For a perfectionist, nothing is more horrifying than the thought of screwing up. Not even the actual screw up, just the possibility. We spend so much time checking, rechecking, tweaking, returning to the original, etc. Rinse. Repeat. Rinse an extra time, just to be sure.
We've been surrounded by mixed messages. First you get the encouragement: "Don't worry. Everyone screws up." "Don't be so hard on yourself." "If you do your best and it doesn't work, it's still fine." But once a mistake is revealed? "Well why weren't you paying attention?" "It's so simple." "How could you possibly miss that?"
Perfectionists hear about a new law/decree/task force/policy, and we immediately run through the possible problems. It's not that we're alarmist, we need the whole picture to understand what will be required of us. We want to know what the ramifications will be if we miss something.
Perfectionists are info seekers. We are data miners. We take the result and learn how all the pieces fit together. We try to make different pictures of those same pieces. We're lawyers, scientists, researchers, counselors, and historians all rolled into a neat package of frazzled nerves.
You see, we're the ones who laugh the loudest at the supposition of "If you didn't do anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about." We laugh because that is a simplistic argument that should be true. It isn't. It's a lie we tell ourselves because we desperately want to believe if we follow all the rules, do our best, and avoid mistakes, we'll live happily ever after.
Bull. Shit.
Lies, damn lies, and statistics, right?
You can poll the exact same group of people multiple times and get vastly different results based on how a question is asked. If you want a specific result, you practice wording the question to nudge answers in the desired direction. It's a sophisticated manipulation.
Sometimes you have to start with raw data and draw conclusions from that. First, you collect all the information available such as all the students in a school district. You take demographics-- age, economic bracket, parental situations, address, ethnicity, and the like; scholastic history-- grades, teachers, pedagogy, and so forth; extracurricular involvement-- sports vs drama vs art vs music vs community service; social environment-- cliques, after school jobs, friends from school, friends not in the district...
Lots and lots of data. So much good can be done with this. But, for argument's sake, let's say that there's a particular guidance counselor a researcher doesn't like for whatever reason. This counselor's students have the highest college acceptance rates and are among the most well adjusted, well rounded kids in the district. This counselor is doing everything the right way. Dollars to donuts, the collected data will show this is a model counselor.
The data collected can also be grouped to show a myriad of reasons to fire them.
The collection of information is always-- always-- the first step for a bigger end game. Always. A plan enacted without the proper data will crash and burn. Perfectionists know this.
When the person requesting the data is shady and when the task of collection is given to a person whose morals are also questionable, the resulting report will most likely be skewed.
Believe it or not, I've spent a good amount of time setting up for a very simple point.
If you didn't do anything wrong, you still have to worry about falling victim to another person's agenda. Being a Good Person or a Law-Abiding Citizen does not protect you from harm.
This has been a passive-aggressive post. Attribute this rant to whatever you wish. I have no control over what you believe to be the source. This information is now public for anyone to draw any conclusion.
And that, reader, is my point.
