Domestication

My “Formula”

[for teaching responsibility -- in response to this post]

Fix Them

Not like we do dogs!  Rather, fix their attention on a task.

Break Them

Not like we do [dogs or] horses!  Rather, give them a break when they wander off task.

Take Them In

Not in the sense of “tricking” them…

Set Them Up

… so, NOT like teaching a dog a trick.

(Rather ACCEPT them — take them into your lives — and GIVE them the resources they need to succeed at each step of their progress — set them up, in a business for example).

Put Them Down

Not like we do [dogs or] horses [...] NOR by using negative feedback (DON’T PUNISH!).  Rather, we stop supporting them at some point (putting them down gently).

PS

[left as a comment on the linked article]

“Domestication” comes to mean “ownership” (specifically, ownership of ones own domicile… or home). So, seeing as how you’re trying to get them to take care of YOUR home (before finally kicking them out)… the process ends with them either owning your home (your death) or your buying them their own first home. Either way, you lose and they win: It’s punishment for your sin (fornication).

Addendum

  1. Fix Them
  2. Break Them
  3. Take Them In
  4. Set Them Up
  5. Put Them Down

Notes

Fixation:  Transference -> Counter-transference -> CROSS transference (crucifixion / blame / guilt) ->  Cross Fixation (or transfixion … as to see but be unable to stop the process of ones own death).  Thus, “fixation” (a person remains attached to a persona or symbol appropriate to an earlier stage of development).  Or “fixation” (ability of the eye to focus on one point). So, finally, as in “to fix” (a problem… in this case through hypnotic regression).

The PROBLEM is understood in terms of having (a dog, for instance) “fixed” — that is, in terms of “phallus” (vs fallacy) and should be accomplished without demasculinizing.

Thus is “domestication” (ownership) rather than “domesticating” (the process by which wild animals and plants are brought under human control and are bred to possess special characteristics that enhance their usefulness for human exploitation).

Ownership: Defines property entitlement in terms of being responsible for said property.  Also in the sense of “to own up” (to one’s responsibility FOR).  But, further, it conveys the idea of “sense of self” (ie. self-ownership).

As applied to character:  Neither in the sense of ownership (that is not in the sense of “having complete legal control of the status of something”).  Nor as in responsibility (”obligation; duty; burden”).  So not that which determines “character” (”moral and ethical actions”).  But in the sense of  HAVING a character (or “a characteristic property that defines the apparent individual nature of something”)… that is, regarding personality.

So finally, I’d like to apologize for saying that parents are being punished (for the sin of fornication, even… ouch!) or for implying that they somehow owe anything to their children.  While the psycho-dynamics DO involve mating (transference and counter-transference); which I see as a result of (or which results IN) sexual confusion (or simply “sex”); AND regression (or, manifestly, childhood… as in “to have children”… which is the physical counterpart to the psychological mechanism suggested); nonetheless, I don’t believe in “sin” (in a religious sense) nor “punishment” (as might relate all of this to “eternal damnation” or hopelessness).  Instead, I do have “hope” that this can all be worked through (thus, I present a psychological model for doing so rather than merely giving up).

Leave a Reply