Have any of you read Patricia Evan's book
Controlling People?
(
http://www.amazon.com/Controlling-Peopl ... 158062569X )
Did it help?
This link summarizes the concepts and techniques.
http://www.towerofpower.com.au/controlling-peopleHere are a couple of summaries I found interesting.
Patricia Evans, author of Controlling People, says a controlling personality begins when one of the four functions( ie Sensing , Intuiting , Thinking, Feeling) are blocked, which leads to poor self-understanding and a blindness to one’s behavior. Once the person loses a connection with oneself that forms his or her reality, control is pursued in the exterior world.
When a person permanently disconnects, however, an identity problem arises. The person’s psyche has been violated. Once a person cannot believe his or her own senses, intuition, thoughts, or feelings, what consistency can be established to form the person’s identity? Identity and control must be established in the only other possible way: by controlling others.
Patricia Evan’s terms this a “backwards connection”. If people are not self-aware of inner experiences, they form their identity from the outside-in instead of the inside-out. While healthy people construct their identity from experiences via the four functions, soon-to-be controllers construct themselves by a desired self-image or what others think one should be like. Intergenerational behavior leads them to treat their partners or children the same way they were treated.
Controllers begin to define another person’s reality.
Healthy, authentic persons realize authenticity in others. Controllers on the other hand, hate authenticity. Their experiences are unknown so they circumvent others from their experiences.
The controller molds his or her partner or child into the desired person and connects to that fake person. A controlling husband can say he loves his wife, but he really loves the perfect wife constructed in his mind. Victims are so blinded by this pretend love, thinking the person who defines and controls him or her is truly in love.
Controlling and abusive relationships are common in marriages because one spouse does not fit “Prince Charming” or “Princess”. It is impossible anyway for these personas to be realized.
The ideal image knows what the controller wants, feels, and thinks. Controllers assume “one mind” with their victims. If the controlled person fails to behave congruently with the ideal image by mind-reading the controller, the person is often ignored, abused, argued against, or told what to be, say, and feel in an attempt to negate authenticity and be molded into the unattainable image.
Victims like a spouse who try to be the perfect ideal image based on the abuse received from their controlling spouse cannot consistently be the idealized image. Moments of genuineness always show – they are who the person really is after all. The victim will always fail to live up to the expectations of a controller. The controller will always be disappointed by the victim.
Controllers do not see their behavior for what it is, however. Most are completely dumbfounded as to why they control others. Blame blinds controllers.
Controllers never take responsibility for their behavior and instead accuse their victims.
The best sign to identify a controlling man or woman is to see if the person assumes one mind. I would assume one mind with you if I became angry over you not knowing what I wanted.
One-mindedness is a warning sign of a controlling person because the ideal image knows what the controlling person wants, thinks, and feels. The moment this perfect understanding is brought back to reality with a question, anger and resentment can form.
A second major warning sign of a controlling person is they define you. I would define you by telling you what you think and feel.
A controlling person defines victims based on the ideal image. Authenticity is neglected – what a victim really feels and thinks is replaced by the controlling person’s definition. The definitions form a fantasy, trying to pull the victim back into the perfect persona.
Intimacy is a paradoxical outcome avoided. The controller attempts to fulfill a need of closeness with the victim, yet true closeness is never achieved when the connection is with an inauthentic person. You cannot be intimate with a controller. Intimacy requires two persons to understand their feelings and connect with each for who they really are, which controllers cannot do because they lack four operational functions.
The first step to deal with a controlling person is to believe no one knows exactly how you feel and think. Victims of abuse can have their self-esteem pummeled heavily into the ground that they believe abusers more than themselves. Someone cannot define you – not even a psychologist. It is vital you acknowledge and believe your self-understanding over what a boyfriend or girlfriend, husband or wife, father or mother, manager or employee tells you.
The second step to deal with a controller uses the one-mindedness warning sign, which is to identify when the person trespasses your “psychic boundary”. Similar to the first step, detect trespasses by seeing what someone does when they attempt to define you. While the first step is an acknowledgment and belief before any controlling behavior surfaces, this second step reinforces the first step the moment someone controls you.
The third step is to speak up. You cannot shatter the idealized image placed on you until you speak up to face the problem. Though you are a victim of someone’s hurtful behavior, you are responsible for your response.
The fourth step uses the “What?” technique taught by Evans who says victims fall into the false reality controllers create by arguing with them.
Instead of arguing with a person who defines you, Evans recommends you do not even validate what they are saying through argument and instead ask, “What?” or variations of it repeatedly.
No controlling person is going to change their behavior through one conversation.
Controllers need to see for themselves the backward connections they have created with others.
Children in controlling relationships need help otherwise they are at risk of dictating others later in life. The moment a child’s fundamental needs remain unfilled, the child escapes to a fake world where those needs are met.
The intergenerational transmission of control cycles again unless it is stopped. Now is the time to deal with a controlling person and take control of what is controlling you.
This book has some good ideas, but the theory that ties them together is not explained very clearly. Also, the terminology she creates for her theory is goofy and confusing. This is too bad, since the topic is an important one, and Evans does not demonize the controlling person, but talks about people who want to stop acting that way.
It's clear that the author has no background in psychology--a basic knowledge of attachment theory and ego psychology would illuminate the mentality of controlling people.
Instead of reading the book, read my summary of its good points:
-Acting "controlling" includes a variety of behaviors that are designed to force or manipulate the target, e.g., physical abuse, verbal abuse, direct and implied threats, harassment, stalking, isolation, discrimination, and defining others.
-CPs act the most controlling with the people they feel emotionally closest to, usually their children or romantic partners.
-Controlling People (CPs) act this way in order to meet important emotional needs that they are usually unaware that they have.
-CPs have a mental image of the kind of person who will meet their needs, and they believe they can get those needs met by forcing a real person to conform to that image and engage in the behaviors that meet their needs.
-CPs believe that emotional intimacy must involve a merging of selves, so they experience differences of opinion, identity or taste as dire threats to intimacy. They also expect intimacy to produce mind-meld, so their thoughts, feelings, and wishes will be understood without their having to express them.
-If CPs cannot feel merged with another person, they feel a devastating aloneness. If a target is unable or unwilling to conform with the CP's demands, the CP will perceive this as a hateful attack, designed to make them feel devastatingly alone and vulnerable (b/c due to mind-meld, the target must have known how the CP would feel).
-CPs usually believe their controlling behavior is justified, morally right, necessary, or at least inevitable. If this belief is difficult to maintain about a particular incident, they will forget what they did.
-Controlling behavior usually backfires on CPs, eventually getting them the opposite results of their goal.
-CPs have distorted and incomplete understandings of the people they try to control, and of the effects of their controlling behavior. In short, they lack empathy. Their view of a relationship is all about the other person meeting their needs, and does not acknowledge the other person having any separate or conflicting needs.
-For a target, self-awareness and trusting one's own reactions are both necessary to resist CPs' attacks.
-For a target, connecting to people and groups of people who also trust your self-definition and reactions is very helpful for resisting CPs. They can give you the reality check you may need to be reassured that you are not irrational--the CP is.
-One indicator of whether a person is a CP is if they verbally define others. They will claim to know, without a doubt, who, what or how somebody is, or what they should be or do, often on the basis of little or no evidence. Sterotyping is when this kind of thinking is applied to large groups.
-Another indicator of a CP is if they often consider their actions or feelings to be "caused" by others, as if they had no control over themselves.
-Other, closely related, indicators of a CP are always needing to be right, win, and feel superior.
-CPs may form oppressive groups that are organized around controlling members and/or outsiders. Gangs, cults and racial-supremicist organizations are obvious examples, but a workplace, church, club or clique can be oppressive too.
-When a CP tries to define you to your face, don't try to persuade them to see your point of view--they will see that as your accepting their right to define you. Instead, directly challenge their premise, by looking at them as if they're nuts or saying something like "What?" or "Nonsense," "You don't know what I'm thinking," "How dare you tell me how I should feel?" "That's just your opinion," etc.
-CPs who want to give up acting controlling, must learn to find true intimacy by paying attention to the real individuality of themselves and others.
