Awakening From Your Anger

Tag: anger

  • Transforming Anger into Emotional Resilience

      There have been a number of posts show up in my email this past week that remind me of the need for this blog. In a recent post, Jack Kornfield, a noted American Buddhist, writes “When self-righteous anger arises, we can let it go. Retaining our own fierce clarity, we too can seek justice, yet do so with a loving heart.” There is a lot of self-righteous anger in our societies, Canadian and American. I agree with the sentiment expressed by Jack yet letting go of anger was never my forte. I could have spend years exploring Buddhist meditation, but it likely would not have touched the Family of Origen issues that underlay my anger — it took nearly ten years of good experiential therapy for me to resolve my issues (such work then became the basic of the anger management program that I developed and taught for twenty years).

      Having developed these skills, I can probably lead others to resolution within a few years (if they will do the work). For a beginning approach, check out the thirty or so postings listed under “Postings / Anger Management”. There were originally a series of 30 emails that I sent out over a period of 90 days, twice a week, with the suggestion to read and practice some simple skills. They generally gave people the necessary skills for better management of emotional issues, and if they wanted more, they could choose to work with me via Zoom or in-person.

      Incidentally, I call it ‘anger management’ because that is what attracts interest — it is really emotional life management; the skills are applicable to any emotional issue. I’ll add to this in a moment.

      Another email post from a few weeks ago described how a dozen hooded and masked individuals in Hamilton, Ontario gathered to rally behind the racist and xenophobic slogan popularized by Trump: “mass deportations now”. Such a process is highly unusual for Canada yet seems to be part of the growing rage throughout North America. From my perspective, it is likely that such intolerance arises from a sense of powerlessness related to the major dysfunctionality of our civilization. It is unlikely that such individuals would want to undertake my anger management program. But they do illustrate the needs of our society — such will likely increase given the current atmosphere in the States.

      Another post added to this: “Lonely, Addicted, and Living Without a Higher Purpose? An open letter to younger men struggling.” A second noted: “Road rage has soared in an increasingly angry nation: People are just overwhelmed.” Both of these were protected by paywalls so I did not read the details — I can imagine though.

      All of these have become common stories; all of these require good anger management.

      I was a physician-psychotherapist practicing in Ontario for more than twenty-five years. As a physician in Ontario, my therapy practice was paid though the Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP); all any Ontario client had to do was say they wanted to work with me — OHIP paid for it. If I moved to a new location, I could have a waiting list within three weeks — lucky for me, lucky for clients.

      Part of my training included a Master’s degree in Applied Behavioral Sciences, functionally a degree in how people function in groups. After a few years, as I developed my weekend anger management program, I got tired to telling people that if they wanted to do individual therapy with me, it was a two-year waiting list. Eventually I switched to exclusive group therapy, and fed my groups from people who attended by anger management weekends. My wife and I had a day-retreat center where we each practiced our careers (my wife is a brilliant trainer in NeuroLinguistic Programming). Eventually also, I wrote my first book Blowing Out the Darkness: The Management of Emotional Life Issues, Especially Anger and Rage.[1]

      I am not interested in blowing my own horn, but my anger management program was effective for a wide range of people. Every three to six months, someone would stop by our center and tell me that their lives changed after a single weekend workshop. A Probation Officer sent me approximately 60 individuals over the years — only one re-offended after that single weekend. A senior Police Officer believed my program to be the best program he had ever encountered. A Justice of the Supreme Court would on occasion specifically recommend my weekend as part of his dispositions.

      I know that all troublesome issues of anger-rage are resolvable — the limitation is the willingness of the client to do the work (which I will describe in ensuing posts). The other major limitation is for the client to find good anger management. From my perspective, most programs are not very good — they mainly tell people what they should be doing. They work for many people because many people are highly motivated. Yet my groups were filled with people for whom such instructions did not work — they were motivated but they needed more. Specifically I did not tell people what they should be doing!

      As a taster of what is to come: What is the matter with being angry? Or being enraged? … Is it the anger, or something else? I suggest it is something else. The basic issue is not the anger or rage. It is that someone did not feel safe in the presence of anger/rage!

      Stay tuned. The next post will look at safety!

    [1] Although written in 2009, I rebranded the book in 2023. The current book is available on Amazon and other sourses from the publisher: MacQuarrie, Dave. Blowing Out The Darkness: The Management of Emotional Life Issues, Especially Anger and Rage. Metairie, LA: The Ewings Publishing LLC (2023), https://www.theewingspublishing.com/product/blowing-out-the-darkness-the-management-of-emotional-life-issues-especially-anger-and-rage/. Or from davidmacquarriebooks.com.

  • Transforming Anger: Emotions as Energy for Change

      As noted previously, I had my own anger management program for 25 years, likely dealing with about 4000 people with various issues of anger. I had long concluded that anger is the canary in the coalmine of our culture – it is the measure of how dysfunctional our civilization has become.

      Thus, I focus on anger as the beginning of change. I strongly believe that unresolved anger is dangerous whereas resolved anger is a powerful source for change. Given the current dysfunction of our culture, we need our anger so as to generate change, ideally for the better. If our anger is unresolved, any change generated is likely to worsen our dysfunction whereas if we come to terms with the nature of our anger, we have choice as to how we use it.

      So, what is anger? First of all, anger is an emotion. So, what is an emotion? My working definition is ‘energy to which I give meaning and direction.’ Emotions are the interface between mind (meaning) and body (direction). My best way of describing them is via what is called the Action Model.

      Something happens in life, a stimulus S. Eventually, we respond, R. In the interim, we Sense it (the earliest awareness is called the F1 state). We Evaluate it via our values, beliefs, memories, and expectations (VBMEs), and we make Meaning of it, our story. We develop a Plan of action as to how to respond and we mobilize our Energy to respond, our emotions. And, ideally, we respond (if we feel safe) — we move our energy into the environment. The system works well (and is prone to various glitches, to be described in later blog posts).

      Think of a time that you have been angry. Feel the residual anger as you now experience it. Notice I did not say ‘the anger you had then.’

      Emotions are a present-time body experience — you cannot feel what you experienced yesterday or at any other time; you can only feel ‘now.’ You can think about yesterday, but you can only feel ‘now.’

      That said, feel your anger. Point with one finger to the location of your anger in your body. For most people, they will point to their upper chest, yet some will point to their jaw or their abdomen or other areas. Although we have the single word ‘anger,’ each individual will have their own unique experience.

      Emotions, in general, are describable as a single word, in the ‘now’ moment, and dependent on meaning. As a child when you were learning language, perhaps someone took your toy, and you were upset. Then mummy or daddy said, “Don’t be angry.” You now had a new word to describe both your behaviour and your internal state. You also learned that the word was fraught with difficulty — you shouldn’t be angry. Yet, at the same time, it is likely that no one taught you what to do with this uncomfortable inner state. Now as an adult, when you encounter this body state again, you know to call it ‘anger’ and perhaps you still do not know what to do with it. If you do know what to do, you likely have a sense of power.

      In general, the simple emotions such as anger, sadness, fear, joy are such that they are characterized by a sense of power — you can do something when you experience them. Anger, for example, is an emotion of uninvited or imposed disruption of your boundaries wherein you are capable of pushing back against the disruption. It is the energy of significant difference in a closed space, a relationship.

      If you don’t feel capable of pushing back, the emotion tends to expand, and we give it a different name — ‘rage.’ Rage is the attempt to mobilize action and power in situations of anger where you feel powerless. Furthermore, if the situation becomes overwhelming, one option is to move to self-righteousness as a further protective mechanism in boosting your sense of power.

      In similar fashion, our sadness becomes despair when powerless and laziness (f—k it!) when overwhelmed. Our fear becomes terror and then fearfulness, and our joy becomes ecstasy and then some form of unitive consciousness.

      There are many other emotional words in our language and the definitions of these words varies considerably. The distinctions I make are:

    • Emotions are a single word descriptor of energy to which I give meaning (mind) and direction (body). I can point to my body as to where I experience them.
    • Feelings are a single word description of energy wherein I point to the relationship I have with others. ‘I feel frustrated’ points to an external person or event. Similarly with ‘I feel included [by …],’ ‘I feel honored [about …],’ and ‘I feel betrayed [by …].’
    • Then, there are feeling judgments, multi-word descriptions of my thoughts about my emotions and feelings. ‘I feel [that] you made an error’ or ‘I feel [that] you liked the meal.’ They represent thoughts that carry an energetic load.

      All of the above is relatively simple to describe, yet there is a problem which will be developed in future posts. It is summed up in a personal story:

    Until my forties, my childhood issues were such that I was emotionally numb. After I had done a number of years of therapy, I said to a friend: “I have learned to feel, and I hate it! It is so g..d.. messy!”

      They are still messy yet now I value them.

  • Re-branding

    So, what is this rebranding of my blog all about? First, the switch-over has been much more complicated and I am uncertain how long the transition will take, but it will certainly delay my engagement. For now, here is the first post that I planned:

    Human beings are social creatures; that has been our success (and angst) for millenia. Yet it is my belief that we have never before been as angry (enraged might be a better word) with each other and with our cultural institutions as we are now. We are in crisis; we feel powerless and scared by our ineffectiveness in dealing with the current risks of climate change and/or the resurgence of possible nuclear winter. And we do not effectively talk about it.

    This was the focus of the earlier rendition of this blog as The Human Side of Global Warming. In rebranding the blog as Awakening From Your Anger, I am wanting to shift the focus to what can we as individuals do in responding to this crisis. My basic premise is that unresolved anger is dangerous, yet resolved anger is powerful.

    I have taught anger management for almost 25 years. I honestly believe that I have/had the best anger management program in North America but I have never been able to sell it because I step out of the cultural box too much — I encourage people to be angry so that they can work to resolution. At a later stage, I will quote from some of the document in my book Blowing Out the Darkness but space precudes this at the moment.

    In her 2017 book Braving the Wilderness[1], Brené Brown talks about a state that she calls High Lonesome; this was early in the first presidency of Donald Trump. She notes, “The world feels high lonesome and hearbroken to me right now. We’ve sorted ourselves into factions based on our politics and ideology. We’ve turned away for one another and toward blame and rage. We’ve lonely and untethered. And scared. e border.

    Brown further notes, “wouldn’t you think that all of the sorting by politics and beliefs we’ve been doing would lead to more social interaction? … Shouldn’t ‘You’re either with us or against us’ have led to closer ties among the like-minded? The answer to these questions is a resounding and surprising no. At the same time [as] sorting is on the rise, so is loneliness.”

    Now (2024 November 9th), with Trump as American President Elect, I imagine this is what many American Democrats are feeling right now — scared and lonely. And even though the Republicans have had resounding success in the election, Brown notes that, “Ideological bunkers protect us from everything except loneliness and disconnection.” I thus suspect that, in spite all the bravado and excitement, there are many Republicans who are wondering as to what the future offers. Equally, for we Canadians, many of us are caught in the same questions.

    As noted above, the focus of this blog is now how can we use our anger as a powerful force for good. How can we use our loneliness as individuals, social creatures still, come together in responding to our social crises. Coincidentally, an excellent article today in the Guardian (Authoritarians like Trump love fear, defeatism, surrender. Do not give them what they want) parallels the kind of ideas I will be exploring. We are in crisis; we are not defeated. 

    I intend several posts each week and I invite interaction. Although my posts will make suggestions, I invite us to come together, to find ways to engage with each other as we seek greater authenticity and greater effectiveness.

    [1] Quoted in “High Lonesome,” Psychotherapy Networker, Nov/Dec 2017, https://www.psychotherapynetworker.org/article/high-lonesome/, accessed 2024 November 8th.

    .

  • How Then Shall We Live?

    CogDiss01In my reading today I encountered a truly outstanding description of how one man chooses to live with Climate Change, something that will affect all our lives. Dahr Jamail’s commentary As the Climate Collapses, We Ask: “How Then Shall We Live? (20190204, the first of a series) touches me deeply, both for his honesty and for his depth of knowledge and understanding. He is one of a small group of journalists in whom I have a deep sense of trust as to his integrity. (Joe Rohm is another source that I trust for his knowledge and his integrity.)

    Jamail writes for TruthOut on climate issues and I recommend all his writings. I have recently ordered his book The End Of Ice: Bearing Witness and Finding Meaning in the Path of Climate Disruption (20190122). I will undoubtedly be reporting on this in a later blog.

    As I write these words, I also have a moment of profound cognitive dissonance. I am slowly reading Drawdown: The Most Comprehensive Plan Ever Proposed To Reverse Global Warming by Paul Hawken, a very well-researched description of 100 substantive solutions to reverse global warming. I also think of the DVD Tomorrow (2015) that I watched a few weeks ago, a video that deeply impressed me with its hopeful message of creative responses to climate issues.

    Thus I simultaneously hold the honest searching and sadness of what we have done and do to our planet together with the incredible creativity that is available. All this with the recognition of how powerless we are to deal with the insanity of capitalism and neoliberalism, the power dynamics that run our system.

    It truly reminds me to be humble of the limited yet important ways in which I can contribute.

    Other articles worth reading:

    Jamail writes a regular series of articles for TruthOut, many of which can be found under Climate Disruption Dispatches or his website http://www.dahrjamail.net/.

    The most dangerous climate feedback loop is speeding up (Joe Rohm, 20190117)

    And on the flip side:

    Opinion: Our house is on fire, and many Albertans want more lighters (20181229)

    A very clear presentation of the options for Albertans. What I find fascinating is the number of ad hominin attacks in the Commentary section, an indication of the amount of toxic discourse (as noted in the past few posts).

  • I’m Right!

    How we polarize!

    The past three blog posts have been fueled by James Hoggan’s book I’m Right, And You’re An Idiot[1]. In conversation with Hoggan, David Suzuki (Canada’s leading environmentalist) asked: Why aren’t people demanding action on environmental issues? To address this question, Hoggan set out to interview a large number of some of the world’s leading thinkers, specifically individuals who study human communication, to gain their perspective on this failure.

    As mentioned in Ways To Contribute, I am involved with the Suzuki Elders in exploring how to use this information in the management of difficult conversations. In Finding Common Ground and How Conflict Escalates, I proposed a simple (perhaps difficult?) methodology for this. Yet I also want to give credit to Hoggan for the immense amount of exploration he undertook.

    The following are some of the major points with which Hoggan grappled. Most are from his Epilogue, and all are direct quotes, with the interviewee named (JH denotes Hoggan’s commentary). [Square brackets are minor changes I have added, hopefully without changing the meaning.]

    • Few of us are truly evil — and good people sometimes [strongly disagree] for good reasons. (JH, p. 215)
    • Democracy works only if reasoned debate in the public sphere is possible. (Jason Stanley, p. 98)
      • While contention lies at the heart of democracy, it must be constructive contention. (Marshall Ganz, p. 115)
      • [People] don’t need not agree on the solution or on the problem. They don’t need to understand each other, trust each other or even like each other. But they do have to recognize that the only way to move forward is together. (Adam Kahane, p. 123)
    • It is through narratives . . . that people learn to access the moral and emotional resources we need to act with agency in the face of danger, challenge, and threat. . . . [This] is one of the most important lessons set out in I’m Right. (Marshall Ganz and JH, p. 174)
      • At its most basic level, I’m Right is about how we tell stories and how we treat each other. (JH, p. 115)
      • To create powerful persuasive narratives, our starting point must be rooted in an attitude of empathy, respect, and compassion. (The Dalai Lama, p. 211).
    • People don’t start out mired in hostility. The situation evolves. . . . Our defense mechanisms kick in . . . and this provokes . . . eventual gridlock. (JH, pp. 214-215)
      • It is hard to know who and what to trust. (JH, p. 216)
      • An important key is to hold our beliefs lightly [so that we are open to new possibility]. (JH, p. 215)
    • Facts and reason are fundamental to healthy public discourse, but in our overheated adversarial public square, facts are not enough. (JH, p. 217)
      • The initial strategy . . . must be inquiry, . . . [exploring] what truly matters to people [the emotional energy]. (JH, p. 218)
      • We must appeal to people’s values and speak from a moral position, . . . encouraging debate about matters of concern. (JH, pp. 217-218)
    • A well-crafted . . . narrative helps tear down barriers of propaganda and polarization. This theme of emotional communication is grounded in the Golden Rule of treating others the way we want to be treated. (p. 219-220)
      • If we seek change, we should learn to use speech for its highest purpose — moral discourse. (JH, p. 222)

    I propose that the methodology I suggested in earlier posts satisfies what Hoggan has identified, especially in providing narrative and compassion, and provides constructive contention.

    [1] Hoggan, J. (2016).  I’m right, and you’re an idiot: The toxic state of public discourse and how to clean it up. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

  • What Are We Thinking?

    DroughtSeveral articles have recently struck me as indicators of where we currently are with respect to global warming. Some of the articles focus on the impact; two focus on the insanity that drives us. What are we thinking!?

    I remain convinced that the major issues underlying global warming are those of:

    • acedia — our laziness, fearfulness and self-righteousness that prevents us from engaging in the most important issue of our species. There are, of course, reasons (good reasons, many of which were addressed in my earlier blogs), but reasons don’t count! Results count.
      • it is our acedia that stops our cooperation, the attitude that: “I’m willing to work hard on these issues if to my advantage, or if you are!” We see this with our international agreements — Russian, Turkey, and the United States (accounting for about 30% of the greenhouse effect) not engaged in the Paris Agreement. And the Paris Agreement is only an agreement to do something about the problem; if Canada’s duplicity is any example, we are a long way from actual results.
    • evil — this is not a topic we as a culture want to address, yet it is undeniable to me that evil exists. It shows up in greed and in the disinformation processes that feed our inactivity.

    Many small positive actions occur, many, but we still have not reached our own tipping point as to when we will move rapidly to resolution. Perhaps we will do so in time to prevent catastrophe for our civilization, perhaps for our species. Perhaps not.

    I almost need to laugh, perhaps cry!

    Cape Town water supply near ‘point of no return’ as reservoirs run dry (20180118)

    A number of articles within this link point to the impact of global warming. Cape Town (South Africa) is considering mandatory limitation of water usage. China is refusing to be the dumping ground for plastic waste, especially plastic bottles, thereby forcing other countries to deal with their recycling products.

    Who is Guilty of Climate Crimes? (20180216)

    The basis answer is that we are all guilty. However, some aspects stand out: the extreme right, the fossil fuel industry, the media, and the major industrial countries (Canada, my country, included).

    Arctic temperatures soar 45 degrees above normal, flooded by extremely mild air on all sides (20180222)

    The highest weather station in the world, about 400 miles for the North Pole, has warmed to 43°F in the dead of winter! In addition to feedback loops that further increase Arctic warming (and loss of more ice), thus impacting the entire weather system of the northern hemisphere (the jet-stream impact), there is also the massive release of methane from permafrost and seabed melting, the rise of sea level (as the Greenland ice field melts), and the slowdown of the global ocean conveyor belt effect. These are just some of the effects; we simply do not know what tipping points will be reached and when.

    Coral reefs will transition to net dissolving before end of century (20180223)

    Another factor in loss of both beauty and a basic food chain component — in addition to warming being destructive of coral, the acidification also is weakening the underlying sedimentary structure of the reefs. Our world food supply is thus at risk.

    Climate science deniers’ credibility tested (20180301)

    This is the greatest crime — the controversy created by the massive disinformation processes we have unleashed in the past 50 years!

  • Anger #31 Loose Ends And Final Comments

    Comment: The final email. Hopefully you have gained from this program. I wish you well!

    MacQuarrie Email Program — Loose Ends and Final Comments

    Happy2Congratulations.

    You have completed the thirty emails of this program. I know that this has required a lot of work on your part. I also hope that it has been an effective program for you, and that you have obtained the outcome you wish from it (Email #01).

    At this point, I would very much appreciate feedback from you as to its effectiveness, especially what parts have been most useful, and what not. Please email me at [email protected].

    My thoughts as to how you can continue:

    • be aware that as you learn your triggers and become more skillful in managing yourself, you will be changing the system within which you function.
      • people will not like this, and will attempt to sabotage you. Don’t violate them as they do so; play with the sabotage.
      • it is not likely that they want you to resume being angry; they may actually want you to be more healthy. However, your changes require that they themselves change. Perhaps your anger has allowed them to avoid their own anger, or served some other purpose within the system. Now they must find another way to cope, and are not prepared for this. Hence, they sabotage you and others so as to avoid their own issues — this is the nature of systems.
    • manage your energy. People won’t like it; manage yourself safely (Email #02 and #25).
      • as much as possible (safely), stop violations by others.
    • learn the messages of your anger.
    • deal with conflict. The only person who can initiate change is yourself.
      • practice the skills of creative communication, cooperation, and challenge
    • on occasion, dive deeper into your issues, perhaps with therapy.
      • be aware that these learnings of the past few months will fade. The activities and tasks must be practiced for an extended time before they become second nature. Expect this — come back (or find another program) in six months or a year.

    And especially, recognize that you can act your way into a new way of thinking; you cannot think your way into a new way of acting (it is action that creates change). Growth is a balance of acting and assessing — risking is essential.

    Challenge yourself. For me, I am often sad about the ways in which we have created ourselves as human beings, how traumatized we are. Learn how to step into the shoes of others so as to get how difficultly they live their lives, and why they may be criticizing you (Email #30 — Dealing With Other Angry People). For example, they have likely been traumatized themselves such that they are bitter; explore how the trauma arises for them in the present in your actual contact with them.

    Most important — be a participant-observer of your own internal conflicts, watching for those sailors who demonstrate wisdom (Email #19 Why We Avoid). Develop your Captain.

    I learned to deal with conflict by being challenged in how I functioned — overall a very painful process. When I had had my therapy practice for a few years, I was running a group within a community organization, supposedly an association with high integrity. Gradually I came to suspect that they had many undesirable characteristics, but I did not then have the skill to challenge them effectively. Eventually I refused to work with them, a decision that was hotly challenged. It took me three months to settle my anxiety, and come to terms that I was making a good decision for myself. But it was not easy.

    Several years later, someone complained to the College who governed my license. I was able to defend myself, but it took me six weeks to settle my anxiety.

    Again after a few years, another complaint — this time it took six hours to settle my anxiety. It was now simply an opportunity to demonstrate that I was living my own values.

    I also learned how to function by requesting feedback from others. Much of this was part of the therapy processes I attended (as participant); later, I made it a habit to request feedback from the groups I was running. The skills of maturity are best learned through feedback.

    If you want more from me, read my books (see below), subscribe to this blog, or ask questions of me ([email protected]).

    If convenient, attend one of my workshops; usually they are listed on my website (A Place Two Be). I also do individual work with clients, usually by some kind of video conferencing such as Zoom (my preference compared to Skype). There is a cost for these, but I am open to sliding scale depending on need.

    Keep well; you deserve it.

    Thank you. I hope you have both enjoyed and benefited from this program.

    Dave’s Books:

    MacQuarrie, D. (2008). Blowing out the darkness: The management of emotional life issues, especially anger and rage. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse.

    MacQuarrie, D. (2012). Acedia, the darkness within, and the darkness of climate change. Bloomington, IN: AuthorHouse.

    Both are available from AuthorHouse, and there may be a Kindle edition on Amazon.

  • Anger #30 Dealing With Other Angry People

    Comment: Angry people tend to attract angry responses, likely from other angry people. If you are to live otherwise, you will need to know how to respond to other’s who are angry.

    MacQuarrie Email Program #30 — Dealing With Other Angry People

    angerface3
    Anger is a masque of deeper issues.

    In Email #01, I indicated your anger will tell you there is a difficulty, but it will not tell you if the issue is within you (powerlessness — something inappropriate within your own beliefs), or in others (conflict — something inappropriate with those around you). The primary intention of the Blowing Out method has been to release the Energy and explore the Message — to empty the Pot, and reduce the likelihood of the Pot filling again.

    Hopefully, by this point in time, you have developed considerable skill in managing your own anger. However, as you undoubtedly realize, you are not alone in having difficulty with anger. So what do you do when you encounter someone else who is angry?

    Previously, you might have escalated with them, with a less than desirable outcome. Your task for this email is to explore what you can do differently in such circumstances.

    You probably know already that it will not do much good to suggest that they check out Angry? Change Your Life in 90 Days. Actually, the best way to recommend this program is to demonstrate to others that, compared with a few months ago, you are now much more able to manage your anger — actions speak louder than words.

    So, how to deal with someone else’s anger (explore these suggestions to see if you agree):

    • first, monitor yourself, especially your voice tone, muscle tension, and body language. You want to be able to engage (or not) by choice, not by your own reactivity.
    • minimize escalation
      • minimize eye contact, neither too little (often interpreted as weakness) nor too much (often confrontational) — be aware there are major variations within cultures. For example, sometimes lack of eye contact is a sign of respect.
      • assume a relaxed posture, and especially avoid pointing.
      • speak with moderate tone, and especially no profanity.
      • listen, listen, listen. Appreciate suggestions; be thankful for contributions.
        • if you will listen to them, they may be willing to listen to you.
      • invite time-outs to problem-solve; make an appointment to resume.
        • when safe, discharge your own energy so as not to contaminate your next event.

    Angry#30-PPositionsWhen complete, the following is a way to explore what happened (especially useful here, also in many other circumstances):

    • as usual, act out the situation — when you utilize your body, you are much more likely to access your other-than-conscious mind, and obtain richer data.
      • first, step into your own shoes (#1) to explore the event
      • second, act out the event from the perspective of the other (#2)
      • then, watch the action from the side (#3), as well as standing on a chair as you move around the event (elevated 3rd). You will gain different information from different positions.
    • finally, if you were dissatisfied with the original outcome, consider what else you could have done, similar to the exploration of Email #20 What Gets You Angry?

    Dealing with ‘difficult people’ is actually a very complex process, partly because conflict is both normal and essential to the development of relationship, be it a group of two people or of twenty-two. When groups are forming, people are unfamiliar with each other — conflict occurs as people honestly sort their needs, and come to agreements as to how to act. Honesty is needed; niceness is often not effective in resolution. Everyone is doing their best to cope, some less effectively than others!

    Those people who could be called ‘difficult’ are simply those with less skill (and perhaps have grown up in less than ideal circumstances). Most of the time, such people are demonstrating limited skill when the group itself is immature in its development. As a general rule, I assume that conflict represents immaturity of a group until it becomes very obvious that the individual is truly interruptive to the functioning of a group.

    From my perspective, difficulties need to be corrected when they interfere with long-term relationship and/or the performance of tasks. Such correction however requires considerable time, often up to ten hours (or more) for resolution — a lot of work. My standards are these:

    • if I am the facilitator of a time-limited group, I will identify interruptive behaviors (simply name them so others are aware), tolerate them, or stop them as feasible.
    • if a long-term group (marriage, friendship, or work group), I will resolve, challenge, or stop inappropriate behaviors. I will also work hard to identify the ghosts and hidden agendas that often underlie conflict.

    Something more needs to happen with truly difficult people — those who continue to be interruptive (major immaturity) and/or those who violate others (toxic). Some thoughts:

    • although much has been made of the concept of empathy in modern therapeutic circles, my experience (and that of my mentors) has been that empathy is very limited in its use.
      • empathy is useful for the development of safety and relationship, especially that of trust. However, it does not encourage growth, and is often conducive to continuing immaturity.
      • challenge (frustration) is much more promoting of growth.
    • early in my career as a therapist, one of my mentors pointed out the need for what he called killer instinct, best summarized by a definition from the 18th century: A gentlemen is one who does not hurt the feelings of another, unintentionally!
      • If I need to stop someone, I do so calmly and deliberately — it is a stance of clarity, not of anger! And I stop them.
    • it is important to recognize that people who violate others are limited in resources, and therefore are likely to escalate when challenged, possibly to dangerous levels.
      • another mentor pointed out that toxic forces are responsive neither to reason nor to empathy. Thus, the risk of escalation — be careful.

    Coming next: Closure

  • Anger #29 Responding To Children

    Comment: Child discipline is fraught with ‘shoulds,’ and thus a place of major difficulty. Child discipline is more accurately discipline of the parent so as to provide consistency and nurturing.

    MacQuarrie Email Program #29 — Responding To Children

    Angry#29a-TasksI chose this topic as part of the program because children are a part of the lives of everyone. Children are a source of major joy, and also of significant anger. Children are developing into individuals, and therefore resist the efforts of others to manage them. Thus, responding to children is equivalent to managing the third limb of a triangle — fraught with difficulty.

    The task in this email is complex — learning to parent with care and consistency. Be aware that it is easy to become overwhelmed with all the ‘shoulds’ in this field. The bottom line is safety and respect. What are your beliefs as to how children should behave? What are you seeking?

    Although most people attempt to parent well, parenting is still an isolated phenomenon within the private family. As children, many of us have been traumatized in families; I certainly had been. As such, most of us received almost no training in emotional or relationship dynamics, other than the emotional field of our own families. Because of this, we are at great risk of recreating such patterns when we themselves have children.

    There is a lot I could say about why our culture frequently traumatizes children, but it would take much space. I therefore confine my remarks to skills that are needed in responding to children.

    The needs of children are age-dependent; difficulties occur because of inherent age-related tasks. Children have more dreams; parents are more orientated to reality. Younger children are focused on family, learning to model family dynamics; teens are relating to peers, and learning independence. Note the directions children are moving (young children towards parants; teens away) People can only hear you when they are moving towards you; thus younger children listen; teens much less so.

    Angry#29b-SECFor me, the simplest way to describe all these needs is in terms of safety, energy, and choice (the primary characteristics of the Triune Brain — Email #04). All children need safety (not rules, but boundaries within which they can explore), extensive nurturing (energy which adds to safety), and age-appropriate choice (risking within the boundaries of safety). Between ages 0-2, they principally need safety and nurturing.

    Difficulties usually begin with the ‘terrible twos,’ and the ‘trying threes.’ Here the primary need remains safety — children between two and ten simply do not have enough life experience to make good decisions of safety; however, the additional need is to educate them towards good choice. This is called child discipline; however, it is more accurately ‘parent discipline,’ the need to provide consistency of safety and nurturing. Parents have difficulty usually because they want to control energy (the expressiveness of children), rather than safety and choice.

    There are two systems I advocate for the younger age group: 1-2-3 Magic (Tom Phelan) and Inner Discipline (Barbara Colorosa). 1-2-3 Magic emphasizes the energy management (positive energy to encourage appropriate behaviours, and absence of energy to discourage undesirable behaviours (criticism is negative energy, and a form of energy reward — as is too much explaining; remember, children want energy, and negative energy is better than no energy). Inner Discipline emphasizes age-appropriate choice. Both systems emphasize safety; both require discipline on the part of parents — consistency of caring, rather than energetic negative reward.

    For the age group of 10-18, the child is gradually allowed to assume responsibility and accountability for both safety and age-appropriate choice, transferring safety issues to the older teen — such that adult-adult relations can develop as the child enters their 20s, perhaps as a form of mentoring on the part of the parent. Sometimes, such consistency is encouraging that of risk-taking, and other times is restrictive due to safety concerns.

    Angry#29c-PACThe most useful way I have of thinking about responding to children again arises from Transactional Analysis, the therapy I introduced in Email #13 Who Are My Sailors? (TA is generally very good at explanations). There I suggested each person consistently has five sailors (nurturing parent, NP; critical parent, CP; adult, A; adapted child, AC; and natural child, NC).

    • The Parents operate from beliefs, the Adults from thoughtful evaluation, and the Childs from feelings.
    • ‘Grown-ups’ have all five states; ‘children’ only C states.
    • CP operates from ‘shoulds;’ AC is the sneaky Child.

    In general, effective communication is with equivalent sailors (e.g., P-P or C-C), and poor communication when levels are crossed (e.g., P-C, P-A, or A-C). Thus, the most difficult situations occur between CP (‘you should’) and AC (‘I don’t want to!’).

    Most parenting conflicts occur between CP and AC, a crossed transaction, in which the parent attempts to control the behavior of the child, independent of issues of safety and choice. Given that we all have Child sailors, younger children are predominantly Childs and teens are often Childs (while learning to have Parent and Adult sailors, eventually Captains — effective Adults).

    Such crossed transactions are recipes for difficulty, especially with teens. The essential parenting need is Adult — set clean boundaries that you yourself can manage. The most effective way that I know is to ‘out-child’ the child — the skill of playfulness, together with an Adult (to provide safety). Can you be in a state of wonder? Do not lecture (P-C); do not argue (C-C). In each case, you will lose. Set boundaries (A), and wonder how the teen will respond (C).

    For example, the teen wants to borrow the car, but never contributes gas. Set the car keys on the table with the instruction that the keys are available when they are replaced with $20 (to be refunded if the car is returned with a full tank of gas); otherwise the keys remain on the table. What will the teen do in response? Probably argue — do not engage. Possibly sulk or cajole — do not engage. Do not lecture. The discipline is to stay with the parameter of: Keys = $20.

    Some other reading material to consider. Tom Phelan’s Surviving Your Adolescents is excellent; if possible, find the first edition — better information from my perspective. Also read Change: Principles of problem formation and problem resolution by Watzlawick et al.; it is the primary source whereby I learned to play.

    Coming next: Loose ends

  • Anger #28 Intimacy And Relationship

    Comment: In some fashion, we all want intimacy, but we are unwilling to risk, and thus we shift to psychological games with predictable negative outcomes. “Here we go again!” Sad.

    MacQuarrie Email Program #28 — Intimacy and Relationship

    Angry#28c-Relating
    The Skills Of Relating

    A friend of mine, a cultural anthropologist, asked approximately 40,000 people how they wanted to live their lives? Essentially everyone said they wanted a sense of aliveness, personal integrity, authentic relationships, and the ability to contribute — to be able to gift to others. My friend also noted in his research that our culture is characterized by domination, greed, and self-righteousness — essentially these are the same 40,000 people, just different sailors present.

    So how then do we get what we say we want? It is not easy — it is risking being vulnerable so as to give permission to the other to be vulnerable also. I summarize it as: 3Rs:

    • Reveal self,
    • Risk not knowing what will happen, and
    • Requesting closeness — Let me know you. Please risk with me.)

    The task of this email is for you to explore your vulnerability, and if you are willing to risk. How willing are you to have a successful relationship? Always it requires effort, and risking.

    Vulnerability is the willingness to be powerless, bringing a clean thoughtful stance to issues, risking criticism (not knowing what will happen, and able to pick oneself up if the attempt does not work). Overall, men in our culture repress their feelings, and lack relationship skills; underneath this, they are actually terrified, especially of being criticized by women. Thus, the best example I have of men risking is in sexual approach. (What if the woman (or possible mate) says No?) Women in our culture experience the pressure to nurture, and do the dance of deception; generally, they are more emotionally mature than men, although they are often indirect, and act as victims. For women, the best example of being vulnerable is when they are willing to express unpleasant feedback directly. These features may be changing for younger generations; however, I do not have enough evidence to judge.

    Be that as it may, we all want intimacy and connection. In Email #12, I identified what I call the three laws of experience: We want positives, it is easier to get negatives, and negatives are better than nothing. These laws determine the difference between intimacy and psychological games.

    A therapy that helped me make clear distinctions here was Transactional Analysis. (Briefly I indicated this therapy in Email #13 Sailors On A Ship.) TA is about transactions — interaction.

    In TA, intimacy is an unpredictable transaction with a possible positive payoff. It is high energy, high contact, and high risk, but when successful, it is very satisfying. In contrast, a psychological game is an other-than-conscious transaction with a predictable negative outcome. It is high energy, high contact, and low risk. Notice the differences between these interactions:

    • intimacy: high risk, positive outcome (very satisfying), unpredictable.
    • psychological game: low risk, negative outcome (negative is easier to get and better than nothing) , predictable.

    Throughout these emails, I have repeatedly emphasized that life has required many of us live with major blocks to awareness, living into acedia rather than wisdom. Thus most people derive the energy they want via psychological games, keeping the process at the other-than-conscious level so as to block awareness of predictable negative outcomes. Sad. If you can say “Here we go again . . .,” you are a participant in a psychological game!

    Angry#28a-Drama1The classic game is known as the Karpman Drama Triangle. Here there are three roles: the persecutor (P), the victim (V), and the rescuer (R). P is criticizing V (giving energy to V), R comes along and attempts to stop this “obvious” inappropriate behavior, thereby giving energy to both P and V. Suppose each starts with 100 units of energy, and each transaction is 60 units.

    Angry#28b-Drama2Persecutor (P) blames victim (V), transferring 60 units. Rescuer also gives 60 units, 30 units to each of P and V. At the end of this round, P has 70 units, R has 40 units and V has 190 units. The basic question is: Who is winning? The victim always wins! But the game is unstable (sooner or later, someone runs out of energy). So, in order to keep the drama going, the players alternate roles. For example, Victim becomes Rescuer, and Rescuer becomes Victim. The game goes on. As an example, husband comes home drunk; wife (P) blames husband (V). Next morning, husband has a hangover (V); wife (R/V) says: “Stay in bed; I’ll get you breakfast. You had a rough night, so somebody (i.e., me) has to take care of you.”

    As for resolution, Eric Berne (the TA therapist who studied psychological games in detail) stated “The only way to stop a game is to stop it!” Simplistically, you cannot play tennis with yourself (it takes two to play)! So when one player walks off the court, the game ends.

    In comparison, effective relationship requires hard work. A host of skills are needed:

    • maintaining values — the groundwork, with often subtle differences between the individuals.
    • communicating and cooperating. Couples need to do much more than communicate — especially they need to cooperate in problem solving.
    • Angry#26b-Options1caring and resolving conflict. Caring is sometimes just as much work as resolving conflict. Problem solving (#27) is essential.
      • relationships do best when there are at least five positives for every negative.
      • blame has no place in relationship — blame is based on a right-wrong mentality, whereas everyone is always doing their best. When inappropriate behaviors exist, the basic question is whether the action was intended, or not. And do the individuals wish to act into better behaviors.
        • Sudden start-up of conflict is especially harmful.
      • it is necessary for the individuals to reveal themselves, especially their differences (a potential source of conflict) as feedback (not criticism).
      • Feedback (healthy) says “This is who I am;” criticism (unhealthy) says: This is who you should be.”

    All of this, especially cooperation and gift-giving, is the basis of effective relating. Repairs of harm (e.g., authentic apologies) are essential. Management of energy (Emails #25–#26) is mandatory.

    The essential stances are:

    • if one of us has a problem, it is our problem! It is simply where the pain surfaces.
    • the person who has the pain has the responsibility to initiate discussion.

    Coming next: Responding to Children