Messages Off of Everything, Everywhere, for Everyone...


It is  double standards which cause double binds.

The sense that we are not being heard by psychiatrists (and others) is reality based.

It's not that they are physically deaf but rather psychologically 'deaf' to what we are saying. 


Look for the patterns. Something to help make sense of it.

       from Survivor













The Real Meaning

Just because you don't understand what I am saying it does not prove that what I am saying cannot be understood, nor does it prove that I don't understand it myself.

Just because you see or hear no meaning in what I tell you, it does not mean there is no meaning there to see and hear.

If your ego is blocking the view and buzzing loudly in your ears, you will remain blind and deaf to the truth that is right in front of your nose. That is this:

I am saying what I mean, and meaning what I say.

I understand something that you do not.

For as long as you can't or won't accept that, because you are too busy defending your own errors, you won't be able to see me, or hear me, as I really am.

Timeless Visions, Voices and New Meanings
Voices Throughout the Ages, Changing Perceptions,  Reactionary People, Trapped Targets, Group Relationships etc.

The Splitting Circle

By Patricia Lefave, Monophrenic

Out of Your Minds... can you HEAR that in more than one way?[1]

The world is full of nexus language and what that is, is any abstraction that is used without connection to concrete specific detail which is what gives it concrete MEANING. This kind of non communication is especially difficult to hear when it is used in absolute terms in an attempt to invalidate an individual's perspective on his or her own experience by projecting someone else's meaning into it as the means of invalidating the individual's perspective on his or her own experience. The "No One Can Be Blamed" people do this often as the means of making sure THEY don't get held accountable for their own behaviour. Like gang members they seek seek justification in numbers; sanity and "normal" being routinely identified in this world by group consensus. If you deal with someone who leads you to believe you are having an experience based on the SAME premise and then that person "covertly" splits off and suggests to others, unknown to you, that an opposite experience is actually what is happening, it is like splitting one dimension into two dimensions and the farther away you get from the event horizon, the more bizarre and surreal it will become, and the less "sense" you will be able to make of it based on your own premise.

So if the "division" of information is between a large group and one person upon whom the large group has been told to focus as the "sick" one, which side do you think will look "crazy"?

When this kind of non reasoning is used in absolute terms it creates a closed system from which there is no escape possible for as long as you continue to see it from INSIDE. So ironically in order to deal with it as the victim[2] of it, you can only make a choice between two metaphysical "solutions" and they are:

Accepting a fate from which you cannot escape while trying to bond with your captors so you won't suffer so much or be alone, helpless and hopeless. Then they can call you crazy for seeing them as they actually are, which they have told you you must deny in order to avoid being forced into total isolation...


Accept your fate and allow yourself to be pushed out of the group and into an alternate reality where you WILL be alone as well because you refuse to give up and pretend that you don't know them for who they are. They will then call you "crazy" for refusing to go along with the consensus reality they have defined for you.

Though the second choice seems more frightening, it is still the better choice to me. Why?

Because with the first choice there is no hope for me or anyone else since I am going along with the group insanity. With the second choice, it may never change but at least the possibility of change is there for BOTH me and everyone else caught up in this dysfunctional crap. From outside the snare I can at least try to show them the structure and also let them know there IS something outside it and that I am standing OUTSIDE the loop.[3]

So for this example let me point out something to you out of your own training in psychiatry that you can't hear. Maybe if you can learn to hear this, you can learn to hear more than this, and that gives me hope that if I beat my head against the proverbial psychiatric wall long enough, I may wear down your resistance to the truth you don't like, and don't want to know. You may have to face the reality of yourselves despite your massive efforts to resist it.

Back to Gordon Warme and his own statement:

"Psychiatrists, when they are thinking like psychiatrists, never take words at face value."

Got that OK?

So that means then that when psychiatrists "think like psychiatrists" they look for hidden meaning in everything we say.

A psychiatrist told me that if "you find yourself looking for hidden meaning, it is a sign that you need an anti-psychotic."

So looking for hidden meaning then is a sign of insanity is that right?

If this is accepted as true (and if you are psychiatrized then whatever you do don't see the humour in that and "laugh for no reason") then this means one of three things and logically they are:

One: Both the psychiatrists and I are crazy the same way according to psychiatry's reasoning.

Two: There is a splitting of reality taking place in order to accommodate a 'them and us' scenario in which the SAME thoughts and behaviours are being giving opposing meanings.

Three: Neither I, nor the psychiatrists, are actually crazy and the whole paradigm is just an abstract contrived crock of politicized shit.

Which one do you think it is then?

Comments? Corrections for the whack job here?

[1] Something has been produced from your minds OR you are all crazy.

[2] Yes folks there really IS such thing as a "victim" despite all your irrational denials used to make you keep yourselves feeling "safe." But that is an illusion and might be called a group delusion if 'reality' was NOT defined by consensus.

[3] In my psychotic imagery this dysfunctional paradigm was called "the loop of destruction"


Links to Articles on the Groupthink Phenomenon

Eight Main Symptoms of Groupthink
What is Groupthink?

Same Old Play; New Century

R.D. Laing
/Schizophrenia/Existentialism/Philosopher ...

Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide ©
Socialization to Killing
They [the SS doctors] did their work just as someone who goes to an office goes about his work. They were gentlemen who came and went, who supervised and were relaxed, sometimes smiling, sometimes joking, but never unhappy. They were witty if they felt like it. Personally I did not get the impression that they were much affected by what was going on — nor shocked. It went on for years. It was not just one day.
Auschwitz prisoner doctor

Robert Jay Lifton

Robert Jay Lifton, M.D. 

...In addition to cruel medical experiments, many Nazi doctors, as part of military units, were directly involved in killing. To reach that point, they underwent a sequence of socialization: first to the medical profession, always a self-protective guild; then to the military, where they adapted to the requirements of command; and finally to camps such as Auschwitz, where adaptation included assuming leadership roles in the existing death factory. The great majority of these doctors were ordinary people who had killed no one before joining murderous Nazi institutions. They were corruptible and certainly responsible for what they did, but they became murderers mainly in atrocity-producing settings. ..


International Cultic Studies


“A Bio Medical Mission was at the heart of Naziism”

“Socialization to Evil is all too easy...”

Robert Jay Lifton


When Patients See These Images, Their 'Interpretations' of What is Being Seen is Very Different to That of the 'Interpretations' of Others. These are Human Beings; Not Objects of Assessment, Interesting Cases, or 'Subjects'. If You Were Being Treated Like That, How Would YOU Feel? Happy?


The Entire Rosenhan Article, On Being Sane in  Insane Places, along with my own commentary relating it to my own experiences in the system, will soon be available from start to finish as a PDF file in this  section of this webpage.

The Pseudo-Patient Study



Last broadcast on Mon, 27 Jul 2009, 11:00 on BBC Radio 4.



Claudia Hammond revisits another classic psychology experiment, David Rosenhan's Pseudo-Patient Study, gaining access to his unpublished personal papers to discover how it changed our understanding of the human mind, and its impact 40 years on.

Between 1969 and 1972, the clinical psychologist David Rosenhan and seven other people - none of whom had a psychiatric diagnosis - got themselves admitted to 12 different psychiatric hospitals around the United States. They did this by presenting with a single symptom, saying that they heard a voice which said words such as 'empty', 'dull' and 'thud.' Once admitted, they acted completely normally. Nevertheless, they were kept in for periods of between 8 and 52 days. Seven of them were diagnosed with schizophrenia and were released as being 'in remission'; not one of them was judged to be sane.

After Rosenhan published On Being Sane in Insane Places in the journal Science in 1973, the psychiatric profession went on the defensive to protest its diagnostic competence. The study struck at the heart of their attempts to medicalise psychiatry and be accepted as proper doctors. Its impact was felt when the third edition of the profession's bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, came out in 1980: changes had been made which brought more rigour to the diagnostic process.

However, as Claudia discovers from Rosenhan's unpublished papers, for him the study was less an experiment of diagnostic efficacy than an anthropological survey of psychiatric wards. In a chapter of the book he never finished, she reads his poignant account of his own first admission, and his sense that 'minimal attention was paid to my presence, as if I hardly existed'.

Now suffering ill health and unable to speak, Rosenhan delegates his friends and colleagues professor of social psychology at Stanford University Lee Ross and clinical psychologist Florence Keller to speak to Claudia and show her the box containing previously unpublished material which throws new light on one of the most controversial and famous psychology experiments.



Recommended for Psychiatrists who believe that chemical imbalance explains everything and that the experience of psychosis is meaningless: here is a movie with "Message'' for you:

starring Kevin Spacey, as the psych patient who FEELS like an ''alien'' from another planet. I suggest you focus, not so much on the concrete details of his fascinating delusion but rather on the concepts behind the details. You just might learn something.


If you would like to receive my once or twice monthly newsletter which will briefly tell you what is new only and where to find it on the Websites (The older writing you can find for yourself!) then register your e-mail address here. Once you start it, you can also unsubscribe yourself anytime you like.