My Psychiatric Label and How I Got It.
By Patricia Lefave, Labeled, D.D. (P) 

The fear induced in the hunted target who knows someone is after her, and who has managed to get to her, even inside her home, so she knows she is not safe there either, is also part of the demonstration in my protagonist's training. (“Let me see your fear.”) There are also comments made there about even psychiatrists being afraid of this "superior" group of well trained people. If my protagonist wanted control over everything in his life, it was suggested he become one of the people ‘GIVING the ulcers, rather than getting them.’

The switch was equated to someone steering a car with his rear-view mirror. Because they are looking behind them instead of ahead, believing that these two directions are the opposite, they don't see the crash that is coming. My own protagonist, who is still looking back to the training of his past, does not see his own 'crash" which is about to occur. It will occur because he has chosen the wrong target this time. In a ‘chain reaction,’ I am being "taught" by him that reality is substantial and will knock me on my ass. It is also knocking everyone else involved on theirs, and last, but certainly not least, the chain reaction, which I interrupted, and sent back towards my protagonist, will knock HIM down. That is the point when HE will ‘realize his own experience’ and see that by following his charismatic leader, without question as to his Purpose, he has become the source of HIS own pain.

My protagonist was encouraged to make spontaneous choices without explaining them or thinking out the reason for them, and to do so in the name of ''aliveness.'' (give up discernment and just follow the leader) He was shown that he must ''win'' first by setting his concrete goal at the start and then doing whatever he needed to do to reach it. (Like his leader did?) Whether this is perceived as good or bad depends upon what the goal actually IS, doesn't it? But you see, to HIM, there is no good or evil, no right or wrong, and he has allegedly expressed just that opinion to those over whom he has petty power in the abuse program at the hospital.

So how did he get rid of his ''item''? (You know; that ''thing'' which can be ''replaced'' as he actually wrote down for me....oops!) Well, he ''hooked'' me with the bait of ''mutual'' interests so that he could use it to ‘pull me out of his circle’ and get rid of me. He learned that ‘solving problems would just create more problems’ so he should not bother with attempts at resolution, instead, he just ‘gives his problems to someone else’, just like management should hand its problems to their staff members. I and some of his co-workers could be used as scapegoats for the whole group. He once asked me if I had ever worked somewhere where the politics was MORE important than the work itself. We both recognized the truth of that. He was shown that ‘experience has component parts’ and was encouraged to connect his own personal experience, as an abstraction, to the ''item'' he wished to get rid of. He was told he was ‘being given an opportunity’ and that he should ‘participate in the process, only as long as it took to get rid of his targeted item.’(me) The anger he associated with his personal past was to be directed at his target of choice. (Again, that would be me, the selected surrogate. The Psych. Prof defined this as ‘an orgasm of hatred’ and compared it to a ''snuff fantasy'', the ‘eroticization of aggressive impulses.’ She also noted the ‘emotional group contagion,’ a sort of catharsis for the group as a whole. )

My protagonist then watched a little psychodrama being acted out of aggressors and victims and was told he needed to make a choice about with which SIDE he wanted to identify. He was told ‘you just follow instructions and take what you get.’ (What that means of course, as in all of this, depends upon with whom you identify. Does it mean ''take abuse from the aggressor and accept the idea that you ''CHOSE'' to be a victim? Or does it mean take it as an instruction on HOW to be an aggressor and sidestep responsibility for it, by BLAMING your victim? Is it intended as an accusation, a revelation or an instruction? It depends upon your ‘perspective.’

It was pointed out to him that this exercise was a parallel to people and relationships in his personal life. The leader wanted to see how afraid they all were; wanted to reveal their fears to them. The previous group of trained zombies (the Psych Profs word) responded ‘like an army of automatons’ set to intimidate the new group. (The Psych Prof. noted that they were all very rigid and looked catatonic) The leader induced fear in the trainees using the pre-trained mob to co-operate with him and his agenda. Many of the followers being trained broke down crying and whimpering under the group onslaught. Relentless confrontation and bullying tactics were used to break down their ‘resistance.’ Most were intimidated and many tried to please the trainer as a way of avoiding his wrath. (Much like abused children do when trapped in a situation where there is no escape possible) All faults are found in the person being trained to react differently; never in the leaders. (Authority figures) In fact, they were not "allowed" to find any fault in the leader nor in his system, though they COULD find fault in others, provided they did not go public about it. (Covert abuse) Any complaints had to stay within the four walls of the training room. My protagonist learned that this game was ‘about domination’ and also that domination is a game played by children. Everyone then gave their own definition about what the "mind" was and of course, many said "the brain." (Perhaps they were the mental health professionals or the politicians taking the training) They were told that they seek agreement with others because they are afraid of being a**holes. ‘It’ was stated that as they acted this out they shouldn't let the authority figures CATCH them behaving badly.

The difference between fantasy and concrete reality was demonstrated for them such as a difference between touching a flower and imagining oneself tap dancing on the top of a gigantic flower. MY protagonist was shown how to ‘practice situations’ until he could act them out perfectly; use the phone to contact your target(s), gather and keep files of information on them. As far as behaviour goes, he is to hide ‘in an opaque compartment’ (so that no one can see the real him) and then up goes the wall, like a curtain on a stage onto which he enters like an actor in a play which he himself writes, directs, produces and acts as cameraman. Just as if it was a scene in a movie, his role studied to perfection. HE creates reality itself. He was told he could change his personality as easily as changing a suit. He could make the movie in his mind come out any way he wants. (In his mind...on the level of fantasy...) He was told he was concerned with one thing and one thing only...his own survival.

He was told that ‘ego’ means ‘being in his own mind and that he is already perfect’; that ‘survival’ means expanding that which is his own mind, to cover the universe and invalidating any other point of view. (Being out of his mind, in other words, by overpowering everyone else. I believe this would be called ‘sarcasm’) He was told that the survival of his mind meant’ dominating, being right and never wrong and self justification.’ He was told that was ‘more important than life itself.’ (Is this an accusation or revelation about the motivation of aggressors? Or is it an instruction TO aggressors? Again, it depends upon your ''perspective'' doesn't it? Aggressors are those who feel entitled to do what they do at the expense of others) He was shown how to remove the barrier (some might call that barrier, conscience or empathy) that exists between him and his desires.

Anyone who stood up to the leader, or disagreed, was pressured and often humiliated by the other group members. (The Psych. Prof felt ashamed of the ‘perverse voyeuristic pleasure’ which even she felt when she looked back on the experience.) My protagonist was then shown that words which may sound the same can have a different meaning depending upon the context, including being meant as physical when metaphysical and visa versa. Example: the words ‘soul’ and ‘sole.’ (The Psych Prof. noted that concrete reality was made unclear in this training.)

I had told a psychiatrist and my employment supervisor at the time, well before I broke down, that I had to get this stopped as I was having trouble staying connected to concrete reality now, and that it was because I could not sort the truth out of all the contradictory information and multiple versions of reality with which I was being bombarded daily. (By the way, I am still getting that; just not at the extreme level it once was.)

My protagonist, the "trickster," was taught to focus on "what" he wanted to ‘eliminate.’ The disconnect from external reality, done first, (the ‘tearing down process’, or fragmentation method, or "depatterning" if you prefer) by remaining vague and abstract in all communications, demonstrates the first steps in the control of the leaders over the lives and minds of others, who may need to be eliminated, so that he can maintain his delusional belief in his own "perfection." Platitudes and aphorisms pass for ‘communication.’ Sessions of group hypnosis were repeated throughout his training and used as reinforcement. The training featured constant emotional extremes which were described as "a roller coaster ride." As soon as a relaxation exercise was finished, the group was revved up to fear and high anxiety again. (Much like I observed in my protagonist’s co-workers and the public which they involved in it everywhere, which was of course, denied. I learned that when they were standing in little groups, folding their arms and tilting their heads together in their on going "assessment" of me, that it was no "joke" as I assumed it to be at the time, as the "leader" of this "game" led me to believe.

In the fear exercise, he was told to imagine himself surrounded by people that he needed to fear and that the number of them kept growing. To imagine there was no place to feel safe, no one to turn to for help (which was being left behind him) and no escape possible. He was told to imagine what it would be like to be watched and followed, realize that someone is after you and that you are not even safe in your own home. (As I was not and may not be, even now) Imagine that ‘men are getting into your apartment’ even as you are trying to get away from them. (Which I experienced in concrete reality and for which I was told I was "crazy” and needed "help." As the Psych Prof. pointed out, "you cannot reason with the aggressor NOR can you get him to just leave you alone."

(This is something very much like I told one of his nurse co-workers about him before I broke down)

Now, here comes the "joke" for this part of the training:

 "Everybody else is afraid of you!, (The trainee) including your psychiatrist!"

Now he was told to notice how everyone is afraid of HIM, out here, ‘in concrete reality.’ "So, who would you rather be with?" he was asked.

(The one doing the assaulting OR the one being assaulted?)

Now, it is said that at this pint of the training, many of the followers start to feel really powerful, and now, everyone who stays in will begin to "cross the line” together. My protagonist was told that he should have such an attitude ‘that people will want to cross the street’ when they see him coming.

(I know that I do. The sight of him and the knowledge that he has been protected and supported by the psychiatric hospital that employs him, for about a dozen years (fourteen now) past the time when I told them what he was doing, nauseates me pretty good. )

Many in the training were manipulated to actually say, "There is no reason in what I do." Though some seemed to be able to hear it, and an amused smirk likely appeared, most did not seem able to hear themselves saying what they had been manipulated to say. Isn't that amazing? It is the followers who do not question things that often do not hear any absurdity in the obvious truth they speak. As is stated in my protagonist's training, "Everything that is being said is TRUE, BUT, what is driving it has been switched.

(Perhaps he is being driven by the desire for domination he sees in his 'rear-view mirror'?) He is enthusiastically supporting ‘It.’ He is following the "authority" figure who tells him he cannot question either the leader or his system. In this upside down, backwards, reversed in time, system, the absence of reason and group aggression is being enthusiastically promoted as the means to achieve "total control," and the MAJORITY are jumping on the bandwagon, trained it would seem, to ‘fail to see what is right in front of them.’

This is reality reversal; reason has become unreasonable, logic = illogic, below has become above, the top has become the bottom and the bottom the top, and the aggressor has become the victim. The whole thing is quite literally and metaphorically, the "image" of reality. (Reversed, like the reflection in a mirror that does not really exist concretely. ‘Everything’ in It is ‘nothing’ UNTIL, or unless, those trained in the concepts of It, bring it to concrete reality by ‘recreating It.’ They do that by giving it form and substance. That is what gives this ‘Shadow’ world, this illusion, its life in concrete reality.

(I once told my employment supervisor that my protagonist's "game" had taken on a life of its own and that it was out of control now)

Its followers are told they are ‘building an empire.’

 This is my protagonist's recreated illusion for both me and his co-workers, one of whom was said to have stated it was ‘only natural’ to take the side of one of your "own" over that of an outsider. In my adversary's training it is shown: reality is that which manifests concretely, and it is stated: "What is unreal is that defined by agreement, consensus or authority.

(His co-workers, the opinions of city employees, and university staff or psychiatrists at the hospital)