There is an abusive situation to which I never pay attention for reasons of rank: how could this person touch me? Yet they can.
I have not realized until now what the complete dynamic was. I have been trying to negotiate and placate. Thus I play into this person’s hands.
Never placate. Learn to notice yourself doing it. If you find yourself placating someone, you are being abused by them. Do not fall into this.
Axé.
coldhearted scientist وداد 
Yes! It is very difficult, however, as there is the idea that one is supposed to be “professional”! One will be accused of not being “professional”.
[OMG! Not that! And THAT is honestly insane– when they are the ones who are being unprofessional…]
And as my nature tends toward wanting to conciliate (though less as I get older), this is ever an issue— and I am a total mark [heh] for this kind of thing.
I’ve become much more aware, lately, of how it is absolutely necessary to defend oneself when others seek to project something into one. It is the most fundamental survival skill. And you don’t need to do it publically — it isn’t for the public arena (my previous mistake). You do it for yourself.
It can be very subtle, too, but when it is allowed to happen, it is nonetheless disempowering. These days I find I disagree with Neechy concerning the idea he had that one cannot truly know the unconscious aspects of one’s motivations. He also thought that digging too much in this direction tended to kill the spirit. I think his approach may have been the most delightful for his own day and age, but these days, when almost everyone and everything seems to be intent on aggressively projecting into you, the need to know oneself is absolutely paramount.
When somebody projects into you, it is like they are giving you a gift of some sort. It may be something very positive; they may be projecting onto you the image of an admirable figure. More often, though, they are projecting onto you something rather negative with which they happen to be familiar. If you don’t want this second sort of gift, you need to find a way to immediately return it. The more you allow it to stick with you, the more it becomes ‘yours’.
To reject such a gift, you need to point out that it doesn’t belong to you, but to the other person who wants to give it to you. The reason you point this out is not for the other person’s benefit — so there is no need to be crude and offensive. You are pointing it out for your own benefit. You simply poinpoint the aspect that has been projected and say: “When you assumed that thing about me, there was no basis for it.”
The point is that you need to be absolutely sure, in your own mind, that there was no basis for it.
That is where self-knowledge comes in.
Jennifer, yes. Of course the management gurus like to say that there are things only an observer can know, that people do not tend to see themselves; I don’t think this necessarily applies to the more evolved / the more conscious of us.
You do have to give it back. Currently I have someone projecting into me that I really have my life together, and someone else projecting into me that I can, here and now, be the academic I’d like to be rather than the screaming in pain one that I am. I am of course accepting these projections and they are doing me good but that only goes to show how strong projections can be. Curative, neutral, or perfectly noxious; but they’re strong and if they’re noxious they have to go right back where they came from.
Mark – to me, being professional is being objective, not being passive agressive, and that is why I dislike so many academics. I tend to be too vocal but at the same time I tend to be conciliatory, it’s odd.
However, what I’ve decided is that in academia and perhaps generally one must take complete control of one’s life. I have been taught the opposite, always, but it is true: you must control and do as you see fit about everything that affects you. Otherwise things lose their flavor and you lose your will, and life turns to drudgery.
I would post about this if I had time. I would also post about how we have to be in perfect athletic form, for strength and endurance. Finally, I would post about how academic jobs tend to cut into your sleep time and how that amazed me at first, it seemed so ridiculous — then I found ways around it — then I got caught in its’ seeming natural, and I now reject that.
(I am feeling positively Nietzschean, perhaps.)
I suspect that if you do not accept the projection, the other person knows it implicitly. Because they had expected to unload some of their energy, and they haven’t succeeded. They will need to find a better solution to their problem (of need or desire) or find someone else to unload on.
What is it about academic life that makes it so hard to be upfront and honest with others? Why all the mind-reading and second guessing? It is not a healthy environment. And I am so glad you are putting your foot down about things, Professor Z!
True words, Professor Z!
All the best…
Y’all — yes, and thanks!
Re Hattie’s question “What is it about academic life that makes it so hard to be upfront and honest with others? Why all the mind-reading and second guessing?”
I really don’t understand and I really would like to. Does anyone have any ideas? I should post this, perhaps, for Academic Mondays.
P.S. Hattie — the post’s coming up Monday the 7th, but meanwhile I have some ideas:
– the medieval/plantationesque power structure of the institutions
– the lack of funding, which cranks up the competition to a hungry pitch
– the fact that so many academics never learned good social skills earlier on; then went straight to this academic environment
– the fact that it is no longer a club for straight or straight acting white men of a certain class, who recognize each other and therefore treat each other as some sort of equal … many other people are here now and we are here by law, so abusive strategies must be resorted to to keep us down
– the fact that so many people are so far away from home or any decent support structure, and they either wither in loneliness and alienation or cling unhealthily together like lifeboat passengers
– what else, do you think … or do you think these hypotheses have any validity?
That about nails it, Prof. Z.
And here is one of my own thoughts: Lodged in the minds of many academics is the revered professor (white, male) who hasn’t just studied the “classics:” he owns them. You and I may pick up a book and read it, but what we think or say about great works lacks any authority.
Another thing: the collegiality my husband enjoys with his fellow scientists is something to behold. They are like a club of guys who help each other with projects, direct each other to the money stream, keep each other in the know and up to date. Fundamental is respect for the knowledge and expertise of colleagues. What they know is not accessible to non experts, so they feel their knowledge is safe. Every once in a while someone comes along who is not up to standard, and I have seen my husband deal with such people in subtle ways that put them on the sidelines. I’ll never forget the way he arranged a Harvard fellowship for a guy who was driving him nuts. The guy was delighted! But this was nothing more than a diversion in the career of a mediocrity. Instead of having to waste his time trying to bring this guy up to standard, he could concentrate on his own work.
Yes, he is a very good power player, but practically no one but me knows how he operates, he is so subtle. The name of the game is research, development, and profits. Fish or cut bait, as they say.
Needless to say, high level scientists like my husband are not threatened by “amateurs.”
I guess I don’t need to add that these particular scientists are not competing with women or “minorities.”
What he says, and I have to agree, is that the only way to make money these days is to provide services and/or make money for the rich. Vonnegut wrote about this a long time ago. The rich own everything, including sunrises and sunsets. And don’t you forget it! Non-aristocrats like us are forever thinking we’re on the same level as the rich folks and forget our true mission, which is to serve the rich.
Well, as Carter put it, life isn’t fair.
Well, how did I end up here?
Anyway, I look forward to your Monday posting.
And ask yourself this every day, “Am I serving the rich as I should?”
Re the ownership and collegiality, definitely.
Certainly the only way to make money, including in academia, is to serve the rich.
I’m interested in dis-serving them as a class, however, and this is why I am a problem.
Right. And one of the big agendas of the rich is to deal with their enemies. They know right away who you are and that you don’t love them.
And *that* is the important thing to keep in mind. Their big tactic (that has been known to work on me) is to divide and conquer, divide even individual people against themselves, and so on.
What we do is decide what we can get out of them without getting caught up in their games. We don’t care for them or their diversions but just take whatever advantage of them we can. We learned this in Switzerland.
Very good strategy — I’ll adopt it more consciously.