens, private charities, and the federal government were responding to their needs.

The Bureau of Indian Affairs maintained a very low profile in 1947, making no effort to ward off or deny massive media and congressional criticism it received after the release of the Navajo Welfare Report. However, rumors did circulate that Navajo Reservation Superintendent Stewart would be fired immediately for allowing the "starving Navajo propaganda to get out of hand."

In 1948, Congress sent ample relief supplies to the reservation and greatly increased the Navajo Service budget. And when Allan Harper replaced Stewart, Bureau officials explained to the Navajos that they had sent their "best administrator" to the reservation in order to make sure that the allocated funds resulted in the greatest possible benefit for their people. Furthermore, the BIA told the Navajos that Harper was the man for the job because he would discuss his administrative decisions with tribal leaders.

The Navajos did not protest the removal of Jim Stewart even though he had earned their respect by not flaunting his authority. He had shown great patience in working with individual tribal leaders, securing their Council's approval of policies and decisions that, in reality, had already been made by the BIA offices in Washington.

When Harper arrived in Window Rock, he was truly "a man with a mission." Stating that it was necessary to get agency files cleared and ready for expanded programs, he ordered that all records and correspondence that did not apply to an ongoing program should be removed from the files and destroyed. Special attention was given to the Stock Reduction Program and to interagency correspondence that had taken up so much filing space in the 1930s and early '40s. Medical records, Navajo death records, and doctors' reports that were "cluttering" the files also were removed.

By the time this "search and destroy" operation was completed, it was apparent that the BIA in Washington did not want to retain any archival material at the agency level. In 1968, I had an opportunity to study the 1947 reports retained in the Bureau's archives. The welfare report written by Elizabeth Chief and myself had been carefully edited; it was not the same report that we had submitted.

From 1848, when the Indian Bureau was transferred from the War Department to the Department of the Interior, until 1947, the Bureau of Indian Affairs managed the personal, political, and financial affairs of Indians in almost total secrecy. Congressional respect for Navajos, generated by the outstandingly loyal service of both military and civilian members of the tribe during World War II, resulted in appropriations that improved the life of every Navajo. The year 1947 thus became the low point and a turning point in Navajo history. Today, Navajos who lived through the post-World War II era are reluctant to describe their suffering. All they say is "Things got better."

source site: click here

The American Red Cross