This question is been pondering in mind for while now. Being a victim or otherwise opening oneself to be victimized is driven mostly by the situation So is being a perpetrator. Both are driven or coerced by the situation one is involved in. Incase one is not sure Whether he/she is the victim or perpetrator? It becomes important to understand if the perpetration is induced with fair intentions or not.
Now the act of playing or claiming to be victim to self induced perpetration needs to absolute scrutiny. Mental recluse alone can decide to play both a the same time. Either or he/she is a schinzophernic Actually being the perpetrator to any offense or not is a choice, it is totally an individuals virtuous call.
However, there is lot of enigma to be considered before being judgmental of ones vice or virtue in case victim him/her self is the perpetrator of offense. This is more paradoxical then the paradox itself. Dilemma hard to explain. There is lot of clutter surrounding this decision of being victim and inducing the offense on self.
This state of paranoia is difficult to unravel. Nevertheless, perpetrator is in better control in such a bargain than the victim! Who you want to play is your sole discretion
No comments:
Post a Comment