Categories
conflict resolution Good Grief support group Grief

Good Grief?

Welcome to From Insults to Respect. Today we’ll be taking an interesting look at the grief process.

Picture from tinybuddha.com

When we experience a major loss, such as the death of a loved one, financial ruin, losses from a natural disaster, or learning of a serious personal medical illness, our emotions can become pretty intense. Common reactions are waves of deep sadness, rumination about the loss, sleep difficulties, and reduced appetite.

A popular model of this process is known as the, “Seven Stages of Grieving.” They are:

– Shock or Disbelief
– Denial
– Anger
– Bargaining
– Guilt
– Depression
– Acceptance and Hope

Sometimes, rather than seven stages, five are used to capture the same basic model. This is accomplished by combining shock, disbelief, and denial into a single stage, and combining bargaining and guilt into a single stage.

These stages do not occur in the same sequence for all people, and they can last for a brief period or quite a bit longer; and during the process, more than one stage may occur at the same time. So, for example, someone may feel shock, anger, and waves of guilt all within a few seconds of one another, or they may all seem to merge together into one combined experience.

Beliefs that we learn from cultural norms can complicate the experience, making us feel at such times that we are acting in a manner that people may not respect. If we start to cry in front of others, will we be perceived as a weakling? If our bereavement lasts longer than what others may think is proper, will we be viewed as having some type of pathological condition?

In an extraordinary Feeling Deeply podcast, Emily Whyte Rubin, my daughter-in-law, interviews Jack Baxter, a guy from London who, having struggled with these issues, started a program to help others who are dealing with similar challenges. Called, “Good Grief,” the program essentially assists people to come together in small groups to share their experiences and to support one another. Let’s take a few minutes to look at some of that interview, and then I’ll express my views on this topic, and then invite those of you who are reading this post to weigh in.

The Feeling Deeply Podcast

This episode of Emily’s podcast can be listened to for free HERE. In introducing the interview, Emily explains that she chose to interview Jack Baxter because, “the human experience of grief is so prevalent, and something I believe many of us can use some more support around.”

After introducing Jack, she asks him what brought him to creating “Good Grief.” Jack’s reply, slightly abbreviated, follows:

“Sure. I’ll tell you a little bit about my story. It started with sadness, unfortunately. It started when I lost my father, Dave. He was 48. He was my best friend. You know, people talk about soulmates; I don’t believe you only have one soulmate, because, you know, I met someone else that I can label that. I’ve since met another soulmate, and I hope to continue to meet more, but my dad was very much my first soulmate; he connected with me in ways that I never connected with anyone. He was my best friend. I could tell him anything, and likewise, he would tell me anything–his advice, his wisdom, and I was lucky enough to have that man for twenty-two years.

“Sadly, he passed September 13th. He had skin cancer, which was, you know, tough for anyone to deal with, as you can imagine. I was only twenty-two at the time. It was like the center of my world had fallen out. It was a very tough time for me to deal with. I no longer had that support, and of course I had some friends and family, but no one like my dad who was, you know, who was there for me at times when I needed him most, and to be honest, I need him even now. You know, a young man needs his dad. And, well, we went on a journey of self discovery and I believe he was with me all that way as well. I made mistakes, ups and down, left and right, and, but, you know, I eventually sought some direction in “Good Grief” which, um, is a support group that I launched with some friends, Ben and James, and we offer support and advice for young people, in London at the moment, but we hope to venture out wider then that, for young people who have lost love ones, much like myself, and Ben, whose father died recently of brain cancer….

“To be honest with you, Emily, it was those people that I met whilst grieving, who understood my pain most. Ben was certainly one of those. I had two or three other friends who had all lost fathers themselves before, or shortly after mine, and they were the support group that I needed. I had lots of people telling me, ‘it will be OK and it will be all right, but it was those who experienced the same grief as me, they were the precious few who I really could listen to and I took strength from. And the group has been going from strength to strength ever since we launched in May, 2018.”

After Jack describes a little more of his grieving experiences, Emily asks him to describe in more detail what happens at these Good Grief meetings.

 “We first like to point out that it is not professional help, because, first off, there is professional help out there….But I think what we offer is, you know, just a group of understanding, empathetic young people. So we sit in a circle, or at least around a table. It’s all very informal; there are biscuits and cookies in the middle. We offer people to snack on them if they want to. Drinks are available, and it’s just a relaxed format. We sort of ask, that just by being there, you are acknowledging that you want to live a life with grief. You never beat grief, you know, you live with it. And just by being around that table, you are admitting to yourself that, well, enough is enough and I want to move forward carrying this weight with me. So we ask people to just introduce themselves. We go around the table clockwise, and we say, you don’t have to say anything tonight if you don’t wish, because this is a big do, it’s absolutely a big deal to sit in a room of strangers and to talk. You know, that’s hard enough. But to talk about some personal issues, that’s very hard. So we stress that you don’t have to talk if you don’t want to, but, at the very least, just say hello, and who it is that you miss…. And then, the person to the right of me would say, hello and it would go from there. And you find, Emily, that once people start saying their hellos, and start introducing themselves, questions just organically are asked by other participants, and there is this whole range of grief that at least one other person can identify with, be it a death from cancer, or a death from suicide, or a car accident. There will be someone else in that room that can identify. And that’s where the questions are asks, and that’s where the support is grown. And it’s a wonderful thing to be a part of.

Emily, then expresses how touched she is about how organic the process is, how simple, and yet, also, how vulnerable it is in its simplicity, to open up this space, and to go directly into that conversation.

Jack replies,

“It’s an amazing thing. You are right. It is so organic. There is no seminar leading up to it. This is what you can expect. You just jump in at the deep end, as they say. You know, you sit around the table and  there’s a brief hello, and…my name is Jack, this is Ben…. And then we just start a conversation…. It’s normalizing the grief, the confusion, and everything else that can come with death at a young age.”

At one point, Emily responds,

“Yes, and that reminder about not having to fix it, you never will be able to beat grief….That grief is something that we move in and out of our whole life. And to be able to have a space where that is welcome. It’s not like, ‘Well it’s okay, I’ll listen to you, but it’s welcoming you, that aspect.”

To this, Jack replies.

“That’s exactly right, Emily. You never complete grief. You never conquer it. It just becomes your new normal. You wake up one day and you realize my dad is not here anymore. But I will, to the day I die, carry that badge of honor that I miss my dad every day. But I got a new normal, a new focus, new responsibilities, new excitements. Also, new sadness. You know, other things have happened in my life since losing my dad that makes me sad, besides, so its acknowledging that you are normal feeling the way you do, and also continuing to feel that way whilst feeling happy, and whilst feeling sad. You don’t have to feel guilty about having a good day. It’s a safe space to be able to sit around with other people that could confirm that you are not a bad person for having a good day, or you are certainly not a bad person for having a bad day. It’s an incredible thing that I take no credit for, because it’s something so natural to me to facilitate a conversation about this.”

Well, there is so much more to this interview worth listening to, and I encourage my readers to take some time to give it a good listen to. But for now, let’s pause here and consider what was said up to this point in the conversation.

Some Thoughts

For me, personally, I tend to grieve internally, letting the experience flow through me, and I don’t feel a need to reach for a supplemental support group. In the past, when someone close to me died, I went to the funeral, spent a few days with people close to me, and then I processed the most challenging aspects of the experience that was, and is still, running through me mostly on my own. I have a supportive wife, and my children are a great source of comfort to me.

When my mom died, I had extended feelings of waves of guilt over whether I could have been more helpful to her when she was alive. I still do have these feeling from time to time, but I feel that I can deal with them without a special support group to help me through it, though I still miss her.

Although my personal approach is working for me, over the years I have met people who, it seems to me, really would benefit with the type of group Jack has put together. For example, a friend of mine whose wife died suddenly is now in his house all alone. It has been very rough on him. What a wonderful resource it would be for him if he could share what he has been going through, and offer support to others in a Good Grief type group. And I know others who, within their family structure, would meet with disrespect when showing any signs of tearfulness. “Man-up!” would be the demand they would face, or, “Don’t cry, it will all be okay.” For these folks, a more supportive group could be an enormous help.

Grief is a process that helps us to prepare for life after a serious loss. I respect that Jack is trying to be helpful and kind as he seeks a way to create something to honor his father’s life. In listening to the whole interview with Jack, I was left wondering if it makes sense to view grief as good, bad, it just is, some mixture of all three, or even something entirely different?

How do those of you who are reading this feel about what Jack has been doing, and grief in general? I’d love to hear from you.


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.

Categories
conflict resolution dealing with negative emotions handling sadness parenting

Am I Bad for Being Sad?

Welcome to from Insults to Respect. Today we seek to answer the question, If we are experiencing sadness does that mean that we are bad? We’ll begin with a little parable to see what it might reveal. Then we’ll look at the real life example of Laura, a young woman who came to think there was something wrong with her because of her sadness.

The Parable of a Mother Disciplining Her Son

It’s a Sunday night. Eight-year-old Carl is playing a computer game. Suddenly, his mom cries out, “Time to head up to bed, tomorrow’s school.”

“Let me just finish my game, Mom!”

“Take another five minutes, and then it’s off to bed!”

 Five minutes later, Carl, still engrossed in his game, hears his mother cry out again, “Time to head up to bed.”

“My game isn’t over yet Mom.”

“Put the game away now.”

“But Mom!”

“Don’t ‘but mom’ me, let’s go,” and she takes Carl firmly by his arm and begins to guide him to his bedroom. Carl’s eyes tear up, which infuriates his mother, and she cries out, don’t you start with this crap or I’ll give you a real reason to cry! You’re acting like an infant!!! Now you stop this instant and get to bed!!!”

Parable Discussion

First of all, I can empathize with this mother. Perhaps she had a very trying day. Perhaps she has learned how to handle the bedtime situation from her own growing up experience, observing how her parents handled this type of situation. Much of our own parenting skills are indeed learned this way, observing how our parents raised us. This mother’s intention was good; she wanted Carl to get enough sleep so he could be ready to do his best the next day at school. I certainly respect what she was trying to do.

That said, I find myself wondering if there might be some better way to respond when Carl begins to express his sadness, instead of threatening him and saying he is acting like an infant. Here’s one alternative approach that comes to mind.

When Carl begins to shed some tears, she might have said in a caring way,

“I see you are feeling sad. That’s understandable. You were enjoying the game so much, and you’re disappointed about having to stop. You know, when we feel sad, it’s to help us figure out how to better handle what we do in the future. I wonder how we can better handle the going to bed situation in the future. Any ideas, Carl?”

“No Mom. I just want to keep playing.”

“I think, Carl, that in the future playing these computer games right before going to bed might not be a good idea. They are designed to keep you wanting to play more and more, and it doesn’t come to an end. You reach one level and there is always another more challenging level to get to. What might be a better thing to do before bedtime?

“I could watch a show that ends at bedtime.”

“That sounds like a good thing to try, as long as it’s not a scary show that will get you all wound up right before bedtime. We could also go to the library and pick out some books that have pleasant short stories, and you can read one right before bed. Short stories come to an end in a reasonable period of time, and the reader feels a sense of completion when it’s over, without making you feel like you have to read the next chapter to see what happens next. That might work also. So, in the future, why don’t we try having you each night choose one of these ideas. I’ll let you decide each night which approach feels right to you.”

From this alternative scenario you might surmise that I think it would be better to frame our sad experiences as something useful for planning our future, rather than an experience that means we are bad or that there is something wrong with us. And, actually you would be right. But there is some nuance to my thinking about this issue that I wish to bring to your attention.

Some Nuanced Thinking When It Comes to Dealing with Our Sad Feelings

Suppose a guy named Fred tends to be sad more than the average person. This might be due to some natural born tendency to experience life in a more sensitive manner than most, or because of some rough stuff going on in his life, or some trauma in the past has been leading to recurring anguishing memories. For whatever reason, Fred regularly comes to work expressing his sadness from the look on his face as he goes around doing his job. Co-workers often stop what they are doing to ask what is wrong, and offer help by taking time to listen to Fred in a caring way. This would be nice in some ways, but let’s say it happens so often, coworkers begin to find that their work at the end of the day doesn’t always get done on time and they end up having to stay late. Some resentment begins to arise. Moreover, in this scenario, the boss begins to dislike what has been going on partly because of the time being taken from the tasks that have to get done with top-notch efficiency in a competitive business environment, and she was brought up by parents who taught that there is something wrong with people who are sad more than average. In the end, Fred loses his job.

Upset about this, Fred begins to share with his friends and family members how he is feeling, but his frequent expressions of sadness over an extended period soon begins to wear on them.

The point that I am trying to make is that experiencing sadness is not something that makes us bad, but how we express sadness can increase the chances that some will view us in a bad way.

Perhaps Fred would have been better off putting on a happy face at work despite his internal experience. Perhaps Fred, if he could afford it, would be better off hiring a professionally trained personal counselor to help him work through his sad experiences in a positive manner so that he doesn’t put too much on the shoulders of friends and family members. There are, in most communities, some counselors available, and at the top of any of my blog post there is a link titled “Counseling Services” that when clicked on provides descriptions and contact information for two excellent personal counselors that I personally can recommend who conveniently provide services through Skype, Zoom, or your phone.

However, counseling services do cost money, and if it is too expensive for someone’s budget, an alternative is to set up via such internet resources like meetup.com, a support group that meets regularly for the specific purpose of sharing challenging emotional experiences. Of course, the members will be unlikely to have the expertise of a trained personal counselor, but with trial and error it is often very possible to find the right mix of caring, empathic participants.

For these types of peer run support groups, it helps to set up some ground rules at the start of such meetings. Here are the rules that make sense to me.

  1. We’re here to emotionally support one another.
  2. Our internal emotions are to be met by group members with empathic caring and the encouraging of self-compassion.
  3. When sad feelings are shared, it is worth considering how such feelings might help us to figure out how to better deal with the future.
  4. When a member thinks that the way a fellow member is expressing his or her emotions is less than ideal, rather than to use any name calling, like, “You are being stupid for acting like that,” members are to gently frame their opinions as tentative suggestions. Here’s a useful phrase to consider using at such time, “I’m wondering if you were to (state whatever the suggestion might be) if that might be worth considering.”

The Example of Laura

Sometimes, instead of interpreting our sad feelings as “we are bad,” we come to think that something is wrong with our physical make-up. If this leads to considering taking steps in the future to improve our diet, get more exercise, or spend more time in nature, that can lead to healthy outcomes. However, there is potentially a dark side to blaming the body.

Rachel Aviv, New Yorker Staff writer

In an eye opening April 8, 2019 New Yorker article by Rachel Aviv titled, “The Challenge of Going Off Psychiatric Drugs,” we learn about Laura Delano, a remarkably talented woman. Although she did have a number of problems in her youth, as most of us do, she functioned well enough to get accepted to Harvard University. Then, at one point, she was at a party where she began sobbing so hard that her escort had to put her in a cab.

Shortly afterwards, she saw a psychiatrist who declared she had a mental disorder and prescribed an antidepressant. Laura was relieved to hear the doctor say that her distress stemmed from an illness. “It was like being told, It’s not your fault. You are not lazy. You are not irresponsible.”

So, at this point, Laura has become convinced that she is not being a bad person for how she was experiencing her emotion, it was her body that was being bad in the form of an illness. Was this really an improvement?

As her story continues,

“When on the drugs,” Laura said, “I never had a baseline sense of myself.”

She began taking twenty milligrams of Prozac, an antidepressant; when she still didn’t feel better, her dose was increased to forty milligrams, and then to sixty. With each raised dose, she felt thankful to have been heard. “It was a way for me to mark to the world: this is how much pain I am in,” she said….

At parties, she flirted intently, but by the time she and a partner were together in bed, she said, “I’d kind of get hit with this realization that I was physically disconnected. And then I’d feel taken advantage of, and I would kind of flip out and start crying, and the guy would be, like, ‘What the heck is going on?’” Most antidepressants dampen sexuality—up to seventy per cent of people who take the medications report this response….

During her junior year, her pharmacologist raised her Prozac prescription to eighty milligrams, the maximum recommended dose. The Prozac made her drowsy, so he prescribed two hundred milligrams of Provigil, a drug for narcolepsy that is often taken by soldiers and truck drivers to stay awake during overnight shifts. The Provigil gave her so much energy that, she said, “I was just a machine.”….

The Provigil made it hard for Laura to sleep, so her pharmacologist prescribed Ambien, which she took every night. In the course of a year, her doctors had created what’s known as “a prescription cascade”: the side effects of one medication are diagnosed as symptoms of another condition, leading to a succession of new prescriptions.

Despite taking all of these drugs she felt so distressed that she thought every day about dying. So a new psychiatrist put her on a new combination of pills. Again, despite these drugs she experienced what John Teasdale, a research psychologist at the University of Oxford, named “depression about depression.” She interpreted each moment of lethargy or disappointment as the start of a black mood that would never end. Psychiatric diagnoses can ensnare people in circular explanations: they are depressed because they are depressed.

As Laura’s story continued, during a brief period she decided to see another psychiatrist who was also a psychoanalyst. He questioned the way that she’d framed what she had been experiencing. He doubted her early diagnosis, writing that “many depressions are given a ‘medical’ name by a psychiatrist, ascribing the problem to ‘chemistry’ and neglecting the context and specificity of why someone is having those particular life problems at that particular time.” Laura decided that “he wasn’t legit.” She stopped going to her appointments.

Soon afterwards, despite all of the drugs that she was taking, she attempted to take her life. She did manage to survive, and afterwards,

She was started on a new combination of medications: lithium, to stabilize her moods, and Ativan, a benzodiazepine, in addition to the antipsychotic Seroquel, which she had already been taking. Later, a second antipsychotic, Abilify, was added—common practice, though there was limited research justifying the use of antipsychotics in combination. “It is tempting to add a second drug just for the sake of ‘doing something,’ ” a 2004 paper in Current Medicinal Chemistry warns.

In May, 2010, Laura wandered into a bookstore.

Robert Whitaker

On the table of new releases was “Anatomy of an Epidemic,” by Robert Whitaker. The book explained to her that as more and more Americans have taken to psychiatric drugs to deal with their emotions, the number of Americans disabled by mental illness has risen. Whitaker argues that psychiatric medications, taken over the course of a lifetime, may be turning some episodic emotional experiences into chronic disabilities. As Whitaker explains what people like Laura are going through, they have “been prescribed one drug, and then a second, and a third, and they are put on this other trajectory where their self-identity changes from being normal to abnormal—they are told that, basically, there is something wrong with their brain, and it isn’t temporary—and it changes their sense of resilience and the way they present themselves to others.”

It was at this point that Laura decided to see what would happen if she stopped taking the drugs, and found that the process was an excruciating experience because of the medication withdrawal reactions. It took her many extremely rough months before her goal was achieved.

Internal records of pharmaceutical manufacturers show that the companies have been aware of this withdrawal problem for many years, and many doctors mislead their patients suggesting to them that the prescribed drugs were either not addictive, or withdrawal symptoms are mild.

Now off the psychiatric drugs, Laura began a relationship with a guy named Rob Wipond. Both of them became emotional when discussing Laura’s sexuality. “I felt like a newborn,” Laura confided. “I hadn’t ever figured out what my body was meant to be.” Rob said, “She was open and awake. Everything was new to her. We were, like, ‘Well, gee, what is this sexuality thing—what shall we do?’ ”

Prior to coming off the psychiatric drugs, Laura had been unable to have stable relationships. “I honestly thought that, because I was mentally ill, the numbness was just part of me.” Now she wondered about the other effects of the many medications she had been taking. “On this very sensory, somatic level, I couldn’t bond with another human being,” she said. “It never felt real. It felt synthetic.”

Laura felt as if she were learning the contours of her adult self for the first time. When she felt dread or despair, she tried to accept the sensation without interpreting it as a sign that she was defective and would remain that way forever, until she committed suicide or took a new pill. It felt like a revelation, she said, to realize that “the objective in being alive isn’t the absence of pain.” She remembered identifying with a sad little bubble pictured in a popular advertisement for Zoloft—the bubble is moping around, crying and groaning, until it takes the medication and starts to bounce while birds sing—and became increasingly aware that her faith in the drugs’ potential had been misplaced. “I never felt helped by the drugs in the sense that I have meaning, I have purpose, I have relationships that matter to me,” she said.

Perhaps we can all learn something essential from Laura’s experience.

Final Thoughts

From today’s post, I hope that you will consider the value of giving up any belief that you may have that feeling sad means you are bad. If, when you experience sadness, you find yourself saying such words like, “I can’t believe I’m feeling sad again, what an idiot I am,” consider how it may be far more helpful to view your sadness as a useful tool for helping us to better plan our future. If you are a parent, consider the value of teaching your children this “sadness is a helpful tool” idea.

Also worth considering is that there are ways in which to express our emotions publicly that can either hurt our reputation or enhance it. Over a half million people have been using this blog as a no financial cost method to learn skills that can enhance their reputation whenever they find themselves in various emotionally arousing situations. I’m hoping you consider the value of joining them.

Finally, the pharmaceutical industry, along with its allied psychiatrists, have enormous resources to convince people that the best way to deal with sadness is to take pills. Laura’s story provides us a cautionary sign to all those who are tempted to go down that road.

Well, that’s my post for today. Here’s hoping you’ll soon join us again right here at From Insults to Respect.

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 click HERE.

Categories
conflict resolution Depression William James

William James’s Experience with Depression

Welcome to From Insults to Respect. Today we continue our exploration of famous people who, despite experiencing depression, managed to achieve an outstanding level of respect. In the recent past, the experiences of Joni Mitchell (see HERE), U.S. Grant (see HERE), Leo Tolstoy (see HERE), and Abraham Lincoln (see HERE) led us along their personal journey. We now turn to the master of all psychologists, William James, to be our guide.

Since we hear often enough from the pharmaceutical industry, with its enormous promotion machine, that it is crucial for people who have challenging experiences with depression to consume antidepressant pills, I have tried to offer a balance by providing examples of admired people who, in various ways, managed without them. For some, like Lincoln and Joni, their suffering never completely went away, but they, in a sense, made friends with it. They did so by coming to understand that experiencing challenges more deeply than people with a happy-go-lucky temperament has the potential to provide a motivating force to bring forth valued achievements. As Joni so beautifully expressed this, 

“Depression can be the sand that makes the pearl…. Most of my best work came out of it. If you get rid of the demons and the disturbing things, then the angels fly off, too. There is the possibility, in the mire, of an epiphany.”

Other people’s experience with depression takes a somewhat different course. At a certain point they find that their base notes of life are the result of living wrongly. Upon improving what they were doing and/or the situation that they were living in, they came to an understanding that the energy their depression provided for making changes led to a better life. Leo Tolstoy provided us the most vivid example. His depression stimulated a gnawing questioning that eventually led to one insight after another. His trouble had not been with life in general, not with the common life of common people, but with the life of the upper, intellectual, artistic classes, the life that he had personally always led, the cerebral life, the life of conventionality, artificiality, and personal ambition. By spending more time in nature and in a supportive community, “things cleared up within me and about me better than ever, and the light has never wholly died away.”  According to Tolstoy, his suicidal feelings disappeared, and he went on to live a productive life until he passed away at the age of 82 of natural causes.

William James’s story is more in line with this second type of depression experience, in that he, like Tolstoy, found that by making certain changes in how he was living and the situation in which he was living, his experiences of dealing with depression decreased to a point that he felt he was getting more out of life. I briefly reviewed these changes in an earlier post titled, “William James’s Personal Bout with a “’Mental Disorder’” (see HERE). I decided to delve a little deeper into this case because I happen to be reading The Letters of William James and came upon some additional information that I believe is worth reflection.

The Most Vivid Description of William James’s Experience with Depression

William James’s son, Henry, described his father’s struggle when he was in his 20s as follows:

William James’s father, Henry, on left, and young Will on right

“It was during this period that such doubts [about morality, his impotence to make any significant change, and the apparent meaningless of his life] invaded his consciousness in a way that was personal and intimate and, for the time being, oppressive. He was tormented by misgivings which almost paralyzed his naturally buoyant spirit. Bad health, a feeling of the purposelessness of his own particular existence, his philosophical doubts and his constant preoccupation with them, all these combined to plunge him into a state of morbid depression…. He even had an experience of that kind of melancholy which takes the form of panic fear.” 

William James, himself, described this fear in vivid detail:

“Whilst in this state of philosophic pessimism and general depression of spirits about my prospects, I went one evening into a dressing-room in a twilight, to procure some article that was there; when suddenly there fell upon me without any warning, just as if it came out of darkness, a horrible fear of existence. Simultaneously there arose in my mind the image of an epileptic patient whom I had seen in the asylum, a black-haired youth with greenish skin, entirely idiotic, who used to sit all day on the benches, or rather shelves, against the wall, with his knees drawn up against his chin, and the coarse gray undershirt, which was his only garment, drawn over them, inclosing his entire figure. He sat there like a sort of sculptured Egyptian cat or Peruvian mummy, moving nothing but his black eyes and looking absolutely non-human. This image and my fear entered into a species of combination with each other.

William in his early 20’s

“That shape am I, I felt, potentially. Nothing that I possess can defend me against that fate, if the hour for it should strike for me as it struck for him. There was such a horror of him, and such a perception of my own merely momentary discrepancy from him, that it was as if something hitherto solid in my breast gave way entirely, and I became a mass of quivering fear. After this the universe was changed for me altogether. I awoke morning after morning with a horrible dread at the pit of my stomach, and with a sense of insecurity of life that I never knew before, and that I have never felt since. It was a revelation; and although the immediate feelings passed away, the experience has made me sympathetic with the morbid feelings of others ever since. It gradually faded, but for months I was unable to go out into the dark alone.

“In general I dreaded to be left alone. I remember wondering how other people could live, how I myself had ever lived, so unconscious of that pit of insecurity beneath the surface of my life.”

Wow! That’s a pretty vivid description!

In that description, when William says that his disturbing experience gradually faded, from his letters it is clear to see that he continued to suffer through deep melancholy for a few years. Some of them included suicidal thoughts.

It is of special interest that William tells us that his experience “has made me sympathetic with the morbid feelings of others ever since.” For those of us who value people who can sympathize with those having such feelings, we see that something positive came out of William’s own experience. This theme that depression is often a tool to create something of value, runs throughout William’s writings for the rest of his life.

What Led to the Fading of William James’s Experience with Depression?

Initially, William, upon having his fearful experience believed that all mental health concerns now referred to as mental disorders are required to have a physical basis and that there was nothing anyone can willfully do about them. Today, short of taking a pill, many of today’s psychiatrists are promoting a similar view. Thus, their basic position is that these concerns are due to something within the patient’s physical makeup. This misses the overwhelming evidence that how people construe their past and current experiences, and their current social and work situations, are often the central causative factors.

Once William came to understand this, it provided the hope and motivation to do some things differently. As he explained to his father,

“Bless my soul, what a difference between me as I am now and as I was last spring at this time! Then so hypochondriacal, and now with my mind so cleared up and restored to sanity. It is the difference between death and life.”

One thing that he had decided to do was to spend more time than he had been on focussing on some uplifting life experiences. For example, he began to read poems by William Wordsworth. Consider Wordsworth’s poem, “I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud.”

I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high o’er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host, of golden daffodils;
Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
Fluttering and dancing in the breeze.
Continuous as the stars that shine
And twinkle on the milky way,
They stretched in never-ending line
Along the margin of a bay:
Ten thousand saw I at a glance,
Tossing their heads in sprightly dance.
The waves beside them danced; but they
Out-did the sparkling waves in glee:
A poet could not but be gay,
In such a jocund company:
I gazed—and gazed—but little thought
What wealth the show to me had brought:
For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood,
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.
For William, the delight that Wordsworth had for the beauty of nature was catching, and William began to spend more time in nature, especially in the Keene Valley area of the Adirondack Mountains. Also, of enormous help, was to find the right type of work for his temperament, as we see from a letter he wrote to his brother, the gifted novelist Henry James:

“The appointment to teach physiology is a perfect God-sent to me just now, an external motive to work, which yet does not strain me–a dealing with men instead of my mind, and a diversion from those introspective studies which bred a sort of philosophical hypochondria in me of late and which it will certainly do me good to drop…. It is a noble thing for one’s spirit to have responsible work to do.

On Left, Henry James, the novelist and brother to William

I enjoy my revived physiological reading greatly, and have in a corporeal sense been better for the past four or five weeks than I have been at all since you left…. I find the work very interesting and stimulating…. The authority is at first very flattering to one. So far, I seem to have succeeded in interesting them [his students], for they are admirably attentive, and I hear expressions of satisfaction on their part.”

Thus, finding something to do that was meaningful to him and placing him in an environment where those around him valued what he was contributing, played a huge part in improving how he was feeling.

Alice Gibbens

But there was an additional factor that perhaps made the shift in his life ever more extraordinary–his marriage to Alice Gibbens. As William explained this to his friend, Josiah Royce, “I have found in marriage a calm and repose I never knew before, and only wish I had done the thing ten years earlier.”

William’s son, Henry, describes the important support that his mother provided to his father, as follows:

“His wife, who entered into all of his plans and undertakings with unfailing understanding and high spirit, stood guard over his library door, protected him from interruptions and distractions, managed the household and the children and the family business, helped him to order his day and to see and entertain his friends at convenient times…and encouraged him to all his major undertakings, with a sustaining skill and cheer which need not be described to anyone who knew his household.”
Professor William James

There are, of course, numerous other aspects of William’s life that played a part in the lifting of his general spirits, some of which I cover in earlier posts. For remarkable suggestions for helping people who are considering suicide, consider taking a look at my post, “Is Life Worth Living? A William James Perspective” (see HERE).  But, for now, I leave the reader here hoping today’s post will serve to make the nature of depression at least a little more comprehensible.

——————————-

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.

Categories
conflict resolution Congressional House Oversight Committee Disgraceful conduct of Republicans Lying Michael Cohen President Trump

Disgrace of Republicans During Cohen’s Hearing

Welcome to From Insults to Respect. Today, we take a hard look at what I view as the disgraceful actions of most of the Republican congresspersons who participated in the 2/27/19 Michael Cohen hearing, and, going forward, what they might do to regain my respect.

The Disgraceful Actions

Michael Cohen served as the president’s personal lawyer and was brought in to the hearing to answer questions by the Congressional House Oversight Committee about possible criminal conduct and unethical behavior on the part of his former client and others connected with him. Rather than to devote their time to the task at hand, Republican after Republican spent the vast amount of time insisting that the whole hearing was a waste of time and a scam by Democrats to do nothing more than to try to gain political points.

Notice that there are two parts of their position. The first indicates that the Democrats wanted to gain political points at the hearing. I take this to mean that they wanted to bring out information that would increase the chances that Democrats will be elected in future elections. This is true enough, though it would have been more true if they also mentioned that the Republicans were also there to try to win political points. Party politicians, Democrats and Republicans alike, are always trying to win political points. The second part of the statement tried to indicate that the Democrats were there to do nothing more than gain political points. I think that party politicians, including Democrats and Republicans, seek to do some other things besides win political points. The Republicans’ claim that the Democrats were seeking nothing more at the meeting was a superficial effort to hide the very real concerns that many of us citizens have with the current administration given the number of people connected with the administration that have been convicted of crimes.

Characteristic of the tone of the hearing by Republicans was Paul Gosar, a Republican representative from Arizona, who set up a sign behind his chair. The sign showed a picture of Mr. Cohen superimposed on flames, emblazoned with the words “LIAR, LIAR, PANTS ON FIRE!”

This was an attempt to discredit anything that Mr Cohen had to say at the hearing because he had lied in the past. Republicans repeated this attempt over and over again throughout the hearing, but it consistently appeared blatantly disingenuous given their continued support of the President who has a well documented history of lying on numerous occasions.

Rep. Jordan on Left and Rep. Cummings on Right
Rep. Jim Jordan on left, and Rep. Cummings on the right

Rep. Jim Jordan, Republican of Ohio, began the hearing by saying derisively to the Democratic Chairman of the Committee, Rep. Elijah Cummings,

“Here we go, your first announced witness, is Michael Cohen. I want everyone in this room to think about this, the first announced witness of the 116th Congress is a guy who is going to prison in two months for lying to Congress. Mr. Chairman, your chairmanship will be always identified with this hearing.”

To this claim, Rep. Cummings soon corrected the record by indicating the clearly documented fact that under his leadership during the 116th Congress the committee had already had three other hearings. At each, there were several announced witnesses. For example, at one such hearing, the high prices of pharmaceuticals, which is in the process of being investigated by the committee, had executives of the pharmaceutical industry called to answer questions.

Rep. Jordan went on from his untruthful statement, to claim that the present hearing was nothing more than to serve the Clintons, their loyalists, and operatives, as well as to harm the President. To defend his position, Rep. Jordan mentioned that the committee was limited to answer only certain questions. In making this statement, he failed to mention that the reason for these limits was to cooperate with the special counsel and the Southern District of New York that had asked for these limits because certain questions could interfere with their ongoing investigations. This is a standard requirement under this set of circumstances. No doubt Mr. Jordan is well aware of this, and nevertheless, he attempted to slip this by the public’s eye.

Throughout the hearing, when it came time for each of the other Republicans to have their five minutes to question Mr. Cohen, with little exception, they parroted, over and over again, what Rep. Jordan had done. Several of the Republicans asked no questions at all, and most of the others, after consuming the vast majority of their allotted time with insulting Chairman Cummings and the other Democrats for setting up this hearing, hastily asked a single question. This dramatically reduced the time to examine what Mr. Cohen replied.

Why the Republicans at the Hearing Had Clearly Acted Disgracefully

Consider the following facts that are all well known to all of the Republicans who participated in the Michael Cohen hearing:

  1. The United States Intelligence community has concluded that Russia, a US adversary, took illegal action during the last presidential election seeking to help President Trump win.
  2. President Trump, a Republican, nominated Rod Rosenstein to serve as Deputy Attorney General for the United States Department of Justice and was confirmed by the Republican majority U.S. Senate.
  3. Following the recusal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions over his misleading remarks he made to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary during his confirmation process and FBI Director Comey’s dismissal by President Trump, Rosenstein appointed Robert Mueller as special counsel to investigate alleged ties between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 elections and related matters.
  4. During the special counsel’s investigation, several close associates to President Trump were convicted of lying about Russian government connections and/or other illegal matters, including his National Security Advisor Michael Flynn (plead guilty to a felony of willfully and knowingly making false, fictitious and fraudulent statements to the FBI), and his campaign chairman Paul Manafort (convicted on eight charges of tax and bank fraud, and repeatedly lying to investigators).
  5. Mr. Cohen had been President Trump’s personal attorney for about ten years, and in that role has probable first hand knowledge regarding possibly illegal actions over that period of time.
  6. Each and every one of the Republican participants know that skillful questioning by investigators of people with first hand knowledge of relevant events often leads to obtaining useful information from people even when the person being questioned had lied in the past.
  7. Information gathered from questioning such witnesses that is deemed as possibly helpful are not automatically assumed to be true, but are instead followed up to seek confirmation by other witnesses and documents.
  8. Mr. Cohen’s testimony before the special counsel had already been deemed helpful by the special counsel at the time of this hearing and the special counsel had recommended to the sentencing judge that Mr. Cohen’s cooperation be a factor in giving him a lighter sentence.
  9. Mr. Cohen, who is currently sentenced to three years in prison, if caught lying to Congress again would face far more years in prison, thus increasing the chances that he might provide further useful information if he is thoroughly and skillfully questioned.
  10. Millions of American citizens wanted to hear and see for themselves how Mr. Cohen would respond to questioning by the Congressional House Oversight Committee.

I contend that each of the ten facts listed above were well known to each of the Republican participants at the Cohen hearing. Together, they provide sound reasons to bring Mr. Cohen in for questioning by the Oversight Committee. Thus, by denying that there were any sound reasons, Republican participants were lying. In my opinion, those lies are even more harmful to Americans than the lies Mr. Cohen has been convicted of telling.

My best guess as to why those Republicans had lied at the hearing, wasted time repeating the lies over and over again, and insulting their Democratic colleagues, is that it was these same people who, when the Republicans were in the majority in the House of Representatives, had blocked a thorough oversight investigation in an effort to protect the President. If it was now admitted that going forward with the investigation is the right thing to do, these Republicans would be seen as guilty for having interfered with their committee’s obligations.

Going Forward

I well recognized the pressure these Republican representatives have for saying something supportive about the President whenever they appear in public. Each of them has in their districts a majority of voters who continue to support President Trump. Swimming against this type of tide is hardly to be expected of politicians. Nevertheless, this did not justify their conduct at the hearing.

Other witnesses are being called to be questioned before the same committee. To regain my respect, when going forward, they could find out from their constituents specific things that they believe the President is doing well. Then, at the hearing they could say in under a minute something like,

“We are here to investigate possible wrong doing that might have occurred, and some of President Trump’s associates have already been convicted of criminal activities. That said, I want all of us to keep firmly in mind that the President has been doing wonderful things. Under his leadership, unemployment has remained low, regulations and paper work for business folks have been dramatically reduced, and excellent people have been nominated for judgeships. I sit here today in full support of our President. Now, let me get down to questioning this witness.”

Although I respectfully disagree with much of this statement, I would understand the need for them to make it. If, after such a statement, they then proceeded to earnestly question the witness, while remaining civil to their colleagues, my level of respect for them would rise.

So, there you have it, today’s From Insults to Respect post. Until next time, may you find that all of our political leaders, Republicans and Democrats alike, are beginning to act more and more in an honest, respectful manner.

———————————
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.

 

Categories
Bob Dylan conflict resolution emotions kiss kissing romance romantic kissing

Bob Dylan On Romantic Kissing

Welcome to From Insults to Respect. Today’s topic, romantic kissing.

Concerned that your romantic partner’s respect for your kissing technique might not be all that you desire? Is it okay to offer a romantic kiss on a first date? Will your date think less of you if you accept a romantic kiss on the first date? A discussion of Bob Dylan’s Theme Time Radio Hour episode on kissing will enlighten us on these and other related topics.

Bob’s Introduction

Bob begins his show saying:

Today we are going to take a musical look at one of my favorite pastimes. It’s an act of intimacy, the thing that Mae West called a “man’s signature,” and I’m guessing she knows what she was talking about.

The first song that Bob plays for us is “It’s in His Kiss” by the magnificent Betty Everett. Here’s a bit of its lyrics:

Does she love me? I wanna know
How can I tell if she loves me so?

Is it in her eyes? (No no you’ll be deceived)
Is it in her sighs? (No no she’ll make believe)
If you wanna know if she loves you so
It’s in her kiss (That’s where it is)

Is it in her face? (No no that’s just her charms)
In her warm embrace? (No no that’s just her arms)
If you wanna know if she loves you so
It’s in her kiss (That’s where it is)
Oh yeah it’s in her kiss (That’s where it is)

So hold her and squeeze her tight
Tell her what you wanna know
If it’s love if it really is
It’s there in her kiss.

The unique communication that occurs during the romantic kiss is wonderfully captured in that song. However, I tend to doubt the we can be certain someone really loves us from a kiss. The kiss is an important form of communication, but there is far more to consider in just what it actually means.

The Varied Powerful Emotions That Come with Romantic Kisses

The next song Bob plays for us is sung by Lefty Frizzell, “Always Late with Your Kisses.” Here we learn that how someone handles romantic kisses can provide some hard to handle messages.

How long do you think that I can wait
When you know you’re always late
Always late with your kisses
Won’t you come to my arms sweet darlin’ and stay
You’re always late with your kisses
Why, oh why do you want to do me this way?

The song, sung in the most melancholy manner, suggests to me that if your romantic partner leans over to kiss you, if you are a little late in joining the kiss, it might be a signal that something isn’t quite right with the romance. Moreover, if instead of lingering in your arms during the kiss, she or he ends it a little too quickly, well, that may be another signal that something is wrong. Given how popular the song was, spending 12 weeks on the country charts, clearly indicates it touched something pretty sensitive in the heart of many a listener.

Bob goes on from here to songs that bring up such topics as passionate kissing, kissing in the dark, french kissing, finding lipstick on your collar, catching your woman kissing your best friend, making up after an argument kissing, and the fact that you don’t have to be rich to enjoy a wonderful kiss. He eventually gets back to our “romantic kissing” topic, with the Everly Brothers song, “Till I Kissed You.” Here’s a few lines of its romantic lyrics:

Never felt like this until I kissed ya’
How did I exist until I kissed ya’,
Never had you on my mind,
Now you’re there all the time,
Never knew what I missed till I kissed ya’, uh huh,
I kissed ya’, oh yeah…
You don’t realize what you doin to me,
and I didn’t realize what a kiss could be,
Mmm, you got a way about ya’,
Now I can’t live without ya’,

The song really captures how emotionally powerful a romantic kiss can have on a person.

A Specific Kissing Technique

Half way through the show, Bob checks his email and finds one of them perfect for today’s theme. Lawrence writes:

Dear Theme Time gang, I heard from the grapevine that you were doing a show about kissing. I can sure use your help. My girlfriend says I’m a bad kisser. We get along great but I’m afraid this one problem is going to ruin the whole thing. Please help.

Bob responds:

Well, Lawrence, kissing is an important part of a relationship. And it’s one of those things that you have to be relaxed to do. So the fact that you are getting anxious about it isn’t helping you one bit. However, I can give you a few tips. Armed with this knowledge you’ll feel a little more confident and be able to set things right. First of all, make sure your lips are moist. Run your tongue over your lips once before you kiss her. No one wants to kiss sandpaper. Stand close to your partner, you don’t want her to reach too far. Tilt your head slightly to one side. Close your eyes just before your lips meet. Just close them. Some people like to keep their eyes opened during a kiss, but until you understand your partner’s preference, better to play it safe and close your eyes. Open your lips slightly, not like you are about to swallow her whole head, just a little bit, and don’t hold your breath. Breath through your nose. Press your partner’s lips gently. Move your lips in a slow circular motion. Be gentle but firm. And finally, and I can’t stress this enough, have a pocketful of mints. There is no underestimating the fact of good breath. Good luck and happy kissing. I hope it won’t be long till you hear your girl say, “baby let me kiss ya just one more time.” 

That there is a pretty decent description of a decent kiss, but I would add one more suggestion for helping him. Why not encourage him to ask his girlfriend what she would like him to do differently when they kiss? For example, she might prefer to be held within his arms more firmly while they are kissing, or perhaps a little gentler approach would be more to her liking.

First Night Kisses

An issue sometimes comes up as to whether or not a guy will lose respect for a gal if she lets him kiss her on their first date. And what about a guy who tries to kiss a girl romantically on a first date? Would he be disrespectful to her for trying. To get into this topic, Bob plays us a recording of some guy taking the following position:

Jerry not only sees Margaret home, but opens the door for her, and then, well, they’ve been going steady for some time now, and there are some customs that are very enjoyable. But now Frank has a new problem, should he try on a first date to kiss his date. He sees her to her door, and thanks her for going out with him. No, he should not try to kiss her good night on a first date. But he does ask her for another date soon.

Bob doesn’t tell us who this guy is, but there is little doubt that there are people who agree with him that a kiss on the first date is a no no. There is also little doubt that people hold different positions on this topic. Take me, for example. I grew up in Brooklyn, and before I was married, and was dating back in the late 1960s and early 70s, when I asked a gal out, I did so because I had some romantic feelings for her. If, by the end of the evening, when we arrived back at her home, if I still felt romantic toward her, I would say I had a very pleasant time, and pause to see if she said something similar. If she did say something similar, I would very slowly and gently lean toward her, observing her reaction as I did so, and if I saw no sign of resistance, my eyes would close and our lips would join for a romantic kiss. If she seemed to get into it, I would feel a wonderful high sensation, not only during the kiss, but all the way home. I never had any sense of disrespect toward the gal for joining me in such a good night kiss.

I’m not saying my position is the correct one. I think it is a good idea to get a sense of the community standard before making a choice about how to respectfully act under such circumstances. Discuss the issue with friends and family members. I also believe that regardless of the community standard, using any force to get a good night kiss, or using any pressure is disrespectful and wrong.

Closing Words

Toward the close of the show, Bob gets back to the topic of the emotions that come from a romantic kiss by playing us a final song, and then reciting a poem. He introduces the song by inviting us to “listen to one of the old masters, the fountainhead from which all music flows, Louis Armstrong, and a song that was the centerpiece for his live performances in the later period of his life. This is a version that he recorded in 19 and 51, ‘A Kiss to Build a Dream on.'”

Here’s a few of that song’s wonderfully romantic lyrics:

Give me a kiss to build a dream on
And my imagination will thrive upon that kiss
Sweetheart, I ask no more than this
A kiss to build a dream on
Give me a kiss before you leave me
And my imagination will feed my hungry heart
Leave me one thing before we part
A kiss to build a dream on
And when I’m alone with my fancies, I’ll be with you
Weaving romances, making believe they’re true
Oh, give me your lips for just a moment
And my imagination will make that moment live
Give me what you alone can give
A kiss to build a dream on

A kiss to build a dream on–can there be a better way to capture the essence of a romantic kiss?

After this song, Bob recites a Robert Burns poem. It’s called “To A Kiss”:

Robert Burns

Humid seal of soft affections,
Tend’rest pledge of future bliss,
Dearest tie of young connections,
Love’s first snow-drop, virgin kiss.

Speaking silence, dumb confession,
Passion’s birth, and infants’ play,
Dove-like fondness, chaste concession,
Glowing dawn of brighter day.

Sorrowing joy, adieu’s last action,
Ling’ring lips, — no more to join!
What words can ever speak affection
Thrilling and sincere as thine!

Pretty fine words for me to close today’s post. Here’s hoping you’ll join us once again right here at From Insults to Respect, and may all of your romantic kisses be thrilling and sincere.

——————————-

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.

Categories
Alcohol drinking problems Alcoholics Anonymous alcoholism Alcoholism as a disease conflict resolution responsibility

Alcoholism: No-Responsibility Illness?

Welcome to From Insults To Respect.

Over the years, I have met some pretty decent folks who spent a good part of their earlier life drinking way too much alcoholic beverages, and, at a certain point, found a way to get this under control. Some of these folks believe they took responsibility for their actions, and that was all that was needed. A very different group became engaged in a program, most typically Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), and came to believe the ongoing support that they receive from its peer members has been crucial in their management of this type of problem.

Some in such programs advocate that serious problem drinking be viewed as a no-responsibility illness. The topic is a useful vehicle for clarifying some confusion about the nature of “guilt,” “fault,” “blame,” and “responsibility.” Whether or not folks have a crystal clear understanding of these concepts can be the difference between whether or not others will regard them with respect.  

A Case Study

A useful way to get into this discussion is to take a look at a concrete example of someone who managed to gain control of a severe drinking problem. Mr. S. H. Hadley’s story, who after his recovery became an active helper of others with similar difficulties in New York, serves our purpose particularly well. His story appears in William James’s brilliant book, The Varieties of Religious Experience. I have slightly abridged Mr. Hadley’s account.

“One Tuesday evening I sat in a saloon in Harlem, a homeless, friendless, dying drunkard. I had pawned or sold everything that would bring a drink. I could not sleep unless I was dead drunk. I had not eaten for days, and for four nights preceding I had suffered with delirium tremens, or the horrors, from midnight till morning. I had often said, ‘I will never be a tramp. I will never be cornered, for when that time comes, if ever it comes, I will find a home in the bottom of the river.’ But the Lord so ordered it that when that time did come I was not able to walk one quarter of the way to the river. As I sat there thinking, I seemed to feel some great and mighty presence. I did not know then what it was. I did learn afterwards that it was Jesus, the sinner’s friend. I walked up to the bar and pounded it with my fist till I made the glasses rattle. Those who stood by drinking looked on with scornful curiosity. I said I would never take another drink, if I died on the street, and really I felt as though that would happen before morning. Something said, ‘If you want to keep this promise, go and have yourself locked up.’  I went to the nearest station-house and had myself locked up.

“I was placed in a narrow cell, and it seemed as though all the demons that could find room came in the place with me…. I was finally released, and found my way to my brother’s house, where every care was given me. While lying in bed the admonishing Spirit never left me, and when I arose the following Sabbath morning I felt that day would decide my fate, and toward evening it came to my head to go to Jerry M’Auley’s Mission. I went. The house was packed, and with great difficulty I made my way to the space near a platform. There I saw the apostle to the drunkard and the outcast–that man of God, Jerry M’Auley. He rose, and amid deep silence told his experience. There was a sincerity about this man that carried conviction with it, and I  found myself saying, ‘I wonder if God can save me?’  I listened to the testimony of twenty-five or thirty persons every one of whom had been saved from rum, and I made up my mind that I would be saved or die right there. When the invitation was given, I knelt down with a crowd of drunkards. Jerry made the first prayer. Then Mrs. M’Auley  prayed fervently for us. Oh, what a conflict was going on for my poor soul! A blessed whisper said, ‘Come’; the devil said, ‘be careful.’ I halted but a moment, and then, with a broken heart, I said, ‘Dear Jesus, can you help me?’ Never with mortal tongue can I describe that moment. Although up to that moment my soul had been filled with indescribable gloom, I felt the glorious brightness of the noonday sun shine into my heart. I felt I was a free man. Oh, the precious feeling of safety, of freedom, of resting on Jesus!…

“From that moment till now I have never wanted a drink of whiskey, and I have never seen money enough to make me take one. I promised God that night that if he would take away the appetite for strong drink, I would work for him all my life. He has done his part, and I have been trying to do mine.”

General Discussion

In this example, we see that Mr. Hadley had come to a pretty awful point in his drinking life. Rather than to kill himself, he chose another path.

He began by having himself voluntarily locked up at the station house. He then had a very supportive experience when he stayed with his brother, although throughout, it seemed to him he was beset by an admonishing spirit. 

That Mr. Hadley’s brother provided a place for him where every care was given to him may be viewed as a crucial step toward achieving his goal.

General Booth

General Booth, the founder of the Salvation Army, expressed the opinion that the first vital step in helping people to recover consists in making them feel that some decent human being cares enough for them to take an interest in the question whether they rise or sink. In counseling and psychotherapy research, this component is often referred to as empathic unconditional positive regard. Numerous studies have demonstrated it is a powerful ingredient for success when seeking to provide help.

When Mr. Hadley goes to Jerry M’Auley’s Mission he does not describe this as a choice that he made. Notice his wording. “It came into my head to go… I went.”

As the events unfold at the mission, Mr. Hadley continues to experience his actions, not based on choices that he is making, but a surrendering to what the mission might do to help him. Thus, at one point, he says to himself, “I found myself saying, ‘I wonder if God can save me?'”

As the experience continued, Mr. Hadley heard from many of his peers that they had struggled, like he had, but managed to recover. This, perhaps, provided a certain amount of hope that he, too, might recover. Perhaps, as well, some of his peers that he met at the mission came to provide some kind of support for him during his recovery process, and this too was an essential component for the recovery process.

Mr. Hadley ends up concluding that by surrendering to the will of God, God had taken away his appetite for strong drink and provided him the precious feeling of safety and freedom. At the very end of his shared experience, he does say that he has been “trying” to do his part in his recovery, suggesting that he did view applying some will or effort is, at least for him, part of his recovery process.

Clearly, there is a religious theme throughout Mr. Hadley’s story. A higher helper, as he viewed it, had been helping him. I can clearly see how someone who is religious minded can find some help by this way of construing events.

William James

That said, William James, as he discusses Mr. Hadley’s experience, hastens to point out that there are numerous “cases of drunkards’ conversions which are purely ethical, containing, as recorded, no theological beliefs whatever.” He gives, as an example, the case of John B. Gough, who was an atheist, and neither God nor Jesus is mentioned in his account of his recovery. A restaurant waiter, who had taken a kind interest in Mr. Gough, appears to be a crucial ingredient for that person gaining control over his drinking difficulties.

Some people just don’t have any religious inclinations. Nevertheless, some of these individuals may, as William James explains, “be excellent persons, servants of God in practical manners, but they are not children of his kingdom.”

For many people, in place of a God being the higher power, faith is placed in the “process” that is offered in the recovery plan. A surrendering of the will is still experienced as part of the process, fully knowing that regularly hearing stories of others who recovered, along with ongoing peer support, has worked for so many.

So, in this general discussion of Mr. Hadley’s experience, we can see the outlines of several components that may have been helpful to him. He recognized that he had come to a pretty awful situation as a result of his drinking. He found some people who took some kind interest in him. He began to hear, over and over again, stories of people who had gone through very similar experiences who did have success recovering. He surrendered, at least to some extent, his own will, replacing it in faith in God and the program he had entered into at the mission. He also began to help others who were struggling with similar problems.

Perhaps the reader might have noticed that in Mr. Hadley’s account of his experience, he does not try to make the case that his difficulty controlling his drinking is a no-responsibility disease. There is little doubt that heavy drinking is a risk factor for several diseases, and Mr. Hadley was clearly experiencing some toxic reactions to his heavy drinking. But to certain strict scientific minds, confirming that someone has a disease requires a pathological report that identifies the presence of a lesion, tumor, microbe infection, tissue tear, bone fracture, organ blockage, or physiological poison.

Now some argue that for alcoholics, alcohol is a poison, and therefore this makes it a legitimate disease. But in the disease model of alcoholism, even when a person designated as an alcoholic has not had any alcohol they still have the disease, and always will have the disease, even if they have refrained from drinking for years.

It may seem that whether or not some believe in this disease notion is of little import. However, some feel so very strongly about this issue that it has an effect on how much respect is afforded to people depending on what side they have come to accept. And because this blog is particularly interested in the nature of respect, let’s delve into this issue.

Guilt, Responsibility, and Drinking Problems As No-Responsibility Disease

Over the years, I have met AA members who refer to their drinking problem as a disease. I have also witnessed some members getting very angry and defensive when someone in front of them questioned whether or not their problem is a real disease.

Upon doing some research on this topic, I found a write-up in Wikipedia on AA, and a section within the write-up titled, “Disease Theory Of Alcoholism.” There I learned the following:

“More informally than not, AA’s membership has helped popularize the disease concept of alcoholism, though AA officially has had no part in the development of such postulates which had appeared as early as the late eighteenth century.[58] Though AA initially avoided the term ‘disease’, in1973 conference-approved literature categorically stated that “we had the disease of alcoholism.”[59][better source needed] Regardless of official positions, from AA’s inception most members have believed alcoholism to be a disease.[60]

“Though cautious regarding the medical nature of alcoholism, AA has let others voice opinions. The Big Book states that alcoholism “is an illness which only a spiritual experience will concur.” Ernest Kurtz says this is “The closest the book Alcoholics Anonymous comes to a definition of alcoholism.”[60] In his introduction to The Big Book, non-member William Silkworth said those unable to moderate their drinking have an allergy. Addressing the allergy concept, AA said “The doctor’s theory that we have an allergy to alcohol interests us. As laymen, our opinion as to its soundness may, of course, mean little. But as ex-problem drinkers, we can say that his explanation makes good sense. It explains many things for which we cannot otherwise account.”[61] AA later acknowledged that “alcoholism is not a true allergy, the experts now inform us.”[62] Wilson explained in 1960 why AA had refrained from using the term “disease.”

“Nevertheless the medical and scientific communities now join with AA’s 1930s disease hypothesis and use scientific criteria to confirm that alcoholism is an “addictive disease” (aka Alcohol Use Disorder, Severe, Moderate, or Mild)[64].”

Regarding this last sentence of the above Wikipedia quote, the claim that there now exists scientific criteria to confirm that alcoholism is an “addictive disease” is misleading. The sentence provides one citation that leads us to the two major mental and behavioral disorder classification systems. One of them (DSM-5) has been criticized by scientists for being heavily funded by the pharmaceutical industry seeking to classify as many psychological concerns as diseases to legitimize the prescribing of psychiatric drugs. Another one of the classification systems describes it as follows:

“Disorder” is not an exact term, but it is used here to imply the existence of a clinically recognizable set of symptoms or behaviour associated in most cases with distress and with interference with personal functions.”

Such classification systems too vaguely define their terms to be viewed as scientific. Relying on the descriptors of “distress” and “functioning” as central to the definition of disease simply doesn’t work. Distress is as natural a part of human life as breathing, and we all have levels of functioning that gets interfered with by numerous aspects of living. Accepting alcoholism as a scientifically validated disease requires that we accept it is as “disease” with no requirement that a valid test has identified a positive pathology result. Rather, a distressing behavior pattern becomes sufficient. For a complete description of the unscientific nature of these types of classifications systems, see HERE.

But outside of the strict scientific realm, if someone wants to view their alcohol drinking as a disease, why in the world would anyone really care? And why should anyone who believes that alcoholism is a disease get all worked up if they hear from someone who disagrees?

Delving Deeper Into This Issue

As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, there is a subgroup of folks who got there drinking problem under control and believe they did so because they took responsibility for their actions, and that was all that was needed. Some of these folks also believe there is a certain strength and dignity to handling their problems in this way, and those who don’t handle their problems in this way are weak, shameful, and maybe even deserving of punishment.

Some people, despite their efforts to handle their drinking problem by an act of will, find they have been unable to make it work. For them, they may have been spending substantial periods of time agreeing that they are indeed weak, shameful, deserving of punishment, that their negative drinking pattern is their fault, and the insults directed at them because of their drinking problem are well deserved and accurate.

The “sins” which they are eager to escape from almost exclusively engrosses their attention, so their efforts at recovery is a process of struggling away from the “sins,” rather than of striving for the positives that can be achieved. For William James, it would be far better for them to lay less stress on their various social miseries, the harm they are doing to their family, stomach, kidneys, and nerves, and far more on “the blessings of having an organism kept in lifelong possession of its full youthful elasticity by a sweet, sound blood, to which stimulants and narcotics are unknown, and to which the morning sun and air and dew comes as sufficiently powerful intoxicants.” 

When one’s will had done its uttermost toward bringing the drinking problem under control, oftentimes one becomes exhausted. This can be a time when suicide is considered, or one decides to surrender to a faith in a process that has worked for others. The personal will is given up, and the person ceases to resist. Sometimes this process includes religious or spiritual themes.

What value might this surrendering approach serve? William James explains it this way:

“You know how it is when you try to recollect a forgotten name. Usually you help the recall by working for it, by mentally running over the places, persons, and things with which the word was connected. But sometimes this effort fails: you feel then as if the harder you tried the less hope there would be, as though the name were jammed, and pressure in its direction only kept it all the more from rising. And then the opposite expedient often succeeds. Give up the effort entirely; think of something altogether different, and in half an hour the lost name comes sauntering into your mind, as Emerson says, as carelessly as if it had never been invited. Some hidden process was started in you by the effort, which went on after the effort ceased, and made the result come as if it came spontaneously.”

Depending on such a process is particularly valuable when individuals had been spending a great deal of time and effort insulting themselves and hearing insults from others. For such people, exercising their personal will has them living in the region where their imperfect self is the thing most emphasized.

Self-surrender is less tension provoking, thus providing for people with drinking problems more of their personal mental resources for doing the work necessary to make a valued change in their lives. This frees up the subconscious forces to take the lead for a period of time. Instead of trying to force themselves to become alcohol free, by falling back on some larger power, the work that had begun by their will is further worked on in this subconscious incubated process, and, if the soil is right, finally burst forth into flower!  

Returning to the Issue of Guilt, Responsibility and Drinking Problems As No-Responsibility Disease

To some folks, in addition to self-surrendering, there is another way for folks with drinking problems to put aside the notion that they are weak, shameful, deserving of punishment, that their negative drinking pattern is their fault. This other way has them becoming convinced that those with drinking problems have a no-responsibility disease. By framing drinking problems as a disease, it is hoped that people will respond altruistically toward those struggling with this issue in a manner analogous to what happens when a mother’s altruistic emotions spring up when her baby is stricken with an illness. With this line of thinking, instead of laying fault, guilt, insults, or punishment upon the drinker, the focus, it is hoped, is upon a plan to help the drinker deal with the disease.

This strategy, however, is far from perfect. By calling serious drinking problems a disease leads some people losing respect for you. Those who took responsibility for their drinking problems and managed, through an act of will, to free themselves from its clutches will feel you are dodging responsibility where it rightfully belongs.

Now I fully recognize that it is grossly unfair for people to assume that just because they managed to get control over their drinking problems by an act of will, everyone should be just like them. Their belief is self-centered, and they fail to recognize that not everyone is the same regarding biology and environmental life circumstances. Getting people with such self-centered views to better appreciate the grand sweep of humanity is a worthwhile goal, but seeking such a goal may be better advanced by avoiding the disease concept, and recognizing up front that you recognize that people with drinking problems are better off if they do take some responsibility for their problems.         

This view that people with drinking problems have at least some responsibility for their actions is common even for people who never gained control of their own drinking problem by their own act of will, and also for people who never had a drinking problem. A major reason for the conflict between those who are motivated to hang onto the no-responsibility disease concept, and those who insist on at least some responsibility, is the confusion about the concept of responsibility.  

The actor Will Smith, in his popular YouTube video titled “Fault Vs Responsibility” tries to clarify this (see HERE). He begins by telling us that he was having a debate with a friend of his on the difference between fault and responsibility. His friend kept saying, “It’s somebody’s fault!” He replied that it doesn’t matter if it’s somebody’s fault if it’s your responsibility to fix it. He goes on to say,

“If it’s somebody’s fault, we want them to suffer, we want them punished, we want them to pay…. As long as we are pointing the finger at whose fault it is, we’re jammed and trapped into victim mode. The road to power is in taking responsibility! Your heart, your life, your happiness is your responsibility and your responsibility alone…. taking responsibility is not admission of guilt. You are not admitting it is your fault. Taking responsibility is a recognition of the power that you see when you stop blaming people. It’s not like letting people who wronged you off the hook, but taking responsibility is an emotional self defense; it is taking your power back.”  

I largely agree with this statement, and if I had a direct conversation with Will Smith I suspect we would come to fully agree with one another. His statement in the video was brief, thus making it hard to get into any nuanced meanings of what he was trying to say in a simple, easy to understand manner. Nevertheless, let me point out two points that I at least appear to disagree.

First, when Mr. Smith says, “Your heart, your life, your happiness is your responsibility and your responsibility alone,“ I actually believe there is often a shared responsibility in the types of situations that he is referring to. That is, whenever those of us in our communities begin to see some folks getting into some serious trouble, it is a sign of wisdom if we take some responsibility to try to find ways, out of kindness, to be helpful in some way. For example, many communities, recognizing that problems with addiction is a problem for the whole community, have worked together to provide places for peer support groups to meet at no cost to the support groups.

Second, when Mr. Smith says, “It’s not like letting people who wronged you off the hook,” I’m not quite sure what he means by this. However, just to clarify my own position, I believe that there are times when a person who is having difficulty getting a drinking problem under control, and has tried all of the admonishments, and blaming that often goes along with the frustration of not succeeding, there may come a time when putting aside these negative approaches, and replacing them with something different, makes a world of sense. 

Now, I well understand that when someone has been self-admonishing and self-blaming for quite some time, to suddenly stop doing it is often difficult. Here’s a simple technique for learning to replace this habit with something far more helpful, and it does not cost even a penny.

As soon as you notice that you are saying to yourself insulting, self blaming words, if you happen to be alone, for a minute or so, observe in a nonjudgmental manner what words are coming to you. Observe them like you were a scientist objectively observing a flock of birds flying by, off in the distant sky.

After about a minute of this, for another minute, turn your attention to the physical sensations that you are experiencing as these words fly by. If you wish to linger, that’s fine. Then, for another minute, imagine what good things would come about if you did manage to solve your drinking problem.

By doing this exercise for two months, the old insulting, blaming habit will occur far less frequently. When it does occur, it will contain far less of an emotional sting. And, in the end, you will observe a new, more helpful pattern emerge. It is wonderfully freeing.

Of course, there will be times over the course of your two months of utilizing this approach when you will begin to notice that you are saying insulting, self blaming words about yourself while other people happen to be present. As soon as you notice you have begun to do this, excuse yourself, and find a place to be alone–even a bathroom will do. Once you are alone, do the practice session as described above. It only takes about three minutes. 

Well, in conclusion, I encourage you to consider whether or not it is wise for you to tell others that serious drinking problems is caused by the disease of alcoholism. It seems to me that even if you do believe that it is a disease, there are enough people promoting this idea so for those who are open to that belief, they already believe it is a disease and need no further push in that direction from you. However, each time you tell people you think it is a disease, you risk the possibility that some who hear will lose respect for you because they will view your attitude as a base attempt at eliminating essential responsibility from people who would be far better off accepting responsibility for their actions. 

Okay then, that’s my post today. I know some of what I’ve written is very controversial. Whether you agree or disagree, I encourage you to give me a piece of your mind in the comment section at the very bottom of this page. In any case, I hope you have found in what I have written some food for thought. And please do join us again right here at From Insults to Respect. 

——————————-

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.

Categories
conflict resolution Jamal Khashoggi Responding to Criticism Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman

Khashoggi, The Saudi Prince, and Managing Criticism

Welcome to From Insults to Respect. 

On this blog, I have been making the case that how we respond to criticism can have an enormous influence on how much respect others have for us. To support this position, from time to time I provide a tentative outline of five levels of maturity for responding to criticism, with level 1 being viewed as the most immature, I give specific examples of people using the different levels, and I discussed the consequences of responding at each level.

A very disturbing example of someone responding to criticism has now crashed upon the international stage. I am referring to the actions of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. According to the US CIA and many others who have reviewed the evidence, the Prince ordered the murder of the Washington Post reporter Jamal Khashoggi because the reporter criticized him. The details are gruesome, with those who carried out the deed actually using a bone saw to cut him into pieces.

Today, in an effort to deepen our understanding about how to effectively manage criticism, we will quickly review the description of the five levels. Then we’ll take a look at how the Prince’s approach to dealing with criticism matches the lowest levels. Finally, I’ll discuss how he is being perceived as a result of his way of dealing with criticism.

The Five Levels of Responding to Criticism

Let’s begin this discussion by once again refreshing our memory of how all five levels are described. Level 1 is viewed, tentatively, as the most immature, and as we move to level 2, then 3, etc., more and more mature ways of responding to criticism is described.

1.  This level requires displaying one or more of the following:

  • Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts without also utilizing at least level 4 skills
  • Physically attacks the criticizer
  • Damages property

2.  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.

3.  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. 

4.  Level 4 individuals 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.

5.  In addition to actions consistent with level 4, people responding to criticism 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 some aspect suggested from the criticism.  Steering cannot be incorporated into all situations, but it is an additional goal of the most mature individuals.

Given these 5 level descriptions, if the Saudi Prince, because of being criticized, arranged to kill the criticizer, what level do you think best matches his actions?

Before I give my own judgment on this, let’s take a look at the Prince’s responses to criticism prior to the murder.

The Prince’s Previous Actions to Criticism

The Saudi Kingdom, an absolute monarchy, has long imprisoned its own citizens who criticize the government. However, entities outside of the Kingdom, when criticizing the Saudis, found that it was typically handled quietly, with the Saudis usually ignoring them. Things began to change when the Prince gained power.

Although King Salman did not appoint his son crown prince until June 21, 2017, the prince has been accumulating vast powers since January 2015, serving as defense minister, overseeing the state oil monopoly, working to overhaul the Saudi economy and building ties with foreign leaders.

Utilizing this power, the Prince recalled its ambassador to Sweden and stopped issuing business visas to Swedes in 2015 after human rights criticisms. Last year, under his influence, Saudi Arabia suspended deals with German firms and recalled its ambassador from Germany after the German foreign minister appeared to criticize Saudi foreign policy.

In August 2018, when Canada criticized the recent arrests of Saudi rights activists, the Prince threatened to break trade agreements with Canada and to break off trade with other Western countries if they, too, spoke out about political repression in the kingdom. An additional threat involved an unspecified, tit-for-tat response to further criticism, saying “any further step from the Canadian side in that direction will be considered as acknowledgment of our right to interfere in the Canadian domestic affairs.”

Besides these threats, the Prince expelled the Canadian ambassador, withdrew its ambassador from Canada, froze new business deals and investment with Canada, and announced plans to withdraw thousands of Saudi students and their families from Canadian schools and universities and place them elsewhere.

So, given these actions, along with the Prince’s order to murder Khashoggi, if you were to utilize the 5 levels of maturity described above, how would you rate these actions of the Prince? If you will, first come up with your own answer to this, and then compare it to my answer.

My Answer

The Prince’s threats, it seems to me, clearly results in a rating of 2 because it matches the level 2 phrase, Threatens the criticizer. His other actions clearly results in a rating of 1 because actions such as breaking off trade and withdrawing thousands of students are costly, thus they are a fairly good match with the level 1 phrase, Damages Property. The murder is clearly a level 1 response because it matches the level 1 phrase, Physically attacks the criticizer. Overall, I think the Prince deserves a rating of 1.

 

Categories
Abraham Lincoln conflict resolution Depression

Abe Lincoln’s Experience With Depression

Welcome to From Insults to Respect.

Regular readers know that from time to time I will discuss some famous person’s experience with depression. The experiences of Joni Mitchell (see HERE), U.S. Grant (see HERE), and Leo Tolstoy (see HERE) are the most recent examples. All of them, despite their mighty struggles with depression, still managed to earn the respect of millions.

To continue this series on the experiences of famous persons who dealt with depression, I just finished reading a wonderful book titled, Lincoln’s Melancholy: How Depression Challenged a President and Fueled His Greatness, by Joshua Wolf Shenk.

I actually began discussing the book in my last post, which has the title, “I’m Sorry For The Tears.” There we discussed some reasons why so many of us are embarrassed when we cry and find ourselves, if we release tears in front of others, apologizing. I gave, as one example of this, Lincoln trying to hide his tears when he heard from some neighbors that his sister had died. As we will now see, there is far more to be learned about Lincoln’s experience with sadness, anguish, and tears.

Lincoln’s First Clear Evidence of Depression

Lincoln, up till his mid-twenties, was not viewed as being a melancholy kind of guy. Friends and neighbors saw him as sunny and persisting tirelessly. For example, during the Black Hawk War, a fellow soldier said of him, “I never saw Mr Lincoln angry or desponding, but always cheerful… the whole company, even amid trouble and suffering, received strength and fortitude, by his buoyancy and elasticity.” Also typical of comments made of him, a neighbor said, “He was the best natured man I ever got acquainted with.”

Oh, there is evidence of cracks in his sunny disposition during his early years, but they occurred during times of great disappointments, which is pretty typical of most people. For example, after he and a partner opened a store and it soon failed, as we might expect, some described him as moping around, and one person reported hearing him say he might “let the whole thing go.”

Although these observations might have been signs of an emerging tendency to experience deeper forms of depression, it wasn’t until he reached the age of 26 in the summer of 1835 when this tendency became obvious to all that knew him. As Mr. Shenk describes this period,

The first sign of trouble came with his intense study of law. He “read hard — Day and night — terribly hard,” remembered Isaac Condal, a stone mason. At times, Lincoln seemed oblivious to his friends and surroundings. “He became emaciated,” said Henry McHenry, a farmer in the area, “and his best friends were afraid that he would craze himself — make himself deranged.”

When a female friend of his, Miss Ann Rutledge, died during a plague, Abe fell into an even deeper state of despair. As Mr. McHenry described it,

…after that event he seemed quite changed, he seemed retired, and loved solitude, he seemed wrapped in profound thought, indifferent, to transpiring events, had little to say, but would take his gun and wander off in the woods by himself, away from associations of even those most esteemed, this gloom seemed to deepen for some time, so as to give anxiety to friends in regard to his mind.

Another person reported that Lincoln “told me that he felt like committing suicide often.” Friends felt compelled to watch and ward over him, and for a time he was locked up to prevent derangement or suicide. “That was the time the community said he was crazy,” remembered Elizabeth Abell.

Even after he began to appear outwardly improved, he continued to grapple with desperate thoughts. Robert L. Wilson, who joined Lincoln as a candidate for the state legislature in 1836, reported that Lincoln once confided in him “that although he appeared to enjoy life rapturously, still he was the victim of terrible melancholy… and he was so overcome with mental depression, that he never dare carry a knife in his pocket.”

The Second Intense Wave

The next period in which people who knew Abe clearly saw he was very depressed began at the beginning of January of 1841. Letters reveal how concerned people became. “We have been very much distressed on Lincoln’s account,” wrote one person. “Lincoln you know was desponding & melancholy when you left,” wrote another. “He has grown much worse and is now confined to his bed sick in body & mind,” wrote another.

Again, it is hard to say for certain if there was some event or series of events that led to what Abe was experiencing at the time. The possible factors that Mr. Shenk mentions are,

All at once, he faced the prospect that his political career was sunk; that he might be inextricably bound to a woman he didn’t love; that his best friend was going to either move to Kentucky or stay in Illinois and marry the woman Lincoln really wanted.

What ever the actual reason, Abe decided to submit to the care of a doctor, who provided a number of brutal treatments. He bled Abe, gave him substances that made him puke and have diarrhea, as well as opium and morphine. The doctor concluded that his aggressive treatments failed to help; it added to his problem.

The doctor’s treatment for depression was not an odd exception to how these types of conditions are dealt with by the medical profession.

Dr. Benjamin Rush

The preeminent physician of that time was Dr. Benjamin Rush, who wrote Medical Inquires and Observations upon the Diseases of the Mind. Dr. Rush advocated the types of drastic approaches that Abe’s doctor used in an effort to stimulate and reinvigorate the patient’s constitution. Later medical approaches include lobotomies, which gouged out the front part of a person’s brain, and today, electroconvulsive shock treatments and drugs well known to cause serious side effects are employed.

A close look at events shows that Abe was far from healed by what the doctor put him through. As Mr. Shenk described them;

Before, he was depressed, agitated, and  “crazy.” After his treatment he looked beaten down, weak, almost inhuman. “Poor L.” wrote James Conkling, a young lawyer in town, on January 24, “How are the mighty fallen! He was confined about a week, but though he now appears again he is reduced and emaciated in appearance and seems scarcely to possess strength enough to speak above a whisper. His case at present is truly deplorable but what prospect there may be for ultimate relief I cannot pretend to say.” 

At one point, Abe wrote to a correspondent,

For not giving you a general summary of news, you must pardon me, it is not in my power to do so. I am now the most miserable man living. If what I feel were equally distributed to the whole human family, there would not be one cheerful face on the earth. Whether I shall ever be better I can not tell; I awfully forebode I shall not. To remain as I am is impossible; I must die or be better, it appears to me.

Lincoln’s Case of Depression Was Never “Cured”

Some people experience depression, and then they have a “breakthrough” or “turning point,” and it goes away. This is what happened to Leo Tolstoy.

Abe’s depression experience provides us an example of someone who never really got over depression, but rather, he learned to deal with it in a productive manner. He spent an increasing amount of time alone, which can be profoundly important as people come to terms with loss, and sort out their ideas. Crucially important for him is that he found a cause that provided him a reason to live.

Perhaps because of his awful experience with medical treatment, Abe came to put no stock in conventional medical therapy. One of the attractions to the medical model is that it avoids blaming the patient for the depression experience by viewing it as a no-fault disease. Abe managed to avoid blaming people and himself  for such experiences by viewing them as “misfortunes.” Depression to him was not a non-fault disease, a crime, or even a disgrace. To him, misfortunes are unhappy circumstances that has happened to a blameless good person.

Abe used a great deal of humor to try to cheer himself up, and he became famous for his delightful stories. In fact this characteristic of Abe’s led to a story in a newspaper that told of two ladies talking about the Civil War. One said, “I think Jefferson Davis will succeed because he is a praying man.” The other replied, “But so is Lincoln.” The first responded, “Yes, but when Abraham prays, the Lord will think he’s joking.” Abe loved that story and told it often.

Although spending significant time alone, finding something meaningful to strive for, not blaming himself for his misfortune, and humor were the major helpful approaches he used to deal with his melancholy, nothing ever ended his experience of depression for long. As Mr. Shenk aptly described Abe’s lifelong depression,

He yoked his feelings to a style…of melancholy that was, more than anything, philosophical. He saw the world as a sad, difficult place from which he expected considerable suffering. “There was a strong tinge of sadness in Mr Lincoln composition,” said his friend Joseph Gillespie. “He felt very strongly that there was more of discomfort than real happiness in human existence under the most favorable circumstances and the general current of his reflections was in that channel.”

Could it be that this philosophical approach played an essential role of Abe’s great work? In the early days of psychology, people who were depressed were viewed as drawing conclusions about themselves and their experiences that were unrealistically distorted toward the negative, and therefore pathological. A more recent body of psychological research suggests that those who are depressed are often judging themselves and the world more accurately than non-depressed people. This provides opportunities to be sadder but wiser.

For those who are depressed, it is more encouraging to view their experience as potentially helpful, rather than an illness caused by having defective genes. Thus, perhaps Abe’s philosophy is more hopeful.

As Mr. Shenk’s fine book draws to an end, he writes,

The hope is not that suffering will go away, for with Lincoln it did not ever go away. The hope is that suffering, plainly acknowledged and endured, can fit us for the surprising challenges that awaits.

———————————
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.

Categories
conflict resolution dealing with sadness Depression

I’m Sorry for the Tears

When Abraham Lincoln was 19, several neighbors were assigned to inform him of the heart wrenching news that his sister had died. As one of them described the incident,  “We went out and told Abe. I never will forget the scene. He sat down in the door of the smokehouse and buried his face in his hands. The tears slowly trickled from between his boney fingers and his giant frame shook with sobs.”

Why did Abe bury his face in his hands? Was it to hide the fact that he was crying? Why do so many of us, when we cry in front of others, apologize? Why do so many of us become embarrassed when we cry? If we are uncomfortable about how we deal with our sensitive nature, what can we do about it? Today, here at From Insults to Respect, we shall seek to throw some light on all of this.

Crying is as Natural as a Smile On a Baby’s Face

Abraham Lincoln wrote in 1859,

“The inclination to exchange thoughts with one another is probably an original impulse of our nature. If I be in pain I wish to let you know it, and to ask your sympathy and assistance; and my pleasurable emotions also, I wish to communicate to, and share with you.”

In Lincoln’s Melancholy: How Depression Challenged a President and Fueled His Greatness, the author, Joshua Wolf Shenk, tells us that when Abe was particularly sad, his friends’ reactions are insightful. They didn’t merely seek to help him, they vied with each other for the pleasure or honor of assisting him.

How can we account for this natural helping characteristic? From an evolutionary theory point of view, in ancient times many tribes dotted the land. Some had members that were more likely to assist those who expressed sorrow, while others lived among less caring folks. The tribes with the more caring folks, along with its individual members, were more likely to survive and thus to pass caring genes on to the next generation. This led to an increased probability that people will have the characteristic of expressing their sorrows to others and to help those who do express their sorrow.

Another reason that may explain why we cry is that it is an essential part of the creative process. As the poet, Lord Byron, put it:

Lord Byron

Sorrow is knowledge; they who know the most
Must mourn the deepest o’er the fatal truth.”

What is it but the telescope of truth?
Which strips the distance of its fantasies,
And rings life near in utter nakedness,
Making cold reality too real!

With this line of thinking, people who grieve deeply when they meet up with a grievous experience, are pausing to do some unique, deep problem solving, going over and over where they are, and what creative alternatives they can derive for moving forward. Support for this style of functioning comes from the incredibly long line of people who have stood out as enormously creative and, at the same time, were prone to periods of the deepest levels of melancholy.

If Crying is Natural, Why the Embarrassment?

So far, I provided arguments that crying is natural because it encourages others to help and it is an important part of the creative process. If this is true, how can we explain why people become embarrassed about crying and frequently apologize for doing so?

Staying with the evolutionary theory line of reasoning, it just so happens that one of its principles is that for every biological characteristic there is variation around its central tendency. For example, the average height for males is a little under six feet tall, but some are a little taller, some are a little shorter, some are a lot taller, and some are a lot shorter.

Using this line of reasoning, it makes sense that although the usual characteristic of human beings is to feel sympathy for someone who is crying, nevertheless, there is some variation around this central tendency. Thus, some people are less sympathetic, and some may be so unsympathetic that they treat people who cry very disrespectfully. They might call the person a “cry baby,” or “immature,” or a “wimp,” or if the person is a male, “unmanly.”

As we were growing up, many of us came upon people who either treated us in this disrespectful manner when we were crying, or witnessed someone else who was being berated for their tearfulness. In time, we might have come to realize there are people out there who really hate to be exposed to someone crying, and this can lead to the apologies.

Additionally, some people internalize the criticism that they received when they cried. Thus, they end up insulting themselves whenever they cry because when they were a child they became convinced by people they had respected that such behavior is a terribly negative thing to do.

Add to this that in our society, a new trend has added fuel to the idea that people who cry have something wrong with them. A billion dollar industry that sells antidepressants have enormous resources to saturate the media with sales pitches that seek to convince people that crying is a symptom of a serious mental illness that urgently needs to be treated with some drug.

And then there is the “Healthy Minded” philosophy that we see in such song lyrics as “Accentuate the Positive.”

You gotta accent-u-ate the positive,
E-lim-inate the negative,
An’ latch on
To the affirmative
Don’t mess with mister in-between!

You gotta spread joy up to the maximum,
Bring gloom down to the minimum,
An’ have faith (amen!)
Or pandemonium’s
Liable to walk upon the scene!

There is no doubt that taking some time to count one’s blessings, and even to rejoice in them is worthwhile. But giving full due to the value of taking some time to sing the blues has some significant rewards for a balanced life.

What Are The Consequences Of Believing That We Are Doing Something Wrong When We Cry?

Before directly taking this question on, I think it’s important to get an issue out of the way.

As I mentioned above, there is this biological principle that for each characteristic of biological entities there is some variation around its central tendency. Therefore, it is natural that some people really don’t take to heart the usual situations that most of us will. These relatively insensitive folks, as long as they don’t pick anyone’s pocket, or break anyone’s leg, have a perfect right to carry out their lives according to their own lights. It is not in our interest to treat them disrespectfully. We would be wise to learn to celebrate the grand sweep of humanity.

That said, for those of us who really were born with the usual amount of compassion and sensitivities, becoming convinced through early life experiences that crying is something to be ashamed of does have serious negative consequences. Squashing the tears, rushing through the insulting scripts with words like, “wimp,” “momma’s boy,” “weakling,” “mentally ill,” etc., along with all of the negative emotions that accompany these words, leave us with far less of the energy that we would otherwise be able to call upon to address the cause of our sadness. Moreover, feeling like there is something wrong with us when we experience sensitive feelings results in millions of us turning to alcohol and drugs, which typically results in a number of unhealthy side effects.

Can Unhealthy Sadness Habits Be Transformed into Healthy Ones?

Yes! It does take some practice. Nevertheless, I, for one, can testify that I have made these kinds of changes, and it has been enormously beneficial.

The first several practice sessions involves noticing whenever you are feeling sad. At such times, as soon as you can, go to a place where you can have some alone time, preferably in a pleasant place out in nature, but even a bathroom will do in a pinch.

Then, recall what led to your sadness, and for a minute, observe in a nonjudgmental manner what words come to you. Observe them like you were a scientist objectively observing a flock of birds flying by, off in a distant sky.

After about a minute of this, turn your attention to the physical sensations that you are experiencing. Do this for at least a minute. If you wish to linger, that’s fine. If tears come, allow them to flow effortlessly.

Do this exercise for two months. It is wonderfully freeing. After this period of time, you will find that this way of dealing with your sadness has become a new comfortable way of experiencing sadness. It comes with no strings attached and won’t cost you a penny. For me, it has led to experiencing sadness in a manner that is as natural as the pleasant warmth from a morning sun.

Here’s another great exercise that I recommend. Over the course of four days, write for a minimum of 15 minutes at each sitting about something that has led you to experience sadness. As you do so, make sure you include not only what happened, but also what you felt when it happened, and how you now feel about what happened. Include your deepest emotions and thoughts about what occurred. Really let go and explore your feelings and thoughts about it. As you do so, recall the sensory experience of these feelings, not just the words that define the experience. After you finish the day’s writing assignment, read it over, and if you had called yourself any unkind names, cross them out, and read, once again, what you had written without any of the nasty name calling.

This assignment, like the other, does not cost any money, and by the time you finish this assignment, you will probably find you have made friends with your sad experiences. However some people may feel they have a few steps left to go before fully embracing sadness.

For example, some who had been taking psychiatric drugs to deal with their sad experiences might wonder if it is time to see if they can wean themselves off of them. This can be a challenging experience because these drugs can be highly addictive. Unfortunately, I’m not an expert on advising people on the best techniques to become free of these drugs. Nevertheless, I have heard some very positive comments about the resources provided at the Mad in America website (see HERE).

Lastly, some people dealing with sadness concerns have one, two, or three special situations that often seep into their consciousness, and they lead them into particularly challenging sadness experiences. Said another way, they find that they ruminate upon certain sad memories, so much so that they desire to get some help with this.

As I explained in another post about ruminating on certain anger experiences, meditation can be very helpful in dealing with any distressing ruminating experiences. You can learn how to meditate for free by clicking HERE.

Perhaps the best way to receive help for these particularly sad experiences is by working with a personal counselor. These people are typically very talented in listening to you in a kind manner, while offering gentle suggestions from a variety of wisdom traditions. As they listen to you, if you begin to express sadness, or even begin to cry, their supportive presence leads you to come to accept your sadness as a natural part of who you are, and to forgo consuming all of the wasted energy that comes from mismanaging sadness.

There is a cost to personal counseling, so not everyone can afford it. Information about getting services from the two best counselors that I know, Emily and Jack, can be obtained HERE.

Well, there you have it, some thoughts about why many of us feel embarrassed when expressing sadness and how to go about mastering these types of natural experiences. Until next time, may all of your joyful and sad experiences be wonderfully fruitful.

——————————-

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.

Categories
conflict resolution criticism dealing with criticism Naomi Osaka Serena Williams

Tears at the U.S. Open

Welcome to From Insults To Respect. As regular readers well know, from time to time I present discussions about the value of dealing with criticism in a manner that can enhance the respect people have for us. I began these discussions by describing how I made a lot of TV shows with a variety of actors displaying different styles of responding to criticism. Then I asked a wide range of people over several years to watch the shows and discuss their reactions.

By doing this, I became very familiar with what people like and respect when it comes to responding to criticism. I then arranged what I had learned into five levels. Level one is the least liked. Each higher level is viewed as more mature, likable, and respected by those who watched the video recordings.

Illustration by Deanna MartinezTo familiarize readers with the five levels, from time to time, I provide real life examples of people dealing with criticism and then ask readers to rate how the criticism had been handled. This week, while thinking about what my next example might be, a new real life example arose as I watched a tennis match between Serena Williams and Naomi Osaka. The two stars were playing at the U.S. Open to determine which would be the women’s national champion.

During the second set, Serena’s coach directed some hand signals at her, and later he admitted that this was an act designed to coach her. The chair umpire, Carlos Ramos, noticed the hand signals, and announced that he was issuing an official warning to Serena because it is a violation of the rules. At this point, Serena indicated that when Ramos issued the official warning, he had criticized her, accusing her of cheating. Before long, tears, like rain, were flowing from Serena and Naomi’s eyes.

There is a set of Youtube videos (see HERE and HERE) that allows us to observe every detail of what transpired, along with a New York Times step by step description of the relevant events (see HERE). Thus, I think that it is a particularly excellent example of a real life event that chronicles dealing with criticism, the consequences of such actions, and what we, personally, can do to improve our own skills when dealing with criticism.

So, for this little practice session, let’s begin by reviewing the five levels of responding to criticism. Then we’ll go into the details of how both Serena and Naomi responded to the perceived criticism that they experienced at the U.S. Open. After that, we’ll see if we can apply the principles of the five levels to what occurred. Finally, I’ll provide some of my own personal views about how the criticism events were handled.

Five Levels of Responding to Criticism

Before providing the five levels, I want to make sure that readers understand that they are not to be viewed as items written in stone. There may be some situations that might alter someone’s view of what is an ideal response. And individuals are of course entitled to make their own personal set of levels. Nevertheless, the levels are useful because they are generally viewed by a wide range of people in a variety of situations to match their own perceptions of what is a respected response to criticism. Thus, it provides us a way to debate its flaws and strengths, and in the end, we come away having deepened our thinking about important issues.

That said, let’s move on to a description of the five levels of responding to criticism. The actions of level 1 are viewed as the least respected, and each higher level tends to get higher ratings.

The Five Levels

1.  Displays one or more of the following:

  • Weeps or sobs with tears or pouts without also using the skills described in level 4 or 5.
  • Physically attacks the criticizer
  • Damages property

2.  Displays 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.

3.  Displays 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 orally indicating this, or with nonverbal cues, or complete silence. 

 

4.  Level 4 individuals 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 perhaps 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.

5.  In addition to actions consistent with level 4, people responding to criticism 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 some aspect suggested from the criticism. Steering cannot be incorporated into all situations, but it is an additional goal of the most mature individuals.

Here’s What Happened

In the first set, Naomi looked impressive, beating the enormously talented Serena, 6-2.

During the second set, Serena won the first game, and during the second game chair umpire, Carlos Ramos, announced the coaching code violation against Serena. The penalty was a formal warning, and if there had been no additional violations there would have been no consequence to the warning.

Serena, upon hearing that a warning had been issued, approached chair umpire Ramos and, from her comments, it became apparent she believed Mr. Ramos had criticized her for cheating. Thus she said assertively, “You may have thought that was coaching, but I’m telling you it was not. I don’t cheat to win. I’d rather lose. I’m just letting you know.”

Mr. Ramos listened attentively, and nodded his head. Serena then went back to the court and lost that game.

A little later, during one of the changeovers, with Serena leading 2-1, she went over to chair umpire Ramos and indicated that she was not ready to put to rest her concern that she believed she had been accused of cheating. Thus, she very civilly explained to Ramos that she understood why he may have thought her coach was coaching, but she stressed that she never did that. Ramos nodded, and then Serena calmly said again that she did not cheat, and Ramos said, “I know that.”

Serena responded, “O.K., thank you so much.”

At this point, Serena may have thought that she had persuaded Ramos to reverse the call on the code violation, which never happens.

Serena won the next game, breaking Naomi’s serve, making the score 3-1.

In the next game, Serena hit a backhand into the net for an unforced error, allowing Naomi to break right back. At this point, Serena was still in the lead, 3-2. Nevertheless, her response to losing that game was to fling her racket into the ground, breaking it.

Throwing a racket is an automatic code violation, and because it was Serena’s second violation, Naomi gained a point for the next game. Ramos had clearly announced, “Code violation, racket abuse, point penalty, Mrs. Williams.”

Serena did not react, just going over to her chair during the break. When Serena returned to the court on the deuce side, apparently expecting the score to be 0-0, she was told to move over to the add side of the court because the score was 0-15. Serena approached the chair again, initially confused by the score. “This is unbelievable, every time I play here I have problems,” Serena said to Ramos.

When Ramos explained that Serena had a point penalty for smashing her racket, she calmly said, “Yeah, that’s a warning.” Then chair umpire Ramos explained that she already had a warning for the coaching violation, and here Serena raised her voice, and looking exasperated, cried out, “I didn’t get coaching! I didn’t get coaching! I didn’t get coaching! You need to make an announcement that I didn’t get coaching. I don’t cheat. I didn’t get coaching!”

As Serena was saying this, Ramos was leaning toward Serena, nodding, indicating he was listening to what she was saying. He did say something very briefly and softly to her, but I couldn’t make it out.

Serena, in response, cried out, “You need to…you owe me an apology! I have never cheated in my life!” She appeared to be glaring at Ramos.

Serena continued from here to say, “I have a daughter, and I stand for what is right for her, and I have never cheated! You owe me an apology. You are never going to umpire for one of my matches again!” While saying this she at times yelled and wagged her finger at Ramos.

Finally, returning to play, Serena loses the next game, and the game after that, handing the lead over to Naomi, 4-3.

Upon sitting down for the between game break, Serena returned to her response to the criticism she had received from Ramos. Waving her finger at him and clearly yelling, she said, “For you to attack my character, then something is wrong, is wrong! You attacked my character!”

Ramos denied this, and Serena replied,”Yes, you are! You owe me an apology!”

Ramos said something I couldn’t make out, and then Serena yelled, “You will never, ever, be on the same court as me as long as you live!” She then called Ramos a liar as he is looking squarely at her, and leaning his body to her, clearly listening to what she had to say.

Ramos, at this point, if he was following the strict rules of the tournament, could have issued Serena a code violation penalty for this because the 2018 Official Grand Slam Rule Book states,

“… verbal abuse is defined as a statement about an official, opponent, sponsor, spectator or other person that implies dishonesty or is derogatory, insulting or otherwise abusive.”

Calling Ramos a liar clearly implies dishonesty. Rather than penalize her, Ramos patiently turned away.

At this point, Serena is on pretty risky ground, but she still refuses to let up. She says to Ramos, while glaring at him,”When are you going to give me my apology! You owe me an apology. Say it! Say you’re sorry!”

Ramos can be heard saying something very briefly, perhaps warning her that if she keeps this up she will be getting another code violation penalty, but I can’t really make it out. Serena replied, “Then don’t talk to me! Well, then don’t talk to me.”

Ramos can then be seen in video recordings complying with this request, turning his body and eyes to face a direction away from Serena.

Serena then said, “How dare you insinuate I was cheating!” After a brief pause during which Serena took a bite of something that looks like an energy bar, she then said to Ramos, “You stole a point from me! You’re a thief!”

It was at this point that Ramos said, “Code violation, verbal abuse, game penalty, Mrs. Williams.” Thus, the score stood at this point, 5-3 in favor of Naomi.

Serena ignored this, and went back on the court, taking a position to receive a serve from Naomi, but because she lost a game as a result of the code violation, it is Serena’s turn to serve. She didn’t seem to understand this, so Ramos called both players over to his chair and clearly explained what the situation is. Serena responded by laughing, and asked, “Are you kidding me?”

Ramos, indicated he is not kidding. Serena replied, “Because I said you are a thief because you stole a point from me, but I’m not a cheater.” She was not yelling at this point, just looked amazed.

Again Ramos said something to Serena, but I could not make it out. Serena, replied, “But I’m not a cheater. I told you to apologize to me. This is…excuse me, I need a referee.”

Serena now began to make her case to the highest official at the U.S. Open, during which she began to cry. “You know my character,” she said, “and this is not right. This has happened too many times, this is not fair. To lose a game for saying that, this is not fair. Do you know how many men do much worse than that, this is not fair. Because I’m a woman, you are going to take this away from me. You know it, and I know you can’t admit it, but I know you know it.”

The official made it clear she can’t change the ruling, and Serena replied, “I know you can’t change it, I get the rule, but I’m just saying it’s not right. This happens to me every single year, and it’s not right. That’s all I have to say.”  Then Serena returned to the court, and upon easily winning the next game, went over to one of the officials, and, while shedding tears, continued to argue that it is not fair that she was penalized a whole game because men have said much worse. The official, who is the president of the United States Tennis Association, listened in what strikes me as a caring manner, but made it clear that she can’t change the chair umpire’s ruling.

When Serena returned to play, it was Naomi’s turn to serve. Naomi easily won that game, and, consequently, the match and the U.S. Open Championship.

After the final point, Serena, graciously walked over to Naomi and gave her a hug.

Several times after the final point there were waves of boos from the crowd, and Naomi clearly had tears streaming from her eyes. It was not clear if these boos were tears of joy, or in response to the boos. She later reported that she “kinda thought the boos were directed at me,” but most observers felt they were actually directed at Ramos for issuing the penalties.

Moments later, the master of ceremony announced it was time to present the trophies, and another round of boos were heard. Naomi once again began to cry. Serena put her arms around Naomi, smiled, and said she was proud of her and that she should know that the crowd wasn’t booing at her. Naomi returned a genuine smile.

When it was Serena’s turn to say something during the awards ceremony, she graciously said, while choking back tears, “She played well, and this is her first grand slam, and I know that you guys were rooting, and I was rooting too, but let’s make this the best moment that we can. We’ll get through this, but, let’s give everyone the credit where credit is due, and let’s not boo anymore, we’re going to get through this and let’s be positive. Congratulations Naomi. No more booing. Thank you to my team, you guys are amazing.” Serena, begins to wipe away her tears, which were streaming from her eyes. She manages to continue, saying, “Thank you to the crowd, you guys are the best in the world. Thank you so much, and I really hope to go again to continue to play here again. We’ll see. It was a tough year for me, but thank you so much.”

The crowd gives her a warm round of applause, and Naomi applauded, along with the others in the ceremonial party. Then the announcer said, “And now our champion, Naomi Osaka.” The crowd does provide her a hearty cheer.

The announcer, talking directly to Naomi, notes that this was a long time dream for her to play against her idol, Serena, in this championship game, and then asked her, “How does the reality compare to that dream?”

Naomi responded by saying, “Um, I’m going to sort of defer from answering your question. I’m sorry.”

The announcer replies, “No problem.”

Naomi then goes on to say, with tears in her eyes, “I know everyone was cheering for her, and I’m sorry that it had to end like this.” She wipes her eyes, and continues, “I just want to say thanks for watching the match, thank you.”

Moments later, Naomi turns to Serena, and says, “It was always my dream to play against you, Serena, in the U.S. Open final, so I’m really glad to have been able to do that, and I’m really grateful that I was able to play with you. Thank you.” As Naomi said thank you, she gave a respectful bow to Serena. Serena nodded and smiled.

Deepening Your Thoughts About What Happened

The responses of Serena and Naomi to the perceived criticism that they received at the U.S. Open provides us an opportunity to refresh our thoughts about actions that can enhance the respect people have for us. It can also provide us an opportunity to discuss some important issues that uniquely arise from this specific day’s event.

To enhance the value of this discussion, before moving on to my own views about those events, I would love it if you would first pause here and think about what took place. Then, if you will, rate on a 1 to 5 scale how well you personally think Serena, and then Naomi, handled the criticism that they perceived was targeted at them.

After doing this, look over the five levels of criticism provided above, and see which one best matches how Serena handled the criticism she felt Ramos had directed to her, and then do the same thing for how Naomi handled the criticism she felt the crowd at the U.S. Open had presented to her when they booed. Once you complete this, read on to get my personal impressions.

My Personal Impressions

When Serena came to believe that Ramos accused her of cheating, she assertively said, “You may have thought that was coaching, but I’m telling you it was not. I don’t cheat to win. I’d rather lose. I’m just letting you know.” This was said in a respectful tone of voice. Mr. Ramos listened attentively, and nodded his head. Serena then went back to the game.

During that verbal exchange, Serena did none of the negative actions described in the first three levels of responding to criticism. Nevertheless, her actions didn’t quite match either of the two higher levels. Part of level 4 says, for example, “Level 4 individuals listen to the criticizer in a supportive, warm, friendly style, and then make it clear that they fully understand what was said.” Although Serena’s actions did not fully match this part of the description, given the setting, it made sense for her to cut any discussion short for she had a game to play in front of a sold out crowd and an even larger national audience. So, I think that if her response had ended here, I would lean toward rating her actions as pretty close to a 4.

If there was less pressure to proceed with the game, I would have liked her to have said to Ramos something like, “I think that the coaching code violation means you are accusing me of being a cheater. Is that right?” I say this, because the phrase in the level 4 description which states, “make it clear that they fully understand what was said,” means that the person criticized would first restate the criticism, as he or she understands it, and then ask if this restatement is correct. If Serena had done so, I think Ramos would have said something like, “I’m not accusing you of cheating. I’m saying your coach has violated, in my opinion, the code that says there is to be no coaching during a U.S. Open match. It was entirely on this basis that I issued you a warning.”

Later, after the match, when there was more time, Serena could have checked with her coach to see what he had done to give Ramos the impression that he was coaching. In any case, at this point, she had been given, as a penalty, just a warning.

Unfortunately, Serena did not refrain from additional code violations. The next such act occurred when Serena hit a backhand into the net for an unforced error, allowing Naomi to win her second game of the second set. At this point, Serena was still in the lead, 3-2. Nevertheless, her response to losing that game was to fling her racket into the ground, breaking it. Thus, it seems to me, that she had criticized herself for her unforced error, and responded by destroying her property. This is clearly a level one response. Ramos penalized Serena one point for the next game.

Serena’s actions that led up to Ramos issuing a full game penalty for her third code violation is clearly properly rated a level 2 response. She yelled, glared at Ramos, called him names (liar and thief) and threatened him when she said, “You are never going to umpire for one of my matches again!”

This example of dealing with criticism provides us a fine example in which people, when criticized, are not just upset because of the criticism, but also the consequences of receiving the criticism. Oftentimes the consequences are not as obvious as in this case. Here we plainly see that Serena received a warning, which was, at the time, reasonably assumed to be of little consequence. However, when she broke her racket, because she already had a warning, she now had lost a point. When she called Ramos a thief, the clear consequence was losing an entire game, and, consequently dramatically increased the chances of losing the entire match. She was also subsequently docked by the tournament referee’s office $17,000 ($10,000 for “verbal abuse” of chair umpire Carlos Ramos, $4,000 for being warned for coaching, and $3,000 for breaking her racket).

In many examples in which someone is dealing with criticism, the consequences of responding in a manner consistent with levels 1, 2, or 3 is not as obvious, but can potentially be enormous. If you respond to your boss’s criticism in a manner that she or he views as immature, you may not get a desired promotion, or, during an economic downturn, you may be one of the first to lose your job. You might not attribute such consequences to how you deal with criticism. Similarly, you might turn off someone you are dating because of the way you handle criticism, and not realize it. Thus, learning about how best to deal with criticism has many consequences, both obvious and subtle.

Here’s another issue that comes up when dealing with criticism that is highlighted in the Serena example. When you disagree with the criticism, what is the quality of your argument for disagreeing? In this example, Serena claimed during an on-court discussion with US Open officials, “Do you know how many other men do things that are much worse than that?” In a USA Today report (see HERE) they tried to throw some light on this issue. Thus, they reported,

“During the three previous Grand Slams — the French Open, Wimbledon and Australian Open — men were assessed 59 code violations, almost twice as many as the women. The men were issued violations for coaching nine times and the most common violation was abuse of racket/equipment 19 times.”

Of course, this is not conclusive evidence for or against the allegation that men say worse things and don’t get penalized like women do. In my view, Serena would have handled this issue quite a bit better if she had said she is concerned that women have not been treated equally when it comes to code violation penalties, and she intends to look into this in a reasonable manner. Then, after the tournament, she could have arranged for an independent analysis of this question. All of these big tournament games are recorded, and such an analysis would be worthwhile in the interest of fairness.

Serena’s coach Patrick Mouratoglou

As far as Serena’s coach’s claim that assessing a coaching code violation never happens, USA Today’s analysis indicates that,

“assessing code violations for coaching is not uncommon, according to information provided by the ITF. Of the 31 code violations assessed during the three Grand Slams before the US Open, 11 of them were for coaching — more than any other code violation.“

What else can this example of dealing with criticism highlight? Well, I think it is important to point out that people develop respect for people for many different reasons besides how they deal with criticism. Despite how Serena handled the criticism at this last U.S. Open, her incredible talent as a tennis player has many of her fans remaining enormously supportive of her. Moreover, after her loss, the way she warmly embraced Naomi, and then encouraged the crowd to cut out the booing, certainly enhanced my respect for her.

As for how Naomi handled the criticism that she perceived, she avoided calling the booing crowd any nasty names. She did begin to cry. Crying is not viewed as a reason to assess someone as acting in a manner consistent with the lower levels of the responding to criticism model that we have been discussing if it is followed by displaying actions consistent with either level four or five. Recall that when Naomi heard the booing, besides crying, she said in a soft, choked up voice, “I know everyone was cheering for her, and I’m sorry that it had to end like this.” She then wiped her eyes, and continued, “I just want to say thanks for watching the match, thank you.”

There is a line in the level 4 description that states, “If, after thinking about the criticism, the criticism is deemed to be incorrect, a statement is made designed to disagree without being disagreeable.” I think Naomi did an admirable job in applying this principle in reaction to the booing. I’m rating her response a 4.

Okay then, there you have it, another “dealing with criticism” practice session. I hope you found it helpful.

Such practice sessions are greatly enhanced if once a week you take a few minutes to recall an incident in which someone criticized you. Then, compare your response to the five levels, formulate in your mind, or better, write out, how you would like to handle a similar incident in the future, and practice the better approach in your mind three or more times.

I think it is important to point out here that there are some people who will continue to have a difficult time dealing with criticism even with the help of the practice sessions I have been providing on this blog. Fortunately, there are some well trained counselors who can help you to get to a more comfortable place (see HERE for two such counselors that I personally recommend and provide services conveniently via Skype).

Finally, I hope you’ll soon join us again right back here at From Insults to Respect.

———————————
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.