I see too, that posters feel they are being blamed for being a certain way that they don't perceive themselves to be...but that's not necessarily scapegoating just because blame or false accusation is involved.

Scapegoating is when the other person knowingly wrongly blames you and lets you take a fall for something they did that they don't want to take accountablity for because it would make them look bad. It is not a misperception, but rather, deliberate manipulation and distortion of fact to sacrifice another's reputation for want of saving their own.

NonScapegoating blame and false accusation are facts of life (unfortunately) when people don't listen to the other side and/or when people judge how they perceive you to be true even when it's not how you see yourself. It is generally the result of not really knowing the other person and not taking time to know them. It is much more common than Scapegoating is, but it's generally innocent based on viewpoint, outlook and individually learned life-survival skills and can therefore be talked out... the key to talking things out though being that all parties have to assume partial responsibility in that even the 'victim' needs to challenge his/her way of coming across to others by putting oneself in the shoes of the other. Both sides need to do the shoe swapping thing.

I think before a problem can be resolved, the problem must be accurately identified. Is the problem based on Scapegoatism? Or is it just human error in opinion?

The difference is important because if we believe we are being scapegoated then we live with a mindset that someone is out to get us, and that will make us distrustful of the other person which pretty much destroys any hope of reconcilliation via talking it out. Feelings of being Scapegoated leaves us with an anger to get even and/or with a conclusion that we need to run away from an unresolvable problem accepting that some people clearly 'suck'. and leaves us with both annomosity and festering feelings of resentment.

On the other hand, if we believe our problems stem from poor communications and opinions, it's another whole ball game. We all tend to make opinions and pass judgement on others. It's human nature to assess a situation based on one's own perception. But these sorts of situations don't need to become traps of nonresolution if we don't first assume our perpetrators have been malicious as a scapegoater would be.

---

annie (03 Mar, 2007 03:48 p.m.):
I think that scapegoating versus something else is that scapegoating is when someone says something to you and you tell them that it hurt your feelings - instead of saying something to smooth things over (not even an apology necessarily but try to put things straight) - they continue with their point, and don't let it drop. You try to ignore it but they do it again. It's terrible really because you know you can't confront them with it again as they will do the same thing. I think it happens to me because I'm not one to argue (even though I have a for a while and to no avail) It's just a hopeless situation and the only solution I can think of is not to communicate at all with them if that's possible - in other words try to get them out of your life. I also think that part of them knows that it's mean and they don't want to own that.

---

Annie, that is truely sad when someone hurts your feelings and then won't even acknowledge you have feelings after you tell them how you're feeling.

I can see it as a form of scapegoating, but it's also to me that something else called, kicking a person when they are down.

What I mean is, if the person goes about to hurt your feelings on purpose just so you will fuss about it so they can then push an agenda about you, -such as to say you make mountains out of molehills/can't ever be wrong/fake cry etc, in order to discredit you to others so they can continue to hurt you and get away with it ....that's some heavy brilliant scapegoating tactics!

---

vil (03 Mar, 2007 04:50 p.m.):

---

annie (03 Mar, 2007 03:48 p.m.):
I think that scapegoating versus something else is that scapegoating is when someone says something to you and you tell them that it hurt your feelings - instead of saying something to smooth things over (not even an apology necessarily but try to put things straight) - they continue with their point, and don't let it drop. You try to ignore it but they do it again. It's terrible really because you know you can't confront them with it again as they will do the same thing. I think it happens to me because I'm not one to argue (even though I have a for a while and to no avail) It's just a hopeless situation and the only solution I can think of is not to communicate at all with them if that's possible - in other words try to get them out of your life. I also think that part of them knows that it's mean and they don't want to own that.

---

Annie, that is truely sad when someone hurts your feelings and then won't even acknowledge you have feelings after you tell them how you're feeling.

I can see it as a form of scapegoating, but it's also to me that something else called, kicking a person when they are down.

What I mean is, if the person goes about to hurt your feelings on purpose just so you will fuss about it so they can then push an agenda about you, -such as to say you make mountains out of molehills/can't ever be wrong/fake cry etc, in order to discredit you to others so they can continue to hurt you and get away with it ....that's some heavy brilliant scapegoating tactics!

Still, in all, when your feelings are hurt, it's so very sad. Here's a hug for you, today. ((hugs))...hope you will pass it on to someone else with troubled feelings.

---

---

annie (03 Mar, 2007 11:33 p.m.):

Hi vil - thanks for the hug! I hug you back. Yes I just replied to Dee Ann and I said that maybe it's not scapegoating although like you say I guess it's a form of it. If you read my reply to Dee Ann it explains a bit more about it. I guess the scapegoating part comes in because they didn't like it that I would stop communicating and (I believe they never thought I would do that) so when they tried to put it right they did it in a round-a-bout way (symbols). So to me it's like blaming me for the whole non-communicating thing. That's where the scapegoating comes in. Like I said to Dee Ann why would they do it like that? Any ideas? thanks.

---

Annie, please don't take this as taking up for your foes; I'm not siding with them, just trying to answer the question why they might talk to you in symbols from several angles because....

Symbols are weird and open to bias.
Symbols = beating around the bush = confusion.

So, as symbolic language goes, it could be being interpreted by you to mean something bad when your family uses them...and perhaps other times in your life symbols have been used that you interpreted to mean something good. So, I don't see symbols as the basis of your problem....moreover it's the person behind those symbols- that you suspect is using them to be mean to you -that is your problem area.

You want to know, what are THEY 'up to' by using symbols to communicate with you. You don't trust their symbols seeing them as shady talk and suspect them of being up to something.

I think you've hit the nail on the head when you said, "So to me it's like blaming me for the whole non-communicating thing.".....in that you are suspecting they are up to something/blaming you...and they surely might be up to something/blaming you! But there are other possibilities.

You said you put them on ignore (sorry for the paraphrasing) and that was when they started with the symbols. I can think of 2 reasons why they might have tried again using symbols...1. they wanted you to understand their view point in hopes of proving to you they were not being mean and really wanted to work things out and used less direct accusatory symbols rather than direct wording since that already ticked you off and made you run, or 2. they like to kick you when you are down.

At any rate, it seems by what you say that your family wants you to understand their view point only. I mean you have not said if they have 'listened' to your side at all, but apparently their view point is in direct opposition to your view point or there wouldn’t be a problem. If you run, they will go on believing their view point and you will go on resenting them for it. They will nobly tell themselves they tried and just didn’t get anywhere. They will not just magically start to believe your view point was right or had any value at all.

---

annie (04 Mar, 2007 06:50 p.m.):
.To me it's like they wanted to put it right, but didn't want to admit they were wrong and if they weren't willing to do that - what does that tell me? Thanks

---