So, I got a card in the mail from my mom, and I just can’t seem to get it out of my head. The card itself is no big deal. It was a thank you card from my sister for her birthday gift.
It was how she addressed the envelope. For now, I’d like this blog to remain as anonymous as possible. So, for the sake of context, let’s say that my name is Bobbert, but all my life, I have pretty much gone by Bob. To feel more comfortable, I have found that Bobbert suits me more, and I have been going with it around friends and work. I had a discussion with my mom about the name shift, and she asked questions and commented.
So, I am just a little out of sorts with why the letter would be addressed to Bob. But, it wasn’t just addressed to Bob. It was addressed to Bob where Bob was four times larger than my last name and the rest of the address, and it was underlined.
(Again, Bobbert is not my actual name. It is used here for context.)
So, am I reading too much into it?
Is there anything to read into it?
Did she write it that way to say, you’ll always be Bob to me?
Was it her subconscious doing it, or was she aware?
Is that how she always addresses her envelopes? (It’s not.)
Or, does it have no meaning behind it, and I am just searching for meaning because I want it to fit my suspicions about how I think she feels. It aligns as evidence to show that my mom, who has feigned support, isn’t actually supportive.
Now, I could ask. But, I don’t think it would do much good because of course she’ll deny it. And, it will cause an issue with nothing resolved.
See this is the danger of perception without evidence. The evidence I have is circumstantial at best. But, it aligns with how I feel, and I can perceive an intent.
Looking at perception another way, my dad perceives me to be mentally and/or morally corrupt. Being transgender goes against everything he knows, and while the Bible doesn’t outright condemn it. For him, there is enough in there that does, and the religious higher ups have condemned it. So, for the sake of argument, let’s say that the Bible is evidence. But again, that evidence is circumstantial at best. Yet, it aligns with his fears.
He’s looking for who I am to be condemned, and he’s found his evidence.
I’m looking for my mom’s intent, and I have evidence.
But, I find my evidence more reliable because it is based on facts. His is based off a book that can viewed by the logical person as, at best, poorly written historical fiction.
His has no basis in rational thought, but it will be used to ensure that my relationship with him doesn’t heal.
And, I have evidence that it won’t heal in this lifetime because a psychic told me so. I saw the cards, and she said the cards never lie.
And, she said that a dark haired female presence is preventing me from healing my relationship with my dad, things won’t be healed in the physical realm, and somehow the devil is involved. (He did say I was possessed by the devil.) The psychic suspects that my dad practices dark magic.
See, I saw the cards. I have evidence. It aligns, mostly, with how I think and feel. (Although, him practicing dark magic threw me.)
But, I don’t believe it.
Even with circumstantial evidence, I don’t.
It is not based on logic or reasoning.
Just a fun $15 lark.
I could either read too much into it or not.
So, maybe, I won’t read too much into the Bob/Bobbert issue.
(Again, not my actual name.)
So, am I reading too much into how the envelope was addressed? I mean, I don’t buy what a psychic told me, but I am still hung up on the way my name was written . . .
Nope, my mom was trying to say something there.
What it was, I’m not sure.
Maybe, I’ll find out in the next lifetime.