On one of the lists I am on there has been a brief discussion about False Memory Syndrome being real.  Oh the shock and horror of it all.  But I have to wonder what is so horrifying to people about the idea that there can and is such a thing as implanted false memories.  Now I could understand if it is spoken of in that all encompassing generalisations, that all abuse means are false.  Then my hackles would go up and  I would come out fighting.  But I feel that way lately about all generations.  If someone says all multiples have a host personality, or abuse is the only cause of multiplicity I am going to react to that, because I believe such generalisations are narrowing, and erroneous.  But I know that even stating the possibility of False Memories angers and disturbs many people.

I think part of that is people's insecurities and self doubt.  When we first started listen to the stories of some of the Shire's past we didn't want to believe it, we couldn't believe it.  This was our life they were talking about and nothing like that could happen.  Our belief in ourselves was very fragile.  If someone had started speaking of False Memory Syndrome I would of immediately thought that it was about me, that they thought I was lying, and would of tumbled into denial.  I therefore think that a lot of resistance to the idea of False Memories is about people's own denial and how easy it is to doubt themselves.  We didn't want to accept it, we didn't think anyone would so we believed everyone would think we are lying.

About a year ago we were swatting scar stories with a friend.  I was talking about how as a kid I was off on my own playing in a stream and slipped cutting my foot open.  I got to the part about trying to brush the grass off my foot and having it open up, I said something like "he was still down at the stream" and she said "I thought you were alone".  It took another couple of months to remember the true story, of how my grandfather had cut it open with a broken bottle when we tried to run away from him, and how all the way to the hospital my mother drummed in the acceptable story until we believed it.  Now people I know have no problems with a false acceptable memory to cover true abusive memory, but they do have issues with the opposite, a false abuse memory overlaying the acceptable one.  I personally don't see the difference.

This isn't to say that every survivors story is a lie, or implanted.  It isn't about perpetuating the belief that none of the abuses reported every happened.  Our abuse is real, I wish it wasn't.  I remember when I was unable to acknowledge any of our abuse, I was describing thoughts and emotions to our therapist, wanting to know what she thought was going on.  It was so frustrating because she sat on the fence, never saying what she thought, allowing me time to reach it myself.  I know that my memories haven't been tainted.  Therefore when the discussions on False Memory start I am not emotionally involved.  And I suppose that is the conclusion that I have come to since first listening to the talk of False Memory Syndrome, be secure in what you know, and that if you believe in yourself it isn't an issue anymore.  It becomes an interesting conversation, but it isn't about my experiences.  Nothing is ever one sided.  Allowing the possibility of false memories doesn't discount the reality of abuse.  Maybe that's what the avid proponents of False Memory Syndrome should also allow for.  That there can be false memories, but there can also be horrific abuse.