I have discussed the topic of crying and how it relates to how much respect a person might have for the crier in several earlier posts (see hereand here). In those earlier posts we looked into the following questions: If I cry when criticized, does that mean I should view myself as acting like a baby? Is it right to view someone who cries as immature? In today’s post I’ll try to enrich some of these earlier issues by discussing Bob Dylan’s “Theme Time Radio Hour “show on the theme of tears (most of his shows are available on YouTube”.
Bob Dylan on Tears
Bob begins his show on tears as follows:
Well, welcome to Theme Time Radio Hour. In the background, some very sad music because this week, we’re gonna learn about sad clowns, crocodiles, and tear-stained make-up. We’re gonna look at a river of tears as we learn about crying. So grab yourself some Kleenex, heck, you better grab the whole box. Not that songs about crying are necessarily sad. This one at least sounds happy. It’s by Question Mark and the Mysterians–“96 Tears.”
Here are some of the lyrics to the song:
Too many teardrops For one heart to be crying Too many teardrops For one heart to carry on
You`re way on top now since you left me You’re always laughing way down at me But watch out now, I`m gonna get there
We`ll be together for just a little while And then I`m gonna put you way down here And you`ll start crying ninety-six tears Cry, cry, cry…
Hmmm, if this guy who is singing was a friend of mine actually going through a similar experience, how could I be helpful?
Well, just listening for awhile in a caring manner is almost always a good start. Rather than to be too quick to start offering advice or criticizing in any way, I might just softly summarize, every couple of minutes, what my friend has been saying, thus assuring him that I am accurately listening. If my summary is off the mark in any way, my friend will clarify.
At some point, I might explore with my friend his desire to not be crying. I understand that many people in our culture feel it is an immature act. You see this when someone does begin to cry in front of you and he or she quickly starts to apologize for crying. Is there some reason to change this attitude that crying is an act that only immature people do? Different people have different views about this.
Getting Back to the Dylan Show
After Bob opens his tear-soaked Theme Time Radio Hour show with “96 Tears,” which gave us an example of a man being bitter about his break-up with his lover, he plays a song by the lovely and talented Anita O’Day. In “And Her Tears Flowed Like Wine” Ms. O’Day provides us a woman’s perspective on what it’s like to be crying over how a lover mistreated her.
And her tears flowed like wine Yes, her tears flowed like wine She’s a real sad tomato She’s a busted valentine Knows her momma done told her That the man is darn unkind
Next up on Bob’s show is a tune by the great blues singer, Bobby Charles, who reminds us that even “Big Boys Cry:”
I cried last night until I couldn’t I’ll cry tonight, I know I shouldn’t It hurts to know that I can’t reach her I learned to lose, she was my teacher
Well I try to hide all the tears down deep inside But even big boys cry
I climb the walls, I chew my fingers I run around but her love lingers Her friends say she don’t talk about me They say she’s doing fine without me
Well I try to hide all the tears down deep inside But even big boys cry Oh
Well I try to hide all the tears down deep inside But even big boys cry
There are quite a variety of songs that Bob Dylan plays that remind us that crying is part of life for pretty much everyone. Bob introduces one of my favorites like this:
Thomas Fuller once said, “We’re born crying, live complaining, and die disappointed. Hank Williams knew what he was talking about. This song is about a very specific depression inspired by a troubled relationship with his wife, Audrey Sheppard. Here that Lonesome Whippoorwill. He sounds too blue to fly. I’m so lonesome I can cry.
What human being is unable to relate to these sad lyrics?
I’ve never seen a night so long When time goes crawling by The moon just went behind the clouds To hide its face and cry
Did you ever see a robin weep When leaves begin to die? Like me, he’s lost the will to live I’m so lonesome I could cry
The silence of a falling star Lights up a purple sky And as I wonder where you are I’m so lonesome I could cry
After a couple of more sad songs, Bob lightens things up a bit:
We still have plenty of tears to shed here on Theme Time Radio Hour’s crying edition.
He then plays a little of the audio track from the movie A League of Their Own. Tom Hanks, playing a manager of a women’s baseball team begins to shout criticism of one of his players. We hear the player begin to cry. Incredulous, Tom asks, “Are you crying?”
“No,” comes the reply from player, but then we hear her weeping.
“Are you crying?” Tom asks again, but now he is yelling. “There’s no crying! There’s no crying in baseball! There’s no crying in baseball!!! No Crying!!!!!”
For those who didn’t see the movie, it might be hard to understand why this scene strikes so many of us as funny, while touching at the same time. I guess you just have to see the movie to understand. I will say this, despite what Tom says in the movie, I have seen many men even in the major leagues crying after losing a big game. Often, they throw a towel over their head in an effort to hide their tears.
Oliver Wendell Holmes
As Bob’s tear-fest show begins to wind down, he provides us a quote from Oliver Wendell Homes-“Laughter and tears are meant to turn the wheels of the same machinery of sensibility. One is wind power, the other, water power.”
Then he he tells us that “poets have always used crying as an inspiration. Here’s an example by Dylan Thomas.”
Clown In The Moon
Dylan Thomas
My tears are like the quiet drift Of petals from some magic rose; And all my grief flows from the rift Of unremembered skies and snows.
I think, that if I touched the earth, It would crumble; It is so sad and beautiful, So tremulously like a dream.
Well that’s pretty much my blog post for today. I hope it has provided you some food for thought about this whole crying stuff. And with that, let’s end with the words that Bob uses as he ends his show on tears:
Well, the old clock on the wall says it’s time to go. It’s a good thing because I’m out of Kleenex anyway. So I’m gonna hop in my car, head down the Robinson Freeway and get myself a beer I can cry into. In the meantime, remember the words of our former president, Woodrow Wilson: There is little for the great part of history except the bitter tears of pity and the hot tears of wrath.
———————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
“I’m very interested in your point of view, Judy. Please tell me more specifically about what you disagree with in those posts.”
John Stewart Mill
“Well, you talk about this John Stuart Mill. According to him, if people criticize us, even for holding an opinion we are very sure of, we should thank them for it, open our minds to listen to them, and rejoice. That’s ridiculous! If you don’t have something nice to say to somebody you should keep your stupid mouth shut! And, as far as I’m concerned, unless I give someone permission to criticize me, that person has no right to inflict it upon me!”
The rest of that post provides my response to Judy. As brilliant as that response is, it is my considered opinion that my readers and I benefit from hearing a variety of views on these types of issues. And so, with that in mind, I went about seeking these views by introducing the post to the Facebook groups that I belong to. Thus, I wrote for each group the following:
Some say that unless you are invited to provide criticism, you should keep your mouth shut. How wise is that?
Then I provided the link to my post. It led to quite a few excellent insightful discussions. My favorite happened to appear on the wonderful group, The Brain Cafe. To our good fortune, several of its participants graciously granted permission to use their comments for the current post. These permissions do not mean they are providing a blanket endorsement of this blog or its writers. And, with that, let’s take a look at the discussion that had taken place.
The Brain Cafe Discussion
Brad Esau, prior to reading my blog post wrote: Uninvited “advice” makes me go thermo nuclear. Uninvited criticism is courting death. Perhaps I should read this.
I, Jeffrey Rubin, replied: Please do read it, Brad Esau, and then let me know what you think.
Barry Kort: I suppose the context matters. As a retired academic, I hang out in Internet venues where my fellow academics schmooze with each other and with interested lay people who are arm-chair aficionados of the subjects on the table. In academia, we have a scholarly culture such that we routinely peer-review each other’s work in a collegial and congenial manner. I view this culture as being characterized by an informal tacit social contract that defines a scholarly culture.
There is, on the other hand, the unscientific (or non-scientific) political culture which has its own inscrutable ground rules which admit of some rather dicey and sleazy practices.
What is the lay person to do in these Social Networks? Clearly we find a mix of behavior that spans the spectrum.
I don’t mind conscientious scholarly criticism of the sort one would expect in academia. I’m not fond of the kind of snarky or mean-spirited dismissals that one finds in our ofttimes toxic political culture….
Brad Esau: This seems to be a cultural thing. I’ve noticed Americans (I’m Canadian) seem to have this notion that they have the “right” to speak out about anything at any time. This is much different than most cultures.
I happen to believe a) I – or anyone – absolutely has the right to deny anyone’s “right” to offer “criticism” or “input” and b) through much, much, much hard won experience, I learned that most people’s “criticism” was largely invalid and of poor construct. In other words, they had no idea what they were talking about.
I am very, very open to critique – if it’s from someone whose expertise or experience I trust and they’ve *earned* my trust. Otherwise, I have no time to waste on most people’s hot air.
So while I think your approach is valid for within American culture, it should be limited to that.
E. C.: Well said Brad! (also a “fellow” Canadian). Love your courage for taking this on Jeffrey. And Brad, you make me THINK
Brad Esau: Thanks, E. C. After growing up in polite Canada and spending a decade and a half around Asians (Japanese, Taiwanese and Chinese) where this kind of “right” to openly criticize is unthinkable, I still find this jarring. Most of my online exchanges are with our friends south of the 49th. Just could never get used to their unrestrained forwardness.
And thank you for the compliment.
Barry Kort: What stood out for me in that vignette was that Judy was enacting a practice that she abhorred when the roles were reversed. About the only scenario where that’s kosher is in scripted psychodrama as a theatrical performance.
Brad Esau: Thinking on this further, I think unsolicited criticism is warranted in cases where intervention is needed. Somebody is clearly going about things in ways that will harm their future or… their chances at their goals, and then I think it’s quite correct to voice some well founded constructive criticism….
The thing with most people, they’re not nearly as “smart” or “wise” or “expert” as they believe themselves to be and most of their “criticism” or “advice” is nothing more than egotistical bluster and hot air.
After some time had passed, Brad added: I now just sort of have this iron clad rule for when anyone – and I mean anyone – offers “advice” or “criticism” I ask for or dig into their credentials and poke into what their motivation might be. 98% of people don’t pass those simple tests.
Of course the trick then is to learn to check one’s own premises and to see if whatever criticism or feedback they might have had to offer was warranted.
There are so many variables at work here!
I could fill a city with people crippled by the criticism they received all their lives from their mothers. Hell, maybe a whole continent. I’d have to say raising motherly criticism is invalid.
Judges are different – you purposely go there to be judged. The topic here is *unsolicited* criticism and how to deal with it.
E. C.: No one wants or needs to hear “bad things” about themselves. That is not constructive criticism. What is helpful is solicited advice on how I can improve on something. That is entirely different, and it requires the “advice giver” to have to actively listen to what it is I am asking and what information I am giving as far as what I need advice or help with.
Lyra Alves: I agree that it is highly determined by our cultural background, but we surely can work our way out of having it as “taboo” and adapt to it. I find criticism, from whatever source it comes, from people who know me or not, who have something interesting to say or not, an incredible gift for my personal growth. I trust much more people who are straight forward than those who are over-polite. I also tend to feel that often those who resist to criticism or those who only accept it if it comes from certain “certified” sources may have self-confidence issues, some hidden insecurities to be sorted out. Every chance we receive some criticism is a chance we have to review various concepts we have about ourselves, about what is the best or not. I think it is always a valuable chance to expand our view on the world and increase our ability to empathize.
Susan Clemens:I have a Facebook rule: Your wall; your opinion. Other than that, constructive criticism can be offered if you have a relationship with the person, if the person is otherwise at risk of injury, or if you are approaching a business from the customer perspective. “Pat them-poke them-pat them” works best. I have a few friends who welcome criticism and others who can’t stand it. I try to respect them and vice versa.
Brad Esau<irony>
I’ve recently posted a piece critical of America and Americans along with my own well founded views.
Going by the universal angry responses and denial I’ve gotten so far, it seems like the people who enjoy criticizing the most and defend their “right” to do so, are most uncomfortable with criticism of themselves.
</irony>
Jeffrey Rubin:Brad Esau, I’ve noticed the same thing–that many people who hate to be criticized are among the quickest to criticize, and often are the ones who are the nastiest criticizers as well.
E. C.:I wonder, am I the only one who kind of “bristles” at the word “Criticism?” I am all for constructive feedback but for some reason framing it as “criticism” feels far less helpful and like others have said does become more about the person giving it than about the person needing it. Jeffrey Rubin – do you see a difference? If so, why or why not?
Jeffrey Rubin:Hi E. C. I see the difference that you are trying to make, and it is an important and worthwhile distinction to make. I don’t see that that difference has to be made by using the word “feedback” for one and “criticism” for the other. However, if I am in a conversation just with you, I wouldn’t object to an understanding that we would use the words to mean whatever you would like.
That said, people have a variety of conceptions of these two words (criticism and feedback) and therefore typically it is a good idea to use more than just those words to explain what we mean. Defining our terms beforehand is a good strategy.
For future reference, to me and Daniel Webster, criticism is an evaluation. If you have evaluated something, then you have formulated a criticism of it; and if you tell someone your evaluation, you are providing the person criticism or a critique of something. It can be done in a way so that it is designed to be helpful to someone. Sometimes it is expressed in a manner that is designed to punish someone, or to just hurt someone for a variety of reasons, e.g., because of jealousy or because the person is stressed and irritable.
Concluding Comment
Well, I hope you enjoyed this discussion as much as I did. I hate to end it here, for there is so much more to say, but rest assured that there will be more on this emotionally packed conversation in coming weeks. Until then, here’s hoping that kindness accompanies all of the criticisms that come our way.
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Anyone who follows the news, has heard about the most recent terrorist act in France. This post, however looks at what occurred earlier this year against those who worked for the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. The magazine had published articles and cartoons that criticize those who believe that the proper response to people making fun of a group’s religious beliefs is to kill them. Although the magazine writers had poked fun at all of the major religions, it was individuals who viewed themselves as followers of the Muslim faith that actually carried out these murders.
Before I go any further, I hasten to point out that Muslim statesmen, clerics and intellectuals have condemned these awful acts. Moreover, the vast majority of those who view themselves as Muslims are not going around murdering anyone, let alone people who voice criticism of their faith. That said, we still have laid before us on the front pages of every media outlet this particular event. I therefore am personally moved to spend some time today throwing around some relevant ideas. Anything that I do say today in no way is meant to imply that I think Muslims, in general, are more violent-prone or immature than other people.
Violence in Response to Criticism
Regular followers of this blog well know that I have put together a tentative model of different levels of maturity for responding to criticism. There are 5 levels. Level one is viewed as the most immature set of responses. Each higher level is viewed as more mature.
If you will, take a look below at the five levels of maturity and see what level of maturity best describes the actions of those who murdered the Charlie Hebdo magazine workers?
This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts unless also displaying responses consistent with either level 4 or 5.
Physically attacks the criticizer (regardless of whatever else is said or done)
Damages property (regardless of what else is said or done)
This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
Insults the criticizer (either with words, hand gestures, the sticking out of a tongue, the rolling of the eyes, or smirks)
Glares at the criticizer
Threatens the criticizer
Punches, kicks, or throws an object without physically hurting someone or damaging anything
Criticizes the criticizer without first fully addressing the original criticism.
This level requires displaying one or both of the following:
Displays defensiveness without directly insulting the criticizer (raising voice’s volume or pitch)
Displays a lack of interest either by verbally indicating this, or with nonverbal cues, or complete silence.
Individuals at this level listen to the criticizer in a supportive, warm, friendly style, and then make it clear that they fully understand what was said. Moreover, they put the criticizer at ease by making statements that indicate that the wise learn from criticism. Some time is spent on showing that they are thinking about the criticism. If, after thinking about the criticism the criticism is deemed to be correct, they make a statement frankly indicating, “I can see your ideas have merit, and I intend to use them in the future.” If they are not sure if they agree, they make a statement indicating that they are very interested in what was said, plan to think a little more about this over the next few days and then they will be ready to discuss this further. If, after thinking about the criticism, the criticism is deemed to be incorrect, a statement is made designed to disagree without being disagreeable. More specifically, a sense of humor, some listening in a caring way and a few smiles help to traverse rough terrain. As the episode winds down, the criticizer is encouraged to feel comfortable communicating suggestions in the future.
In addition to actions consistent with level 4, people acting in a manner consistent with level 5 seek ways to use, whenever they disagree with the criticism, a technique known as steering in the direction the criticizer would prefer to go. That is, rather than just disagreeing without being disagreeable, the criticized person seeks to find a new choice of action that creatively utilizes something suggested from the criticism. Steering cannot be incorporated into all situations, but it is an additional goal of the most mature individuals.
Okay, so now that you looked over the five levels of maturity for responding to criticism, which level do you think best matches those who slaughtered the group of individuals who worked for the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo?
My Response
As I looked over the levels, the task was easy. As far as I’m concerned, level 1 is clearly the best match.
Now some might say, why bother to put the actions of those who did the killing in a developmental framework? For many, just calling them vile names more than suffices.
Well, one reason is that calling someone vile names doesn’t automatically point one to a description of what would be a more mature response, as a developmental model does. Additionally, if you want to talk the language of many experts in human behavior, getting away from the vile name calling fits in with their zeitgeist.
Mustafa Akyol
Consider Mustafa Akyol, author of Islam Without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty and the writer of yesterday’s New York Times Op-Ed titled “Islam’s Problem With Blasphemy.” First, Mr. Akyol points out that,
The only source in Islamic law that all Muslims accept indisputably is the Quran. And, conspicuously, the Quran decrees no earthly punishment for blasphemy — or for apostasy (abandonment or renunciation of the faith), a related concept. Nor, for that matter, does the Quran command stoning, female circumcision or a ban on fine arts.
Mr. Akyol explains that religious nationalism is guided by religious law — Shariah — which was developed over 100 of years after the Quran, and it is there that we find clauses about punishing blasphemy as a deadly sin. While Shariah is believed by many Muslims to be rooted in the divine, according to Mr. Akyol, the overwhelming majority of its injunctions are man-made, partly reflecting the values and needs of the seventh to 12th centuries — when no part of the world was liberal, and other religions, such as Christianity, also considered blasphemy a capital crime.
In contrast to Shariah law about blasphemy, the Quran tells its followers: “God has told you in the Book that when you hear God’s revelations disbelieved in and mocked at, do not sit with them until they enter into some other discourse; surely then you would be like them.”
Mr. Akyol concludes his Op-Ed piece with the following:
Just “do not sit with them” — that is the response the Quran suggests for mockery. Not violence. Not even censorship.
Wise Muslim religious leaders from the entire world would do Islam a great favor if they preached and reiterated such a nonviolent and nonoppressive stance in the face of insults against Islam. That sort of instruction could also help their more intolerant coreligionists understand that rage is a sign of nothing but immaturity. The power of any faith comes not from its coercion of critics and dissenters. It comes from the moral integrity and the intellectual strength of its believers.
Notice Mr. Akyol’s last paragraph refers to immaturity, and he lays out what he views as a more mature, wiser path. That is the type of model that I, myself, am striving to emulate.
———————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Some children, when asked to attend to certain tasks, do so for shorter periods than most. Some are also more energetic. Such children are often said to have Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD).
Although many doctors recommend placing children believed to have ADHD on drugs such as Ritalin and Adderall, many parents refuse to go that route. The evidence that the drugs do not lead to lasting improved academic and social outcomes are major reasons (see my post titled “The Myth of Ritalin’s Effectiveness” for a review of the effectiveness studies). Other major reasons have to do with concerns about known negative side effects and possible long term harm to such young developing brains.
Parents who have a child viewed as having ADHD typically face two challenges–disciplining their child and responding to concerns from their child’s teacher. For parents who choose the drug approach, they may come to believe that at least by drugging their child something is being done to deal with the challenges. They may thus become less motivated to take some other steps because what can be done is being done. If the child misbehaves, the parent may come to believe that the cause is due to the drug not doing what it’s supposed to be doing. Maybe the child needs to go back to the doctor to get the dose tweaked, or another drug needs to be added or substituted.
But for parents who refuse drug treatment, they don’t get confused about all of these drug issues and a clearer path lies before them. As a school psychologist for many years, I’ve walked with parents down this non-drug path on numerous occasions, and here are some suggestions that I found most helpful.
My Four Favorite Suggestions for Parents Concerned about a Child’s Attention Span or Energetic Behavior
1. Search the internet with the following search terms–“ADHD without drugs.” If you do so, you will find many suggestions on how to address your concerns. A daily running program and meditation were just a couple of excellent ideas that I found quickly in a recent search of this sought. Many of the suggestions indicate that they have research support demonstrating that they are effective (see for example APA’s article titled “Easing ADHD without Meds“). What I particularly like about having parents search the internet in this way is that they get to select from a wide range of ideas the ones that make the most sense to them. Moreover, there are always new ideas coming out, and these types of internet searches are regularly updated.
2. Get a copy of The Kazdin Method for Parenting the Defiant Childby Alan Kazdin. Dr. Kazdin is director of the Yale Parenting Center and Conduct Clinic and is a former president of the American Psychological Association. His approach has been well tested in solid research programs with impressive results.
If you can’t afford to buy Dr. Kazdin’s book, you can get a copy at your local library. If your library doesn’t have a copy, walk over to the the librarian and ask to get it through inter-library loan. If you have trouble reading books, it is also available on CD. Listen to these CDs while you are driving, cleaning the house, and washing dishes. You’ll find a goldmine worth of information.
3. Ask your child’s teacher to provide you, each week, a list of the main topics that will be covered in class the following week. Then view at home with your child a lesson on each topic on the Kahn Academy website.
This website is a resource that provides free lessons on all the topics that teachers teach in school. By having your child review each lesson before hearing it for the first time from the teacher, when the teacher actually presents the lesson in school, your child will now be at least somewhat familiar with the topic. This is called “priming” and it has been demonstrated to increase the interest level for learners and increase the likeliness that the topic will end up being mastered. Moreover, once you show your child how the Kahn Academy website works, your child, before each test, can go back to the lesson and make sure he or she has really mastered it.
If you do not have the time to do this with your child, see what you can do to get someone at least four years older than your child to carry out this activity. You may have to pay a young teenager a little, but it will be better than paying for pills.
This approach leads to real learning. Once your child starts to make better academic progress in school, he or she will feel better about school in general.
4. “Casino for teaching calculation fluency” is a card game that I have found works great for kids who have difficulty learning math skills in the usual manner. You can find the rules for the basic casino card game on line by typing in your search engine, “Casino card game rules.” Once you learn the basic rules it will be easy to learn how to apply the game to improve a wide range of math skills.
Basically, the game is played as follows. The dealer deals four cards to each player and four cards face up in the center (these center cards are laid out separately so that all are visible). The aim is to capture cards from a layout on the table, by playing a card from your hand which matches in number a table card or the sum of several table cards. When it’s your turn, if you can’t capture any cards, you have to throw into the center, face-up, one of the cards from your hand. The cards that each player captures are accumulated in his or her pile. The player who ends up with the most captured cards (in the simplest form of the game) is the winner. After each player plays the four cards that are originally dealt, each player is dealt four more cards. The game is over when all the cards in the deck are used up.
To win, a player must learn to do basic addition. Consider this example. Suppose it is my turn and I have in my hand a 9, and on the table, face up, is a 6 and a 3. If I know 6 plus 3 equals 9, I can use my 9 to capture the 6 and the 3. The more cards I capture, the more chances I have of winning. If I am a bit clumsy at addition, this game can motivate me to increase my fluency.
Once your child has learned to add smoothly, you can change the rules of the game to learn more advanced math skills. For example, you can make the new rule as follows: the only way to capture cards is by using subtraction; or multiplication.
The game can be played in groups of 2, 3, or 4. Besides a deck of cards, it will help to learn math if you will get an abacus. Any student having trouble with learning basic arithmetic should be taught how to use an abacus, and should get a great deal of experience using it. It visually displays how our system works, with the ones line, the tens line, and the hundreds line. The manipulations are fun, and they begin to make conceptual sense after regular use. You can buy an abacus on line for just a few dollars and they come with directions.
The abacus is used as follows. Suppose Sue, who is playing Casino with Jill, attempts to use a 7 in her hand to capture a 6 and a 2. She can use the abacus to see if 6 and 2 equals 7. In a short period of time, Sue will learn to add without the abacus.
An interesting psychological aspect of playing this game is that even when it is not the turn of the other players, all the other players are motivated to do the calculation of the person whose turn it is in order to make sure she or he does not cheat. Moreover, whenever a player can’t make a capture, and therefore throws a card from her or his hand onto the table, all the other players start to make calculations in their heads to figure out how the new card can be utilized. Consequently, there is an enormous amount of additional calculations going on than one might think by watching the player whose turn it is. This is a large reason why this game is so effective.
Now, once your child learns the basic rules of the game, usually within a half hour of playing time, the rules can be changed so that your child begins to work on learning fluency of the math facts at his or her level. So, if Sue is learning to be fluent in learning single digit addition facts, the group plays the game in the standard manner.
If Sue is learning fluency in mastering two digit addition facts, the game is changed so two decks of cards are combined. Both decks get a little doctoring. The parent takes out the four jacks from one of the decks and crosses out their J, and writes beside it the number 11. In a similar fashion, queens, and kings have respectively, the numbers 12, and 13 written on them, replacing their Q and K. For the cards in the second deck, their numbers are changed so that they are given numbers that range from 14 to 27. Both sets of cards are shuffled together, and the game is played like the basic version of the game but there is far more addition facts that can be employed in order to capture cards.
For students learning fluency in mastering single digit subtraction facts, the same rules are applied as the single digit addition form of the game but players can only capture cards by applying a subtraction fact. For example, if Fred has a 2 in his hand, and there is an 8 and a 6 faced up on the table, if he recognizes that 8 minus 6 equals 2, he can capture with his 2 both the 8 and the 6.
For students learning fluency in mastering two digit subtraction facts, the same rules are applied as the two digit addition form of the game but players can only capture cards by applying a subtraction fact.
In a similar manner, the game can be played as well so it is designed to teach fluency in basic multiplication or division.
Math is often a stumbling block for children who have trouble paying attention to topics that bore them. By making learning these skills fun, these skills are quickly learned. When your child then goes to school, his success in math class will greatly improve his or her overall school experience.
Okay then, those are some ideas to help children thought to have ADHD. There are of course far more options to discover.
Until you join us again, have a great week.
Jeff
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Sometimes I’m asked why I write so much about dealing with criticism. The answer mostly has to do with the types of concerns that have been expressed to me over the years. Some involve the desire to be liked and respected. Others have to do with seeking to gain control over anger. And still others come from parents who find that how they go about disciplining their children has been a serious source of stress in their lives. Providing and responding to criticism in a pleasant, thoughtful manner involves skills that can be learned fairly quickly, and are clearly helpful when addressing these types of concerns.
Additionally, conflicts that bring forth negative criticism, if handled in an immature manner, can escalate and result in a destructive relationship between parent and child, the parting of a relationship between two valued friends, the loss of a job, serious injury, and prison time. And then there is the relationship between certain ways that people handle criticism and suicide.
Rebecca Sedwick
In an earlier post, titled “Teenage Suicide and Cyberbullying: A Case Study,” I wrote about 12-year-old Rebecca Sedwick who had leaped to her death after more than a year of being incessantly criticized by a coterie of 15 middle-school children. Today, once again I take up the subject of the relationship between criticism and suicide because of an article I just read in this September’s Review of General Psychology by Gordon L. Flett, Paul L. Hewitt, and Marnin J Heisel titled, “The Destructiveness of Perfectionism Revisited: Implications for the Assessment of Suicide Risk and the Prevention of Suicide.” It’s written for research-minded people and has far more nuanced information than I can share in a single blog post designed for the general reader. Nevertheless, I’m going to summarize a few of its key points for I think they are very much worth considering as we move forward in our quest to become masters at dealing with name calling, insults and teasing.
Suicide and Criticism
The media is filled with stories about the Ebola virus, which has so far killed close to 4,000 people worldwide, and one person in North America. In contrast, it is estimated that over one million people worldwide, including 40,000 people in North America, kill themselves on an annual basis. Recent U.S. data indicate that suicide is the second leading cause of death among people who are under 40 years of age. For every person who commits suicide, several more attempt it, resulting in anguish for family and friends, and financial costs from emergency room and aftercare services that are estimated to be several billion dollars.
Of course, there are a number of reasons why people kill themselves, but the article I just read makes the following argument:
Chronic exposure to situations and contexts that place excessive pressure (or percieved pressure) on the individual to be perfect can have a destructive effect on most individuals and this is heightened among those people who are vulnerable and hypersensitive to criticism and social comparison feedback. Consider, for instance, the vulnerable perfectionist exposed regularly to a hypercritical parent, (boss/supervisor) or romantic partner who is ever-present and seemingly impossible to please. Alternatively, the vulnerable perfectionist may have a work environment where mistakes are simply not allowed and excessive standards are required by a tyrannical boss.
Now, I hasten to point out that most parents, bosses and supervisors who encourage quality performance don’t cause anyone to commit suicide. Moreover, the vast majority of people who may view themselves as perfectionists, even those who see themselves as particularly sensitive to criticism, don’t end up killing themselves. Nevertheless, the consistent evidence from studies that link suicide behavior with chronic exposure to external pressure to be perfect and the relationship between perfectionistic characteristics and an increased risk of lethal suicide behavior leads one to pause. Perhaps there may be some ways to encourage quality performance without increasing suicide risks.
Ideas about Prevention
Many people who view themselves as perfectionists tend to remain silent about any despair that they may experience. And those who demand that their children or workers be perfect don’t see anything wrong with this. So these people are unlikely to show up and ask to learn some skills to improve their behavior. Prevention programs, therefore, must be designed proactively and implemented broadly to reach these people. Schools, colleges and business organizations, if they are to impact people at risk, must provide education about these issues to their entire population. Thus, Flett and his colleagues recommend the following key themes be incorporated into school-based programs:
(a) fostering self-acceptance and compassion instead of experiencing shame and self-criticism; (b) promoting appropriate goal-setting and goal appraisal versus setting and maintaining impossible standards; (c) combating ambivalence about giving up the need to be perfect since the distressed perfectionist must be highly motivated to change; and (d) developing resilience to feelings of shame and ability to cope with interpersonal conflict and feelings of being rejected by others.
For the work environment, Flett and his colleagues state:
Prevention efforts should include an organizational focus on reducing pressures to be perfect. When perfectionism prevails as part of the culture and values of the workplace, it tends to promote poorer performance rather than superior performance (Gillett & Stenfert-Kroese, 2003) and it is linked with job dissatisfaction, poorer communication quality, role conflict, reduced likelihood of staying, and a poorer perceived fit between the person and the work environment (Balthazard, Cooke, & Potter, 2006; Rousseau, 1990).
Although, as a general statement, these ideas are worthwhile to think about, a far more detailed process is necessary to foster the goals of these researchers. For those who can afford counseling services designed to teach self compassion, along with addressing each individual’s concerns, I recommend working with either of the two counselors described HERE. For those who can’t access counseling services because of the financial costs, although not as ideal as direct one to one counseling, there is available for free a curriculum that teaches the necessary skills at this blog site (see below).
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Readers of this blog well know that I often discuss immature and mature ways to provide negative criticism. Originally, I presented a post titled PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM: FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY. There, in addition to providing an outline of what I believed was a good starting point to think about this topic, I asked readers for suggestions on how the outline could be improved. Many readers were not at all shy. While this was going on, I continued my own reading, and from time to time, I shared what I had learned. And now, just this week on the internet, I came upon an article that provided a new set of guidelines. I kind of like them, and therefore, decided to see what kind of reaction they might lead to. But first let’s quickly review what we already covered.
THE ORIGINAL FIVE LEVELS OF MATURITY FOR PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM
Below you will find preliminary descriptions of how people at five developmental levels of maturity provide negative criticism, that is, criticism that points out what we don’t like about someone’s actions, beliefs, or appearance. Level one is the most immature and uses observations of babies as its starting point. Each successive level is more mature:
This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
Cries without stating what the crying is about
Physically attacks the person being criticized
Damages property
Although these three descriptors may not sound like providing criticism, in some situations we can see that it is the very beginning of the development of this skill. Let’s say Jill takes baby Bob’s crayon away believing he is done with it. Bob begins to cry and takes a swipe at Jill. She manages, by moving away, to avoid Bob’s swipe. Bob now looks even angrier and crumbles up a piece of paper and flings it on the floor. An observer to this may conclude that Bob, in a sense, is criticizing Jill for taking the crayon.
2. This level requires displaying one or both of the following:
The criticizer does not explain what the offending behavior is, but instead expresses displeasure with glares, insults, shouting, silence, or threats that do not involve bodily harm. (For example, someone might be making too much noise and the criticizer might turn to the noise maker and glare, or cry out, “Jerk!”)
Threatens bodily harm regardless of what else is said.
3. The criticizer clearly states the criticism with enough detail so the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance, but couples it with glares, insults, shouts, or threats that are not about bodily harm.
4. The criticizer states the criticism without bodily attacks, damaging property, glares, insults, threats, or shouts, and with enough details so that the criticized person, if he or she wills, can improve the behavior, idea, or appearance. If the person receiving the criticism becomes defensive or angry, the criticizer empathizes without returning glares, insults, threats, or shouts.
5. When the criticizer provides criticism, he or she does so in a manner very similar to a level four response, but beforehand, the criticizer considers the person who is the target of the criticism and the situation that he or she is in. As a result of such considerations, the criticizer may decide to alter the criticism.
IDEAS THAT FOLLOWED
After proposing the five levels of maturity, several additional ideas came my way. One person suggested:
Hey there. One thing that potentially could be even better than a level 5 way to provide criticism would be to ask the person permission to offer them a criticism. You could say like, “hey, would it be alright if I make an observation about the way you handled that situation” or “do you mind if I offer you a couple constructive criticisms about your song” or whatever. Then, if the person says yes, they won’t feel like they are being attacked because they’ve given consent. Or they’ll have the opportunity to say “you know what? I’m really sort of feeling on edge so maybe another time would be better for us to talk.” That way, instead of gauging for yourself whether or not the person is in a state to tolerate the criticism, you can let them decide for themselves. What do you think about this idea?
I responded:
I like your idea. It goes along with considering person variables. For me, personally, I’m almost always up to hearing criticism, even if it may sting. Therefore, always asking me for permission would eventually become tiresome. But until you know someone well, starting off the relationship as you suggest, makes sense. And if, in time, you learn the person is very sensitive about criticism, continuing asking for permission would be the wise course of action.
Others argued that unless you are invited to provide criticism, you should keep your mouth shut. And others argued that even if you are invited to provide criticism, if you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all. I address these issues in a post titled, UNSOLICITED CRITICISM: GOOD OR BAD? Very briefly, I agreed that these ideas were worthwhile to consider before providing criticism, but after this consideration there were times when providing uninvited criticism makes sense.
Thomas Jefferson
In a post titled “PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM: A LESSON FROM THOMAS JEFFERSON” I explained that recently I had been reading an excellent biography of Jefferson by Jon Meacham. There, I learned that early in a relationship Jefferson typically avoided mentioning any fault in his new companion. He felt that later, once the relationship was well developed, was a better time to discuss differences of opinion. As Meacham describes Jefferson’s style, “people often talk too much and listen too little, which can be self-defeating, for in many instances the surer route to winning a friend is not to convince them that you are right but that you care what they think. Everyone wants to believe that what they have to say is fascinating, illuminating, and possibly even epochal.” In that line of thinking, Jefferson advised a daughter: “Much better…if our companion views a thing in a light different from what we do, to leave him in quiet possession of his view. What is the use of rectifying him if the thing be unimportant; and if important let it pass for the present, and wait a softer moment and more conciliatory occasion of revising the subject together.” Now Jefferson clearly recognized there was exceptions to this general rule, but nevertheless it makes a great deal of sense that whenever we are tempted to provide negative criticism careful consideration of this idea makes sense.
Another set of comments came from a few parents who argued that although the five levels of maturity made sense when adults were interacting with other adults, when parents provided negative criticism to their children, yelling, and even hitting were perfectly permissible. I responded to this in a post titled, PROVIDING NEGATIVE CRITICISM: DEFENDING THE FIVE LEVELS. The issues this raises are simply too complicated to summarize here, so I’ll just refer interested readers to that post.
Finally, someone on Facebook presented the idea that it is helpful to use the sandwich approach to providing negative criticism. Here you begin with a slice of some positive comment, then you put on top of that the negative criticism, and then, on top of that, you provide another slice of positive criticism.
OK! So, basically, in a very abbreviated manner, those are some ideas we have already discussed. Now, to a new set of guidelines.
Philosopher Daniel Dennett’s Approach to Providing Negative Criticism
You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.
You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
You should mention anything you have learned from your target.
Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.
I kind of like this. Whereas it is not inconsistent with the original five levels of providing negative criticism, it provides some additional ideas to consider.
Over the course of a week or two I’ll come up with some specific examples that demonstrate Dennett’s approach. Until then, my best wishes to you all,
Jeff
———————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
Today I offer a follow-up to my earlier post titled “Name Calling by Psychiatrists: Is it Time to Put a Stop to it?” Among the points that I had tried to make is that psychiatrists falsely claim that the names they use to describe patients are “diagnoses.” In actuality, all that they do is convert someone’s expressed concerns into medical jargon.
I received a great deal of positive and negative comments about the post from readers, but my focus today is on the negative ones. Most of them argue that in contrast to my position, they had personally found their psychiatric diagnosis very helpful.
Those who Found the Psychiatric Pathologizing Helpful
I just finished an excellent book on this topic by Lucy Johnstone titled, A Straight Talking Introduction to Psychiatric Diagnosis. There we find several quotes from people who received a so-called diagnosis from psychiatrists and spoke of its positive personal impact. For example, some felt that it provided relief at knowing “what was wrong.”
I had something that I could firmly grasp, and, you know, I could find out more and try to resolve it…[I] felt relief that this whole jungle was going to be sorted out.
Another person wrote,
It gave me the comfort of explanation…. When I was told I was depressed it gave me a framework of understanding and a first grip on what was happening.
Some felt that it gave them hope for treatment and support.
Illness meant treatment and the possibility of cure.
Acceptance of my illness was a turning point…. By accepting treatment I could actively seek the right medication, access support, and turn my life around.
I think I prefer my illness having a name because it makes me feel less lonely, and I know that there are other people experiencing my kind of misery.
Then there were those who felt it provided them freedom from blame and guilt.
Diagnosis implied that this was an illness and not my fault—important for someone whose depression has always been riddled with guilt.
Commentary
Although there are many, many people who feel this way, Ms. Johnstone points out that the relief that these people experience is based on their assumption that the diagnosis itself is valid. If it isn’t, they are simply being offered a circular explanation—“Why are my moods so up and down?” “Because you have bipolar disorder.” “How do you know I have bipolar disorder?” “Because your moods are so up and down.”
Keep in mind, as well, that these people came to view their so-called diagnosis as helpful without ever having an opportunity to compare the pathologizing approach to any alternative approaches. For example, what would be the reactions of these same people whom I have just quoted if they were provided an option that avoided simplistic, misleading terminology, while professional mental health providers and peer support groups assisted the person to find their own stories and provided a choice of treatment options?
Moreover, finding freedom from blame and guilt by playing the blaming-the-brain game may not be anywhere as helpful as the pharmaceutical companies would have us believe. Many of us have learned that we all, from time to time, do things that violate our image of our ideal self and spend some time suffering the consequences. We come to realize that we not only violated the image of the ideal self in the past, but we’ll no doubt do so again and again in the future. The experience of suffering over these lapses is the spur that, after a period of difficult reflection, eventually gets us off our butts, learn new skills and seek out the type of support that moves us to make improvements. It can take time for this to happen. It can take more time than we in our modern pressure pot world may feel we have any right to take, and our loved ones may lose their patience. However, in the long run, drugging these feelings away have always produced more harm than good.
Those who Found the Psychiatric Pathologizing Unhelpful
In contrast to those who tell of some positive reactions to psychiatric name calling, there are other people who tell a dramatically different story.
For a number of years, I accepted the medical model as a framework of understanding…. But I gradually came to appreciate drawbacks to the framework. My reading suggested the model might not stand up scientifically…. By the time I was entering my second decade of service use, the medical model, which I had initially found reassuring, seemed increasingly unsatisfactory, without the capacity to encompass the complexity of my interior or exterior life and give it positive value. As a result, I began to activelyexplore frameworks that better met my needs.
I already knew something was wrong with me. Now I knew I was mad…. The diagnosis becomes a burden… you are an outcast in society…. It took me years to feel OK about myself again.
My diagnosis label promoted despair and threatened to become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I have been diagnosed with dysthymic disorder since I was thirteen. One kind of harm I suffered from receiving a diagnosis, in and of itself, was that it seemed so final and despairing to receive as a teenager. For me, having a diagnosis seemed so final. Like it wasn’t just a tempory issue that I was having, adjustment or adolescence or something, but this disorder that I was going to have for the rest of my life no matter what I did.
But the worse part of this, which I have only been able to shake within the last year…is the defectiveness I felt. Just kind of in some core way. Like I’m totally different.
I was so offended. I was really offended. I thought well, ‘F*** you! You’re attacking my personality; you’re attacking me. You’re attacking the very soul of me, you know; who I am, and what I am, that’s a disorder.
I no longer identify with my previous role as a severely ill psychiatric patient but a human being that is experiencing and surviving life in my own unique way… just like every other human being on this planet.
Commentary
In her book, Ms. Johnstone summarizes what she has learned from these quotes:
Lucy Johnstone
It is understandable that service users, reaching desperately for an escape from anguish, confusion, guilt and blame, might see diagnosis (at least initially) as ‘salvation’. However, these benefits may be bought at the high price of taking on profoundly destructive messages of defect, dangerousness, damage and despair.
In my view, we can come up with a much better approach to the psychiatric pathologizing of people, an approach that doesn’t label anyone, but rather, classifies mental health concerns. For those who found the pathologizing approach helpful, this alternative approach would provide the professional and peer support that they value without misleading name calling. Psychiatric terms confuse questions of fact with questions of value, and superficially declare that a person’s experience is bad when it may have some pluses and minuses.
Undoubtedly, there are kind and decent folk who have a very different position than I on this subject. In no way do I mean to suggest that those who hold a different opinion are stupid, for I have met many who are as bright as a cloudless summer day. If they want to continue to use the DSM approach, it will continue to be available. All that I seek, all that I hope for, is that those who are uncomfortable with the DSM approach, can still assess mental health services using an alternative. All that I seek is that we all take some time to think more deeply about the nature of melancholy, sadness and tears.
———————
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
On this blog, I often discuss immature and mature ways to deal with criticism. The advice that I offer is designed to be helpful to males and females alike. But recently, in an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, Tara Mohr argues that when it comes to criticism, women can benefit from advice specifically targeted to the unique cultural situation that they find themselves in.
The New York Times Article
Ms Mohr, in her thoughtful article titled “Learning to Love Criticism,” tells us:
Criticism stings for all of us, but women have been socialized to not rock the boat, to be, above all else, likable. By the time a girl reaches adolescence, she’ll most likely have watched hundreds of films, television shows and advertisements in which a woman’s destiny is determined not by her own choices but by how she is perceived by others. In those hundreds of stories, we get the message: What other people think and say about us matters, a lot.
In addition to these messages in the media, for centuries women have had less rights than men. Being likable, or at least acceptable to stronger, more powerful men, became a primary survival strategy. For many women around the world, this is still the reality.
Given this history, we might think that women have mastered the skills to insure that they are liked, but in the business world there is some evidence that problems exist.
A Recent Survey
In a recent survey that looked at 248 performance reviews from 28 different companies, both men and women gave more negative feedback to the women being reviewed. Here are a few examples:
“You can come across as abrasive sometimes. I know you don’t mean to, but you need to pay attention to your tone.”
“Your peers sometimes feel that you don’t leave them enough room. Sometimes you need to step back to let others shine.”
“The presentation ultimately went well. But along the way, we discovered many areas for improvement. You would have had an easier time if you had been less judgmental about R—‘s contributions from the beginning.”
This kind of negative criticism showed up twice in the 83 critical reviews received by men. It showed up in 71 of the 94 critical reviews received by women.
There are three possibilities that present themselves here:
1. The women received more negative criticism despite not acting in any distinctively different way than the men because of distinctively different expectations of how women “should” act;
2. The women who received more negative reviews actually acted distinctly different in certain ways than the men and it is these differences that led to the additional negative criticism;
3. It is a little of both.
An Informal Survey
Interestingly, from my perspective, are the results of an informal survey of someone I know who was intimately involved in evaluating and promoting personnel. Here, early criticism was about equal between men and women, but more women took the negative criticism they received to heart and made changes prior to their following evaluation. This ultimately led to their promotions. The majority of the men who got negative feedback seemed uninterested in making any changes and subsequently lost their opportunity for promotion.
From this, I think that it is not only possible, but perhaps even probable, that despite the pattern suggested in the more thorough survey, there is great variability across settings.
Some bosses may have an archtype that a great leader is a tough, no nonsense person who only projects a demanding sense of profits. Such an attitude will provoke a very different style of criticism around the office than one that supports the idea working for profits doesn’t have to mean that we must abandon basic principles of human dignity.
Let me just add that the person involved in providing and promoting personnel in the informal survey happened to be a master at providing very specific feedback. Consider the example provided above in which someone stated in a review:
“You can come across as abrasive sometimes. I know you don’t mean to, but you need to pay attention to your tone.”
Such a statement potentially can be helpful as one looks within and seeks to come up with a less abrasive way to respond in situations. However, the feedback would be far better if a supervisor, let’s call him Bill, invited a subordinate, let’s call her Mary, to a one-on-one meeting shortly after an abrasive incident occurred. At that meeting, Bill does several things. He gently explains that he is about to imitate how Mary had acted, using her tone of voice and what was said. Then, after imitating for her how she acted, he displays for her in a role-play how he would prefer she act when a similar incident arises. He then proceeds to ask Mary to imitate what he just acted out. Then he goes through this process with Mary until she can actually copy the less abrasive style to his satisfaction. If Bill provided this level of specific feedback, it would be potentially far more helpful then the two-sentence feedback that was actually provided.
Advice
I very much support the recommendations that Ms Mohr provides in her New York Times piece. For example, at one point she writes,
If a woman wants to do substantive work of any kind, she’s going to be criticized — with comments not just about her work but also about herself. She must develop a way of experiencing criticism that allows her to persevere in the face of it.
How can this be done? “A woman,” says Ms Mohr, “can identify another woman whose response to criticism she admires. In challenging situations, she can imagine how the admired woman might respond, and thereby see some new possible responses for herself.”
I won’t go into all of the recommendations of Ms Mohr, suffice it to say her article is well worth reading. But I do think it is essential to point out that a single article will not do the trick for most of us, women or men, who want to learn to become a master at dealing with criticism. It takes several months of regularly bringing before our minds examples of criticism, followed by a discussion of how to transform each specific example into something better. My blog provides one way to go about doing just this. Readers can begin with the introduction to this blog, and move forward at their own pace by clicking on the next newer entry post. Additionally, by reading the trilogy of novels that I’ve written, people become immersed for a few months in adventures that illustrate the struggle to seek respect even under the most trying circumstances.
Well, that’s this week’s edition of From Insults to Respect. Here’s to hoping you’ll join us again real soon.
Jeff
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
One day I happened to be flipping through the New York Times when I came upon a story titled Dealing With Digital CrueltybyStephenie Rosenbloom. It had been a year since I had written a post about a particularly sad incident of internet cruelty. Back then, 12-year-old Rebecca Sedwick had leaped to her death after being cyberbullied by a coterie of 15 middle-school children who urged her to kill herself. Upon reading the Times story, I decided to revisit this issue.
The Times article begins, “Anyone who has ever been online has witnessed, or been virtually walloped by, a mean comment.”
Because communication on the internet can provide anonymity and invisibility it can lead many to feel uninhibited. If someone is sitting right in front of you, there is a chance that a mean comment could lead to the insulter ending up with a fat lip or witnessing streams of tears running down a sweet face. Not so when all you see is some letters.
Recently, I wrote a post titled, “Responding to Criticism by Crying: Is it a Sign of Immaturity?” In that post I explained that I had, in earlier posts, put forth a model of how to respond maturely to criticism. To help readers to rate their own skill level, and that of others, I had outlined five levels of maturity. Level 1 was viewed as the most immature level, level 2 as a little more mature, and so on (seeHERE for a full description of the first 4 levels of maturity, and see HERE for a description of level 5, the most mature level). Level 1 had been described as follows:
1. This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts
Physically attacks the criticizer
Damages property
As you can see from this description of level 1, I had come to believe that weeping or sobbing with tears was best to view as one of the most immature responses. I then explained several reasons why I had come to believe that, but I won’t repeat them here. I then wrote that since I came up with the five levels of maturity, I had met some individuals who seem rather remarkably mature to me in many ways, and yet they had revealed to me that they find themselves crying quite often when they are criticized. They say that they are very sensitive individuals, that they don’t hurt anyone or anything when they go through this experience, and that I should consider removing crying from the description of the lowest level. As I thought about this, I thought it would help me if I propose a change to my readers, ask for feedback, and only then make my decision whether or not to make the change. I ended that post as follows:
Proposed Change
Weeping, sobbing and crying will only be viewed as the lowest level of maturity if the person responding to criticism does nothing else but that, or if he or she does that along with the other lowest level responses such as physically attacking the criticizer or damaging property. If, after crying, he or she then begins to display responses consistent with level 4 or 5, crying will no longer be viewed as a sign of immaturity.
Although I could make this change after I get some feedback, I hasten to point out that it won’t change the fact that many people will still consider crying in the face of criticism as a sign of immaturity. Some will lose respect for those who cry.
Perhaps these sensitive individuals can help to reduce the lack of respect that they might encounter. They can explain that their sensitivity helps them to more deeply consider the criticism. Moreover, they might suggest that for people who feel uncomfortable around someone crying, they can provide the criticism at first by email, snail mail or voice mail. This will allow the sensitive person time to process the criticism. Then, a follow-up meeting to further process the criticism can be arranged.
I hope to hear from readers on this.
After I published this, I received more feedback on this post than anything I had previously written. It came mostly from several Facebook groups I belong to, but also from a couple of professional organizations as well. Today I’d like to share with you several of these comments, and then provide my new description of level 1.
The Feedback
The first three comments came from psychologists.
I have read your material, and tend to agree w/ you. It appears to me to qualify for a level 1 response, as it reflects a lack of (age appropriate ) skill development (if it is not a reflection of serious cognitive inefficiency in general). It does invite further negative input from the criticizer and others. It increases the victims sense of vulnerability. There are many other alternatives which could be modeled or practiced — even if they are not available for immediate accessing by the victim. In this sense, I agree with Dr. Phil (who I many times don’t agree) “Fake it till you make it”
Dr. Charles Morrissey school psychologist and lic.clinical psychologist NY
Hi Jeff,
Your query is very intriguing to me. As a psychodynamic therapist, I have found that crying can occur when a criticism becomes associated with an old psychological wound that has yet to be fully processed (e.g., perhaps the criticism sounds like something painful someone heard from his/her mother repeatedly, but they did not recognize this past hurt until it was activated by the current criticism). I hope this example makes sense. I like your revision and think it takes into account such a consideration. I hope that helps!
Take care,
Ashley
Ashley Curiel, Psy.D.
Jeff, you write (I think correctly) that, regardless of any adjustments you make in your hierarchy, you “hasten to point out that it won’t change the fact that many people will still consider crying in the face of criticism as a sign of immaturity. Some will lose respect for those who cry.” I suspect that many will considering crying a sign of “weakness,” an even more damaging judgment than “immaturity” in many social and vocational settings. (I admit to some confusion about the strength-weakness continuum as it has sometimes been explained to me, where compassion was considered “weakness” and aggression a sign of “strength.”)
I wonder how much the context of the criticism matters in this analysis. If a grad school classmate told me I was “incredibly stupid” because I did not know some obscure fact about endocrinology, I could probably have shot at a Level 4 (well, at least 3) response, especially if I had been getting all As in my courses and making great progress on my dissertation while anticipating a return to a secure and fulfilling job. However, I might well cry upon hearing the same words from the chair of my dissertation committee a week before my defense, especially if the time limit on my doctoral program was almost exhausted, I was struggling to make payments on the second mortgage I had taken out to pay for the doctoral program, and my new job was contingent on my receiving the doctoral degree by the end of the school year.
You are obviously correct that most individuals cry less readily in the face of criticisms and other stresses as they become older, which does fit a “maturity” continuum, but there do seem to be individual differences in general readiness to cry when criticized, when singing the national anthem on Memorial Day, when watching a sad movie, or in moments of joy. Some folks also think there are gender differences involved.
Thanks for sharing these posts with us.
John Willis
The rest of the comments came from members of Facebook groups that I belong to.
Thank you Jeffrey. I had a few thoughts about your article in so much as I think that we have to be careful about labelling someone who cries, as a response to criticism, as immature. I think context is important and needs to be appreciated, and the nature of the conflict or the criticism needs to be explained. Crying is a pretty normal response to grief, stress, sadness etc., and isn’t something that the “crier” should automatically be ashamed of or guilty about, nor is it a reaction to which the other party, or parties, should automatically attach shame or blame. We expect people to be able to manage their emotions and to control themselves physically, but sometimes I think that this expectation can be a little unreasonable although, again, context is everything. Crying is a reaction which is generally triggered by a heightened emotional state, and sometimes it is difficult, even for the most emotionally mature or emotionally intelligent person, to manage to balance out their threat and soothing/calming systems, depending on what has just been triggered for them. There are also, in genuine cases of distress (not the “crocodile” tear brigade), things going on in the automatic nervous system which make it difficult not to cry once the emotion has kicked in, such as the opening up of the glottis, the muscle controlling the opening from the back of the throat to the voice box, causing the “lump in the throat” feeling which often accompanies crying. Sipping water and deliberate yawning are techniques which help to release tension in throat muscles when this happens but I don’t imagine that these will automatically spring to mind when someone is in the middle of a conflict situation and, indeed, deliberate yawning might be taken the wrong way and exacerbate the matter. I think that a great proportion of those who cry when criticised do indeed use tears as part of an immature or manipulative or inappropriate response, because they know no other way of expressing or managing their distress or anger or fear etc., but I don’t think that it will be the case in every instance. I have known some of the most “together” and emotionally mature people to crack under sufficient levels of pressure (those who were criticising were certainly deliberately pushing buttons and hitting below the belt), and to cry despite obviously not wanting to, and they were certainly not wanting this physical manifestation of their emotional state to take centre stage in the interaction. Their response happened to be accompanied by some tears, but those tears were not central to their response, and certainly were not being used in a manipulative manner, nor were they accompanied by aggression or any other inappropriate behaviours, such as shouting or hitting or abuse of any kind. I think we need to look at the skills sets of both the criticisers and the criticised, and make a judgement based on the bigger picture – a somewhat wide-angled approach. Also, while I think that those who use tears to manipulate should not be allowed to gain any traction with such behaviour, I would hate to think that we “condition” people not to cry – there is a “stiff upper lip” stigma already in many societies which can be and is emotionally damaging, especially for men. We need to respect the fact that crying is natural and helpful and healing and cathartic, while also helping people manage their emotions and their conflicts using appropriate language and careful, respectful, assertive forms of communication.
I think this depends a great deal on the type of criticism. Careful constructive criticism would be less likely to evoke tears especially if, for example, the sandwich technique was used – strength, need, strength. I think still, it is possible that someone who is tired and stressed might break down – perhaps consider that human if it is an atypical response. If the response to considered criticism and I am not talking about victimization, provoking, harassment or brutal comments, is always tears, the person may be highly manipulative, rather than immature.
Sometimes a criticism may tap into something from childhood, to which the natural response is to cry. Crying could also be seen as mourning for a parent who criticised a child, but because of the child’s inability to cry in front of the parent, will cry in front of a therapist. Even if crying is accompanied by anger, it may display a need that the inner child is unconsciously displaying – perhaps an insecure, anxious attachment that needs to be addressed.
IMO, crying releases all the pent up anguish that is toxic, it is a way to cleanse. On the other hand, it can also be an overwhelming emotion that can only be expressed through the release of the flow of tears….words just can’t express some of the emotions we feel…good or bad!!!
Sometimes, criticism can remind someone of a bad place in their Life, re-open a wound that never was quite healed..I agree with no right or wrong here.
Crying is natural and very human. If you feel that you want to cry as a response, then cry! Your feelings are your feelings. There’s no right or wrong feelings.
And so, those are some of the many thoughtful responses that I received. After giving them a great deal of thought, I have now decided that in future posts, when I describe the five levels of maturity, I’ll word the first level as follows: 1. This level requires displaying one or more of the following:
Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts and then does nothing else to address the criticism. (Some mature people are very sensitive and do cry on occasion when criticized. If they cry and also address the criticism in a manner that is consistent with level 4 or 5, crying is not viewed as a sign of immaturity.)
Physically attacks the criticizer
Damages property
Although this is my plan for the future, I am always open to hearing additional comments and suggestions for improving the wording of all of the five levels of maturity. My Best, Jeff
——————————-
Some people will enjoy reading this blog by beginning with the first post and then moving forward to the next more recent one; then to the next one; and so on. This permits readers to catch up on some ideas that were presented earlier and to move through all of the ideas in a systematic fashion to develop their emotional and social intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can clickHERE.
So grab yourself some Kleenex, heck, you better grab the whole box. Not that songs about crying are necessarily sad. This one at least sounds happy. It’s by Question Mark and the Mysterians–“96 Tears.”
Too many teardrops
Well, just listening for awhile in a caring manner is almost always a good start. Rather than to be too quick to start offering advice or criticizing in any way, I might just softly summarize, every couple of minutes, what my friend has been saying, thus assuring him that I am accurately listening. If my summary is off the mark in any way, my friend will clarify.
After Bob opens his tear-soaked Theme Time Radio Hour show with “96 Tears,” which gave us an example of a man being bitter about his break-up with his lover, he plays a song by the lovely and talented Anita O’Day. In “And Her Tears Flowed Like Wine” Ms. O’Day provides us a woman’s perspective on what it’s like to be crying over how a lover mistreated her.I cried last night until I couldn’t
Thomas Fuller once said, “We’re born crying, live complaining, and die disappointed. Hank Williams knew what he was talking about. This song is about a very specific depression inspired by a troubled relationship with his wife, Audrey Sheppard. Here that Lonesome Whippoorwill. He sounds too blue to fly. I’m so lonesome I can cry.
I’ve never seen a night so long
“No,” comes the reply from player, but then we hear her weeping.
Well, the old clock on the wall says it’s time to go. It’s a good thing because I’m out of Kleenex anyway. So I’m gonna hop in my car, head down the Robinson Freeway and get myself a beer I can cry into. In the meantime, remember the words of our former president, Woodrow Wilson: There is little for the great part of history except the bitter tears of pity and the hot tears of wrath.
On this blog, I often discuss immature and mature ways to deal with criticism. The advice that I offer is designed to be helpful to males and females alike. But recently, in 
n a sweet face. Not so when all you see is some letters.
