Further thoughts on blame, codependency and the need for anger as protection

Any codependent relationship has the potential for both parties to become conscious of their invested need in the dynamic that has played out. Blame occurs within codependency when either or both parties recognizes the aspects of self not being fulfilled through the dynamic and the exchange / intertwined communication in the relationship. Eventually ended when at least one side decides to move on, either replacing the dynamics required in the codependency in another relationship, or becoming conscious of what cannot be fulfilled or completed by the other party.

When a codependent relationship has formed that is akin to abuse, either via physical, mental, emotional, sexual abuse/violence, or the disempowerment of one individual through manipulations of shame, guilt, fear or control, a recovery process is needed in order for that individual to restore a sense of identity outside of the dynamic. If a level of brainwashing has occurred, where one individual cannot see the damage / dominance inflicted on them by their codependent “abuser” (I put in quotation here, abuser a strong word, and yet relative to the first hand experience of the abused) a waking up and reprogramming can occur, where with sufficient time outside and free from the relationship the “abused” (again relative to the type of relationship, its gravity and whether there is a sense of danger physical or otherwise) can begin to see the abuse for what it is, without bypassing or justifying the other parties behavior or needing to empathize with the other party. This again draws somewhat of a parallel to Stockholm syndrome.

With the desire of an individual at soul level to evolve and discover self beyond the limitation incurred from the co-dependence, an unraveling can occur where the sting of outrage at the injustice experienced by the abused, if their psyche is ready to acknowledge and process it, begins to kick in. With the allowance of time for it to unravel, they can see the deeper levels of the dynamic of abuse in the relationship, and how it was carried out. They begin to see the truth of the dynamic, both of what was experienced, where lines were crossed and also what the pay off was for them in staying in the relationship as long as they had.

In the midst of this awakening to the injustice experienced, anger is a crucial reminder and acknowledgement for self to truly acknowledge the danger and damage of this type of relationship in the way it has the potential to distort self and limit growth and expansion. The containment previously experienced in the relationship has to feel repulsive or become so, in order for the individual to move out of empathy and not be drawn back in by the old manipulations & dependency of their abuser, which would have before allowed them to continue to justify and mentally or emotionally bypass the behaviors of their abuser, for example guilt for questioning their abusers actions, or unquestioning loyalty overriding discernment of their codependent’s intentions.

The activation of anger and blame helps the individual to draw a line in the sand and recognize where and how the violation had occurred. It is needed also in their state of vulnerability to keep them safe, in being conscious of what they then attract or choose to co-create with other individuals. The abuser in the dynamic that they “escaped” from, needs in the abused’s psyche to remain “the bad guy” in order for a sense of self to rebuild without their confidence being broken down again by guilt, shame, violence or any other type of manipulation/ distortion.

Holding onto this blame and resentment, however, can last years, if not a lifetime, because the next phase requires even deeper integration where the individual assesses and recognizes how the anger and resentment has served them as a form of protection, but they are now entering a period of transition where they are strong enough in their energy (and perhaps have had enough life experience away from the original codependent relationship) to no longer require the other individual to be held accountable in their mind / psyche via blame, anger or resentment. The soul is yearning to move towards true forgiveness, understanding, and neutrality which requires to no longer hold fear of the other individual. To recognize that the other party no longer holds power over them. To access this state, a stripping away of the blame is needed which means the individual must then recognize the fear of losing self to the old abuse / dependency is no longer valid because they no longer are able to even resonate from a space where they could attract that type of dynamic. If they did they would recognize it and be able to disconnect from it quickly while maintaining a state of neutrality with no fear of its old trappings.

For more articles visit

‪#‎blame‬ ‪#‎resentment‬ ‪#‎anger‬ ‪#‎codependency‬ ‪#‎abuse‬ ‪#‎stockholmsyndrome‬‪#‎fear‬ ‪#‎growth‬ ‪#‎forgiveness‬


Am I honouring myself?

A loss of power can be something that we don’t even recognise. But feeling that loss of control can lead us into a frenetic state, where we scramble to bring a sense of order back into our lives via external force. This is outward justification of the loss we are feeling within ourselves when our sense of self honour has become confused or misdirected. As we scramble to get that feeling of protection love or safety back in our being, we can quite easily flip into the dualistic state, of assessing the world around us in simplified terms; good or bad, right or wrong, noble or evil, when the truth is it’s never really this clean cut. We go into “cleaning house” mode as a way of moving our stagnant energy, and attempting to regain our sense of empowerment. Yet sometimes in this state of exalted self cheer leading, we miss the point, and we oversimplify or dramatize the situation, when really we just need to go within ourselves and ask the question; “am I honouring myself?”

We try to make “clean cuts” when we have confusion over the unresolved feelings we’ve experienced that bring up feelings of pain, lack of self love or honour. Our society tends to support this very simplistic and black and white way of trying to empower itself. It’s kind of the “Ricki Lake” method. You know? Like the guy couldn’t commit, he was always at work, girl don’t settle, go out and get yourself a new outfit. Bam! You’re empowered. And yes in a sense you’ve had a shift, you’ve recognised something wasn’t working and you feel reenergised. But what happens when you go and recreate the exact same situation?


Is it always about villains? Villainy? Yes you can look at everybody and make lists of pros and cons about them, but so what? They are who they are. Does it work for you or not? And if so, to what degree? When you interact with someone where do you feel you’re not honouring yourself? Can you change that aspect? And is it enough to reframe your concept of the exchange you’ve created with that person and to put it in a different light? Or does it mean it can’t be resolved?

How do you feel about yourself? Do you feel good about yourself when you’re spending time with others for the most part? Is it just one small aspect that makes it too much of a compromise? And if so, how can you change the dynamic? How can you leave it so everyone is honoured?

We know when we are selling ourselves short. We can deny it, but underneath that we can feel the pain of lack of self honour. But directing anger at those who are blissfully unaware of our pain won’t resolve the issue. Often our sense of self honour is tied in with our value system. But here’s the tricky part, what if our value systems are completely different? Who’s right and who’s wrong? Does it make someone else wrong if we feel we’re right? Or does it just mean they perceive things in a different way?

In every exchange, we can assess how much of ourselves we give, dependent on how much honour we feel is brought to the table by each party. And each exchange will be as unique as every individual is. If we give more and expect the same, and it’s not reciprocal, we’re going to experience the loss, and if we deny that, try to justify it and still hold out in EXPECTATION of the same level of energy to be returned by the other person, our sense of self love will plummet. But it doesn’t make anyone bad. It’s a realization.

Discernment is key. What you feel safe to share with somebody, may not feel as sacred with someone else. Your sense of self honour and honour of others, as well as the honour you receive from others will be your indicator as to what level you will co-create with another person, group or mass of people. And to what degree you feel safe, loved and honoured co-creating worlds. Only you can assess that internally, based on your value system, to know if you feel safe, loved and honored. This is how we can bring the sacred part of ourselves into the world and feel received and held by it.

Reiki Massage Bayside Melbourne

Maurice Katting is a Massage Therapist, Reiki Practitioner and Vibrational Healer based in Melbourne, Australia

You can connect with him at

Do I need to take my anger seriously?

What do we learn from anger and what does this emotion teach us? Is it a way of highlighting a disparity, when we feel a boundary has been overstepped or when we feel who we are isn’t being acknowledged? When we sit in the awareness of our anger we can process for ourselves what the anger means beyond the other person’s actions, and choose if we need to take action to resolve a situation. Or is the work more internal? Do we need to readdress the way we view an interaction with someone or our expectations of it? Is the process a solo effort, dressing our wounds, accessing and healing deeper layers of a reappearing pattern?

When we’ve addressed our concerns and taken action to redeem them, whether externally or internally, does there come a point when we just need to say to ourselves, “stop taking yourself so damn seriously!”?

If you sat down and wrote a list of all the horrible things people have said about you in your life, you could go through the list and systemically assess each description. Do these opinions matter? Are there some valid points? Are some of these descriptions accurate? If so, is it a bad thing or is it just a thing? If it feels like it’s completely someone else’s projection do we know ourselves enough to not be in fear of that label? And if we can see how some people would see us in a certain way, do we need to hold on to establishing to the world that we don’t fit that description? Can we just be ok with it?

If we were angered by something in the past and it meant so much to us then, are we still needing to justify our rejection of the projections of others and what they thought of us? Or do we reach a point where those projections exist on one level and we can exist on many levels? Can there be times when we identify with our personality selves and how the world may see us, and times when we identify with the non corporeal or defined versions of ourselves, where we are not our names, our bodies and human forms? When we hold ourselves in unidentified forms and then return to our human identification, does our anger still hold validity?


How much of the fight for justification is necessary for us to carry day to day? What is worth fighting for? The less we are fighting for things it seems the less we need to fight for things. But this not apathy or disinterest in the world. It is going beyond the pitfalls and separations of form. It can be likened to the idea of protesting from a state of unification with all life. The more we feel we need to justify the more we feel taken away from our formless identities, but our formed identities seem to keep changing anyway. So why be upset? Why do we still need to be pissed off? Why do we still need to be in that argument from 1986?

What does it ever really prove anyway? What does proving a point mean? We can debate til the cows come home and both sides can feel that they are not being heard or recognised, and sometimes we aren’t recognizable, just as much as we may not be recognizing others. The capacity to recognize just isn’t there. When we’re pushing for justice or where we feel there has been and remains inequality, by all means we should use our voices as our expression is a divine tool. But what if the justification that we are fighting for is against a projection or a belief others hold of us of what we represent? Can we really “fight” for control of that? Do we need to release the duality in order to just be and not carry the weight and the struggle of requiring justification? How many times do we need to “prove the point”?

At some stage I feel we all reach less of a desire for the, let’s call it, 3D world debates and dialogues, which will always fall under the veil of separations, projections and distinctions. The constant identification with these 3D world identities traps us. Separates us from seeing reality in a different way. It also keeps pulling us back into the exhaustion of the fight for justification.

We all have a purpose and an expression which is valid. But is the way that we are utilizing our expression exhausting us by our identification with the 3D realm, or are we using it to transcend our reality and allow others to follow in their freedom?

Do we reach a point where we understand that we are wasting too much energy and concern with our need for justification when we still identify with the 3d realm? If it’s not actually teaching us anything anymore then do we need to take our anger so seriously? Cause if we can let that go then we don’t have to keep playing ball.



Reiki Massage Bayside Melbourne

The Disconnect Healing Space

Maurice Katting is a Massage Therapist, Reiki Practitioner and Vibrational Healer based in Melbourne, Australia

You can connect with him at