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 itbut 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.
Some people find that their actions are violating certain societal norms and feel guilty and ashamed about this. When they try to stop doing these actions, they may find they can’t just stop, and thus they end up feeling even more guilty and ashamed.
Some parents, when they see their offspring act in ways that violate certain societal norms, find that they feel guilty and embarrassed. These parents believe that they are to blame for the actions of their children, and they also feel ashamed because they believe others believe they are “bad” parents.
The idea that certain actions that violate societal norms are mental illnesses like any other illnesses is attractive to many people because they believe it helps to reduce this guilt and shame. To understand this a little better, let’s take a look at a quick parable:
The Parable of Rachel
Rachel, the mother of five-year old Jonathan, recently went through a very sad divorce. Now, at Jonathan’s parent-teacher conference, his Kindergarten teacher expresses some serious concerns. “Your son is very hyperactive and he has a great deal of difficulty paying attention. Have you considered taking him to a doctor? He may have ADHD.”
Upon leaving the meeting, Rachel begins to cry. “I feel so ashamed,” she thinks to herself. “It’s all my fault. I shouldn’t have been so critical of Ron (her former husband). That’s why he left me for a younger woman. Jonathan has been so upset since Ron left, and he blames me for the breakup. And it is all my fault! I’m a rotten mother.”
Later, Rachel takes Jonathan to a doctor who, after asking a few questions, states that he has diagnosed Jonathan as having ADHD and prescribes Ritalin.
“I’m so ashamed,” cries Rachel.
“There is no need to blame yourself,” the doctor explains. “ADHD isn’t caused by bad mothering. It is an illness very much like diabetes. Just like insulin is a drug that treats diabetes, the drug I’m prescribing for your son’s ADHD will treat his medical condition.”
As Rachel leaves the doctor’s office she feels a little less to blame. But when she tells her father what the doctor has said, he grumbles and says that the doctor is full of crap. “Jonathan is angry and upset because of the divorce and not having his father with him any more. Anyone can see that!”
“You think you know better than a doctor!” cries Rachel.
Her father waves his hand in disgust, but says nothing more. Rachel interprets his silence as meaning that she won the argument, but her father is not at all convinced.
Later, Rachel discusses what has been happening with her closest friend, Lora. “I felt so ashamed about how Jonathan has been acting at school, but the doctor explained that I’m not to blame, that Jonathan has ADHD, which is an illness.”
“Well, Rachel, I certainly don’t think you are to blame, but I don’t think Jonathan has an illness. I’m sorry to hear you are thinking about putting him on one of those ADHD drugs; they have a whole bunch of side effects.”
“If it’s not an illness, then I am to blame!” Tears start to roll down Rachel’s face. “I shouldn’t have criticized Ron so much. I should have been a better wife!”
“You did your best, Rachel. I think it makes sense that you take some responsibility for what has happened, but blaming yourself isn’t being fair, nor is it helpful. When people blame themselves a lot of the time they think they deserve some type of punishment. In my opinion, a better way to take responsibility for what went wrong is to accept the strong emotional experiences that go along with taking responsibility, accept that you played at least a part in what went wrong, and then set yourself on becoming determined to take steps to improve. The genuine sad, heartfelt feelings that come with taking responsibility leads us to do a search for making improvements.”
Does The “Mental Illness” Construct Help To Reduce Shame and Guilt
In the above parable, a doctor tries to reduce the shame and guilt that a mother is feeling about her son’s behavior by framing the behavior as an illness. Although this initially appears to help, she runs into some people who refuse to go along with this anti-shame/mental illness notion. Let’s explore this notion a little more thoroughly with the help of some of the writings of psychologist and philosopher, William James.
William James’s Letter to his brother, Henry James
In an earlier post, I discussed William James’s bout with a depression that many might refer to as a type of “mental illness.” There, we found that he came to believe he succeeded in overcoming his struggle with the help of his own will and effort, although he also recognized that as he went through the experience he received a great deal of support with the “will and effort” thinking from reading certain poets and philosophers.
Shortly after his recovery, James found that when he met other people who were struggling with their own bouts of depression, if he brought up the topic of will and effort it was not at all well received. James explains this type of reaction to his brother, Henry, in the following 1885 letter:
To suggest personal will and effort to one “all sicklied o’er” with the sense of weakness, of helpless failure, and of fear, is to suggest the most horrible of things to him. What he craves is to be consoled in his very impotence, to feel the Powers of the Universe recognize and secure him, all passive and failing as he is.
Why would one believe that framing one’s difficulties as an illness would lead to the Powers of the Universe providing some type of help? Perhaps it stems from a related experience.
Anyone with even an ounce of maternal feeling is familiar with the altruistic emotions that spring up when a baby is stricken with an illness. Generalizing from such experiences might lead to the belief that an illness is especially worthy of altruism.
Although this may make sense to some, others just don’t buy the illness notion, and feel that it is an excuse to avoid responsibility. Thus, the “mental illness” construct comes with it some pluses and minuses.
From my discussions with people in Alcoholic Anonymous, it seems to me that many of its members found themselves in a state similar to what James describes in his letter. The program seems to provide them a way to stop blaming themselves by using the “I have a real sickness” idea. It also offers a sense that they could put themselves in the hands of a higher power, while, at the same time, they receive a great deal of support from peers who have managed to recover.
I think the real active ingredients in the program are the reduction of blame that is experienced by becoming a member of a group that stops the blaming rhetoric while also providing peer support to its members to work toward their common goal. However, for people who have a religious background, perhaps the additions of the “real illness” and “higher power” ingredients do offer some added benefits, but they come with negative reactions from those who believe in taking responsibility for one’s actions. Some of those who believe in responsibility think mainly that certain actions are “deserving of punishment.” In my view, it is much better if we come to understand responsibility as a strong emotion that spurs us on to actively pursue better ways to deal with the present and the future.
Now, to further our thinking of these issues, let’s turn our attention to something else that James wrote on this topic.
James’s Talk to Teachers
In James’s book titled Talk to Teachers he tells us, “The teacher often is confronted in the school with an abnormal type of will, which we may call the ‘balky will.’ He then explains what he means by this: “Certain children, if they do not succeed in doing a thing immediately, remain completely inhibited in regard to it.”
James then tells us that “Such children are usually treated as sinful, and are punished; or else the teacher pits his or her will against the child’s will, considering that the latter must be ‘broken.’
Clearly, James opposes this approach. “Such will breaking is always a scene with a great deal of nervous wear and tear on both sides, a bad state of feeling left behind it and the victory not always with the would-be will-breaker.”
In his next paragraph, which I quote in its entirety, the theory that pathology as a concept is used by James to protect individuals can be seen rather clearly.
When a situation of the kind is once fairly developed, and the child is all tense and excited inwardly, nineteen times out of twenty it is best for the teacher to apperceive the case as one of neural pathology rather than as one of moral culpability. So long as the inhibiting sense of impossibilityremains in the child’s mind, he will continue unable to get beyond the obstacle. The aim of the teacher should then be to make him simply to forget. Drop the subject for the time, divert the mind to something else: then, leading the pupil back by some circuitous line of association, spring iton him again before he has time to recognize it, and as likely as not he will go over it now without any difficulty. It is in no other way that we overcome balkiness in a horse: we divert his attention, do something to his nose or ear, lead him around in a circle, and thus get him over a place where flogging would only have made him more invincible.
Note that James doesn’t say that the child actually has a neural pathology, only that it would be helpful for the teacher to apperceive the child as having this condition. By apperceiving the case as neural pathology, what does James hope to gain? He does not explicitly say. The technique that he describes of dropping the subject, diverting the mind, then springing it on the pupil later, is stated plainly enough so that many individuals can employ it without first apperceiving the case as neural pathology. I have done so, myself, on numerous occasions.
James appears to feel that some individuals who are prone to apperceive the case as one of moral culpability are likely to use will-breaking and flogging. If, instead, they can apperceive the case as neural pathology, it would be easier to use the technique that leads to a good state of feeling.
Viewing someone as “sick” can elicit altruistic behavior for some people. Feelings of caring, as if for a child with an illness, are conjured up. Such a chain of reactions is more commensurate with James’s circuitous technique than the clashing-wills technique.
Here again, we are faced with the dilemma–whether it is wiser to use the “mental illness” construct to promote caring, which may short circuit the habit of blaming someone in the sense of seeking to punish someone, or is it wiser to promote notions of responsibility that leaves out the desire to punish, while constructively seeking to make personal improvements? Today, I leave this dilemma in the hands of my readers.
——————————-
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.
A group of my male friends and I get together about once a month to play a little poker. Because my wife and I did some traveling last winter, I happened to miss a couple of these fun events. Upon my return, I was notified of when the next poker night would occur. As I arrived, one of my buddies, noticing my entrance, cried out, “Oh no, Jeff’s back!” On the heals of this comment came a chorus of moans, sprinkled with laughter. Accompaning all of this were some warm handshakes and pats on the back.
Mike Gilmartin, a fellow player, always writes up a little summary of the evening events. To give you a little flavor of how, upon my return, the rest of the evening went, I thought I would share with you his summary. I edited out some of it because unless you know the backstories of our relationships, you would have no idea what he was referring to. Here’s what is left:
THE WORLD SERIES OF POKER: YEAR 17, ROUND 6
First hand won: Unbeatable golf partners, Stevie Wonder & Mike, split the pot.
Last hand (showdown) won: Mike’s artfully constructed full-house is bulldozed by Gordie’s wild card-tainted straight flush.
Best beat: Steve’s four kings put a whuppin’ on Almont’s four jacks in Bowling for Dollars….
Psychology major at work moment; In order to break his poker losing streak, Almont walks around the table three times, clicks his heels, and voila, starts winning.
Pie in the sky moment: Woody delivers two, count ’em, two pies for the game. When he is out of the room, there is talk of chipping in to buy him a frilly apron for next season’s games. Gordie will check with Nancy [Woody’s wife] to see if Woody favors gingham or polka dots.
Now we’re wondering why we missed him moment: Jeff’s return to the poker table reminds one and all that incoherence, forgetfulness, and ineptness are not all that admirable….
Thanks to all for playing.
A couple of weeks ago, I first brought up this topic of friends insulting one another (see post titled “Insults Amongst Friends“). There, in an effort to give you a sense of how this tends to get played out, I described some of the events that transpired when my friends and I recently went on a baseball trip. Today’s post is focussed on explaining why we do insult one another.
Why Friends Playfully Insult Each Other
One answer that quickly comes to mind is that it’s fun. The insults often lead to laughter, and laughter is typically a pleasant experience. If we do something that leads to a pleasant feeling, we tend to do similar acts in the future in the hope that it will again lead to pleasant feelings.
But this answer begs the question, why do insults among friends lead to laughter? Mike, the writer of the poker night summary I shared above, when asked this question, said that it is actually a way to say to your buddies that you like them without being mawkish about it.
His comment reminded me of a number of comedy roasts that are readily available on Youtube. If you’ve watched any of them, no doubt you’ve noticed that the person being roasted is actually the person being honored. Nevertheless, they are subjected to a barrage of insults most of the time, although there are, toward the end of a series of insults by each presenter, a sentence or two of heartwarming praise.
Mike, when I discussed this with him, added that, “Our friends, rather than feel bad because I insult them in my summary write-up, are more likely to actually feel bad if I accidentally forget to insult them. The insults are a way that brings us all together under the banner that “No shame is too great to bear.”
Although there is much truth to Mike’s take on this, I think there is a little more going on. In my view, most of the time that we laugh it’s because something reminds us of a shameful experience which touches a set of nerves even before we have time to think more fully about what is actually going on. Upon realizing we are among friends who all have had to undergo a shameful experience or two, it unites us in this common experience and we are relieved that this is being shared with those whom we are confident like us despite our very real shortcomings. It is this sense of relief that is expressed as laughter.
And our laughter serves as well as a special form of communication. When someone tries out a friendly insult, there is a very brief moment when the insulter and those listening in are not quite sure that the insulted party will take the kidding as a real insult intended to make someone actually feel awful. Doing something that leads to a friend feeling awful would be experienced as shame. When the target of the playful insult laughs, there is a sense of relief that the playful insult has been taken in a pleasant way, and it is this relief that is expressed as shared laughter among friends.
Laughter is believed to be instinctual because even people who are born blind and deaf still laugh. And those who study the connection of our brains and laughter have found that it begins by triggering some action in the oldest part of the brain, a part of the brain that came about when language and thinking development was at its most rudimentary stage. And so we are provoked to laugh at times even when we are not sure why we are doing it.
Professor Robert R. Provine
Robert R. Provine, is a professor of psychology and neuroscience at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. Professor Provine conducted a number of studies of laughter and authored the book Laughter: a Scientific Investigation. One of his studies was a survey of laughter. He and some graduate students listened in on average conversations in public places and made notes. And in a survey of 1,200 “laugh episodes,” he found that only 10%-20% of laughs were generated by anything resembling a joke.
The other 80%-90% of comments that received a laugh were dull non-witticisms. For example, people often begin to laugh as they start to leave some people after a period during which they were all interacting and they began to say such things like, “I’ll see you guys later” and “It was nice meeting you.” Why would people be prone to laugh then?
Well, it seems to me that just as we are departing from an interaction with others, we may have deep down in the emotional center of our brains, some concern that our interactions might have come off as negative or even shameful. As we begin to observe the behavior of the other parties that were involved in the interaction, some may be perceived as indicating that things had gone well. Comments like, “Gee, this was really fun,” or “Let’s get together again real soon,” are monitored carefully to see if they are perceived as sincere. At such times, sometimes we begin to experience at some deep level of our emotional brain that some of these comments do indeed appear to be sincere, and a sense of relief is experienced. These perceived reliefs are expressed as laughter, or nervous laughter, as they are sometimes referred to.
Our laughter then communicates to others that at least someone enjoyed the interactions, and there is some relief experienced by the other parties concerned about how their own interactions were perceived, and the laughter spreads.
There is a similar phenomenon going on when we are amongst friends. When our friends point out our shortcomings, the emotional part of our brain begins to become concerned. The relief that we experience a fraction of a second later because we realize we are among people whom we have some good reason to believe like us despite our shortcoming is expressed as laughter. There is then some additional relief experienced by others from the sound of the insulted parties laugh and the laughter spreads.
Now, I hasten to point out that I have among my close friends, two guys who don’t take well to playful insults. Consequently, my friends and I largely respect this characteristic of them by avoiding throwing any barbed comments their way. Why make a friend feel bad just because the rest of us enjoy this fun form of interacting. So I urge you to keep this in mind. Consider keeping an eye out for those individuals. Some of them might laugh just out of concern that the rest of us might think less of them if they let on that they can’t take a playful joke, but inside they might be cringing. You can usually pick up who feels this way by the nature of their laugh, which typically is more halfhearted than typical. Sometimes they get obviously annoyed and defensive.
And if I might offer one more suggestion in this regard, consider the comedic roasting of an honored guest we see from time to time on TV. Just like those doing the roasting take a little time after the friendly insults to say some kind words, you might be wise to do likewise.
Well, that’s my post for this week. Until next time, may you all have some fun without hurting anyone’s feelings.
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 intelligence. To begin at the very first post you can click HERE.
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.”
Crying is as Natural as a Smile On a Baby’s Face
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.
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?
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.”
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.You gotta accent-u-ate the positive,
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.
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.
Observe them like you were a scientist objectively observing a flock of birds flying by, off in a distant sky.
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.
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.
The idea that certain actions that violate societal norms are mental illnesses like any other illnesses is attractive to many people because they believe it helps to reduce this guilt and shame. To understand this a little better, let’s take a look at a quick parable:
Rachel, the mother of five-year old Jonathan, recently went through a very sad divorce. Now, at Jonathan’s parent-teacher conference, his Kindergarten teacher expresses some serious concerns. “Your son is very hyperactive and he has a great deal of difficulty paying attention. Have you considered taking him to a doctor? He may have ADHD.”
“There is no need to blame yourself,” the doctor explains. “ADHD isn’t caused by bad mothering. It is an illness very much like diabetes. Just like insulin is a drug that treats diabetes, the drug I’m prescribing for your son’s ADHD will treat his medical condition.”
But when she tells her father what the doctor has said, he grumbles and says that the doctor is full of crap. “Jonathan is angry and upset because of the divorce and not having his father with him any more. Anyone can see that!”
“Well, Rachel, I certainly don’t think you are to blame, but I don’t think Jonathan has an illness. I’m sorry to hear you are thinking about putting him on one of those ADHD drugs; they have a whole bunch of side effects.”
“You did your best, Rachel. I think it makes sense that you take some responsibility for what has happened, but blaming yourself isn’t being fair, nor is it helpful. When people blame themselves a lot of the time they think they deserve some type of punishment. In my opinion, a better way to take responsibility for what went wrong is to accept the strong emotional experiences that go along with taking responsibility, accept that you played at least a part in what went wrong, and then set yourself on becoming determined to take steps to improve. The genuine sad, heartfelt feelings that come with taking responsibility leads us to do a search for making improvements.”
In the above parable, a doctor tries to reduce the shame and guilt that a mother is feeling about her son’s behavior by framing the behavior as an illness. Although this initially appears to help, she runs into some people who refuse to go along with this anti-shame/mental illness notion. Let’s explore this notion a little more thoroughly with the help of some of the writings of psychologist and philosopher, William James.
In an 
To suggest personal will and effort to one “all sicklied o’er” with the sense of weakness, of helpless failure, and of fear, is to suggest the most horrible of things to him. What he craves is to be consoled in his very impotence, to feel the Powers of the Universe recognize and secure him, all passive and failing as he is.
From my discussions with people in Alcoholic Anonymous, it seems to me that many of its members found themselves in a state similar to what James describes in his letter. The program seems to provide them a way to stop blaming themselves by using the “I have a real sickness” idea. It also offers a sense that they could put themselves in the hands of a higher power, while, at the same time, they receive a great deal of support from peers who have managed to recover.
It is in no other way that we overcome balkiness in a horse: we divert his attention, do something to his nose or ear, lead him around in a circle, and thus get him over a place where flogging would only have made him more invincible.
By apperceiving the case as neural pathology, what does James hope to gain? He does not explicitly say. The technique that he describes of dropping the subject, diverting the mind, then springing it on the pupil later, is stated plainly enough so that many individuals can employ it without first apperceiving the case as neural pathology. I have done so, myself, on numerous occasions.
