personhood, and its relationship to the body

 from tomorrow sex will be good again by katherine angel (verso)

"now the individual woman whom this risk discourse addresses is an idealized and vehemently confident sexual subject, one who knows herself, speaks directly and clearly, and refuses her own vulnerability. she manages risk through her self-expression. she uses her confident self-knowledge as armour for her own protection; she asserts her invulnerability as a way of keeping her vulnerability at bay. . . 

there is, of course, something satisfying about this rhetorical move; allying oneself to power, not weakness, is gratifying. but it also serves a protective function, one which comes with painful costs. . .  hardening oneself is often a necessary response to violence, or a necessary strategy in the face of it. perhaps the fear - the constant spectre - of rape does this to our thoughts, our ideas, too." (36)

"most men experience the inability to sustain an erection as distressing and humiliating, which is precisely the reason viagra was such a success for pfizer. the company also cannily sensed that the failure of desire in a man is oxymoronic; it is more humiliating, and perhaps more unthinkable, for a man to fail to experience subjective sexual desire than it is for a technical glitch to occur in the mechanics of arousal. what is a man, after all, without desire? masculinity is libido, appetite, excitement.

women - so writers, pick-up-artists, and christian grey tell us - are disconnected from, or dishonest about, the truth that their bodies 'scream' out. in the framing of viagra, in contrast, there was no possibility that a man's feelings are 'disconnected from' the truth his body tells us. on the contrary, his subjective sense of interest in sex, despite his impotence, is taken as the truth. it is he, not his body, that speaks the truth - and we believe him. personhood, and its relationship to the body, is different in men and women: men are authorities on themselves, while women are not." (84)

"sex can induce anxiety and defensiveness precisely because it is a realm in which we risk intense pleasure. relinquishing control can be so destabilizing that we want to short-circuit it, and defend, as berlant and edelman write, 'our putative sovereignty'. and here's the nub of things: sex, and desire, compromise our sense of sovereignty, of knowing ourselves, and of being in control." (102)

too much and not the mood

 from too much and not the mood by durga chew-bose [published by farrar, straus and giroux]

"being wowed by fruit or cake batter, i should add, yet fairly sure i'm okay with never seeing the grand canyon in person, ought to disqualify me from ever writing about wonder. then again, maybe that's why i'm drawn to wonder: it pays no attention to priorities." (12)

"i've come around to the conciliatory quality of untruths. memory fans out from imagination, and vice versa, and why not. memory isn't a well but an offshoot. it goes secretly. comes apart. deceives. it's guilty of repurposing the meaning of deep meaning and poking fun at what you've emotionalized.

and besides, it feels more covert to have no evidence. to believe that something you've experienced will build on your extent -- your extent as a person who sees things, and is moved by things -- without ever having to prove those things happened exactly as they happened. substantiating is grueling, monotonous. it's what life expects of you. memory is trust open to doubt." (31-32)

"i've been so young for so long and so old for longer -- so heart-wrinkled and naive all at once. so brow-furrowed but heart-open too; a detective. snooping yet easily sidetracked. i'll believe anything because i want to understand, yet understanding can sometimes organize itself like a series of false starts." (35)

"it's been months since i'd been to a museum, but watching this woman mechanically tie her hair was softly enormous." (57)

"going to the movies is the most public way to experience a secret. or, the most secretive way to experience the public." (191)

"i still confuse being misunderstood with feeling shame." (215)

"while my mother said, 'people don't change,' what she meant is, i'd estimate: i shouldn't try to change a person. that the effort exerted is often ineffectual and upsetting. nobody adjusts himself or herself, unless prompted first, by some interior gurgling. some deep mobilizing. urgency forms in the belly. and change, i've come to understand, rises up like nausea: the promise of relief is what makes it bearable. the body's clever ways for communicating shifts can make a person crazy, but also move a person toward life. 

in suggesting i shouldn't attempt to alter how this person from my past thinks or finds his focus, my mother also meant: be wary of overvaluing what he gives. be cautious of how proportioned my ability to love is with how impressionable i become. what moves him to create belongs discretely to him. what lights him up from inside and incites growth is what will ultimately specify his dimension. not me." (218-219)

more truthful lives

from everyone loves a good train wreck by eric wilson

"death's perpetual certitude inspires us to imagine more truthful lives. but death, by thwarting narcissism, also elevates our ethical imaginations. what does the egotist believe but that his existence is more important than those of others, that his self is of immense value and preeminently worthy of being nourished and perpetuated? death deflates this puffery, positing that all attempts to boost the "i" are ultimately vain. though you are unique on one level, on another you are the same as everyone else: you will suffer and die and return to the dirt.

shaking us out of narcissism, death calls us to merge with our fellows, to enter into a global community bound by hurt. it says: you are dying, and this is pain, and you would like to alleviate it in any way possible, and so now you apprehend the plight of all others, also moribund and agonized and in need of succor. obviously, when we experience this distress, we don't by necessity become aware of the miseries of others. we can hurt selfishly, convincing ourselves that our discomfort is worse than anyone else's and thus deserving of the most care. but hopefully we will, when we realize that our lot is common, suffer charitably, and so translate our own groaning into empathy with another's torment."

ambiguous loss

from ambiguous loss by pauline boss

"the outcomes of ptsd are also similar, though not identical, to outcomes of long-term ambiguous loss. both can result in depression, anxiety, psychic numbing, distressing dreams, and guilt. but ambiguous loss is unique in that the trauma goes on and on in what families describe as a rollercoaster ride, during which they alternate between hope and hopelessness. a loved one is missing, then sighted, then lost again. or a family member is dying, then goes into remission, then the illness returns again in full force. hopes are raised and dashed so many times that psychically people no longer react."

"learning to live with the ambiguity of divorce and remarriage requires a whole new set of skills. the first is to revise our perception of who our family is and who it is not. . . all this requires a second skill, the ability to let go of needing an absolute and precise definition of family. . . rather than weakening the family, such elasticity in family composition enhances resilience and flexibility. . . in a sense one has to abandon the concept of monogamy in order to make divorce and remarriage work because a first marriage does not simply stop when a second one starts. it is forever a part of the fabric of one's life."

"ambivalence can result from the ambiguity of not knowing who is included in the structure that is supposed to be one's family. conflicting impulses that may exist in the psyche are often a consequence of this uncertainty.

ambivalence is often intensified by deficiencies outside the family -- officials cannot find a missing person or medical experts cannot clearly diagnose or cure a devastating illness. because of the ambiguity, loved ones can't make sense out of their situation and emotionally are pulled in opposing directions -- love and hate for the same person; acceptance and rejection of their caregiving role; affirmation and denial of their loss. often people feel they must withhold their emotions and control their aggressive feelings because social norms dictate that becoming upset is inappropriate and will only bring further harm to the missing person, demented elder, or comatose child. this is the bind, especially for women, who are most often caught in caregiving or waiting roles.

mixed emotions are compounded when a separation involves the potential of irretrievable loss. when there is a chance that we will never see a loved one again, we protect ourselves from the prospect of losing that person by becoming ambivalent -- holding our spouse at arm's length, picking a fight with a parent, or shutting a sibling out even when he or she is still physically present. anticipating a loss, we both cling to our loved ones and push them away. we resist their leaving and at the same time want to be finished with the goodbye."

"if we are to turn the corner and cope with uncertain losses, we must first temper our hunger for mastery. this is the paradox. to regain a sense of mastery when there is ambiguity about a loved one's absence or presence, we must give up trying to find the perfect solution. we must redefine our relationship to the missing person. most important, we must realize that the confusion we are experiencing is attributable to the ambiguity rather than to something we did -- or neglected to do."

"for people who are accustomed to having some control over their lives, insight appears to help; such people want to understand 'why,' to penetrate the deeper meaning of an experience before they risk doing something different. but for others, insight is gained experientially, not cognitively. for them, the family therapist carl whitaker was right when he said, 'you only know what something is after you've gone past it.' people have to experience a phenomenon before they can understand it. what is clear to me is that we as clinicians must be more sensitive to individual differences in ways of understanding a situation if we are to avoid creating the very resistance we sometimes attribute to the people we are trying to help."

generosity & dignity

from beyond religion by the dalai lama

"a key element in biased feelings is what we can call 'attachment.' once, at a scientific conference in argentina, a mentor of my friend francisco varela told me that, as a scientist, he should not be too attached to his own field of research, as this might distort his ability to assess evidence objectively. hearing these words, i immediately felt they should also apply to the religious domain. for example, as a buddhist, i should strive not to develop excessive attachment toward buddhism. for to do so would hinder my ability to see the value of other faith traditions.

furthermore, when there is an element of attachment, our affection and concern for others are often dependent on the way those others relate to us. we feel concern for those who care for us and treat us well. but when our affection is dependent on the fulfillment of our own goals and expectations, which we project onto others, it will always be very fragile. so long as the others meet our expectations, everything is fine, but as soon as they do not, our feelings of affection can easily turn to resentment and even hatred."

"furthermore, although compassion arises from empathy, the two are not the same. empathy is characterized by a kind of emotional resonance -- feeling with the other person. compassion, in contrast, is not just sharing experience with others, but also wishing to see them relieved of their suffering. being compassionate does not mean remaining entirely at the level of feeling, which could be quite draining. after all, compassionate doctors would not be very effective if they were always preoccupied with sharing their patients' pain. compassion means wanting to do something to relieve the hardships of others, and this desire to help, far from dragging us further into suffering ourselves, actually gives us energy and a sense of purpose and direction. when we act upon this motivation, both we and those around us benefit still more."

"for many, it seems, there is a conflict between the principle of compassion, which implies forgiveness, and the exercise of justice, which requires punishment for wrongdoing. as they see it, the principle of justice or fairness, rather than that of compassion, must underpin any humanistic approach to ethics. to give priority to compassion and forgiveness, they argue, would allow perpetrators of harm to go unpunished and hand victory to the aggressors. the ethic of compassion, they say, amounts to little more than an ethic of victimhood, under which aggression always triumphs, wrongdoing is always forgiven, and the weak are defenseless. 

this objection rests, in my view, on a fundamental misunderstanding of what compassion entails in practice. nothing in the principle of compassion - the wish to see others relieved of suffering - involves surrendering to the misdeeds of others. nor does compassion demand that we meekly accept injustice. far from promoting weakness or passivity, compassion requires great fortitude and strength of character."

"compassion demands that we condemn wrong actions and oppose them with all means necessary, while at the same time forgiving and maintaining an attitude of kindness toward the perpetrators of those actions."

"an austrian economist named ernst fehr introduced an interesting concept that he calls 'altruistic punishment.' he illustrated the concept by means of a game of trust. the game is played in rounds and involves ten players. the players are given equal amounts of money and asked to contribute some of it to a collective fund. the experimenter explains that in each round the total amount the players contribute to this fund will be doubled and then redistributed equally among them. in the early rounds, most players are quite generous, making substantial contributions to the central fund, in the belief that others will do the same. this, i think, reflects the intuitively optimistic side of human nature. inevitably, however, there are some individuals who hold back and contribute nothing. in basic monetary terms, they see that what profits them most is to keep their share of what is given, without spending any money of their own. such people, i understand, are known in the language of economics as 'free riders.' as a result of their behavior, the other players start to feel they are being taken advantage of, and begin to contribute less and less to the central fund until finally, usually by about the tenth round, the entire system breaks down. at this stage, no one is willing to contribute, even though the experimenter's offer to double any money contributed is still in place. 

at this point the players are introduced to the notion of altruistic punishment, a mechanism by which they can punish the free riders. by contributing some of their own money to a nonrefundable punishment bin, they are able to force free riders to pay double that amount. so, for example, by spending three dollars on punishment, a player can make the free rider pay six dollars. as it turns out, once this system is introduced into the game, cooperation between players can be sustained more of less indefinitely. would-be free riders are deterred from taking advantage of others, and as a result the players continue to contribute to the central fund and everyone benefits. 

although this experiment was principally designed to test a theory in economics, i feel that it also contains a universally applicable message. it shows us that punishment can be exacted in a way that benefits everyone, including wrongdoers themselves. it illustrates the point that punishment which does not exact revenge, but rather corrects the wrongdoer, is in everyone’s interest.”

"in moments of anger or irritation, we may be rude to loved ones or aggressive toward others. later we may feel some remorse or regret, but when looking back on our outburst, we do not fail to distinguish between what we did and who we are. we naturally forgive ourselves and perhaps resolve not to do the same thing again. given that we find it so easy to forgive ourselves, surely we can extend the same courtesy to others! of course not everyone is able to forgive [themself], and this can be an obstacle. for such people, it may be important to practice compassion and forgiveness towards themselves, as the foundation for practicing compassion and forgiveness toward others."

"practicing awareness is not quite the same as listening to your conscience, however. in buddhist ethical theory there is no idea of the conscience as a distinct mental faculty. but being conscientious is still very important. it is described in terms of two key mental mental qualities, namely self-respect and consideration of others.

the first of these, self-respect, relates to having a sense of personal integrity, a self-image as a person who upholds certain values. so when we are tempted to indulge in harmful behavior, our self-image acts as a restraint, as we think 'this is unbecoming of me.' the second mental quality, consideration of others, pertains to having a healthy regard for others' opinions, especially for their potential disapproval. together, these two factors give us an added level of caution about doing wrong which can strengthen our moral compass."

"in the context of secular ethics, perhaps the antidote to destructive emotion with the most urgent and immediate relevance for our everyday lives is what is called soe pa in tibetan. though usually translated as patience, soe pa also includes the virtues of tolerance, forbearance, and forgiveness. what it really means is the ability to endure suffering. it entails not giving in to our instinctive urge to respond negatively to our difficulties. but soe pa has nothing to do with being either passive or impotent. it is not a case of tolerating something just because you do not have the ability to hit back. nor is it enduring injustice grudgingly, through gritted teeth. instead, genuine patience requires great strength. it is fundamentally the exercise of restraint based on mental discipline. there are three aspects of patience, or forbearance, to consider: forbearance toward those who harm us, acceptance of suffering, and acceptance of reality."

"the only effective antidote to greed is moderation and contentment.

of course, in extolling the benefits of simplicity and modesty, i am not suggesting that poverty is acceptable. on the contrary, poverty is a tremendous hardship, one that we must do all we can to end. in addition to making survival a struggle, poverty tends to disempower people and make them feel cowed or demoralized. in these ways, it makes the poor suffer greatly. on the personal level, however, the sooner we accept that riches alone do not bring happiness, and the sooner we learn to live with a sense of modesty, the better off we will be, especially with respect to our happiness. 

time and geography will always impose limits on how much wealth anyone can succeed in accruing in a single lifetime. given this natural limit, it seems wiser to set one's own limits through the exercise of contentment. in contrast, when it comes to acquiring mental riches, the potential is limitless. here, where there is no natural limit, it is appropriate not to be contented with what you have, but to constantly strive for more. unfortunately, most of us do the exact opposite. we are never quite satisfied with what we have materially, but we tend to be thoroughly complacent about our mental riches."

"it is useful to begin by reflecting on the harm we do to ourselves, even physically, when we succumb to temptation and bad habits. then we can also consider the harm that our bad habits inflict on others. it is easy to assume that our personal behavior and habits have no real effect on others, but this is seldom the case. suppose, for example, that one member of a family is addicted to drugs. although, of course, the other family members will not suffer the direct physical and mental ill effects of the drug, this does not mean they will not be harmed. in all likelihood they will be deeply afflicted by worry and concern, as well as by whatever other agonies and complications may accompany the situation. so, when considering the harm we inflict through a lack of self-discipline in our personal habits, we should always be mindful of those who care about our welfare and those whose welfare is intimately connected to our own.

it can also be useful to consider the harmful effects of a lack of self-discipline at a wider social level. in my view the problem of corruption, which is prevalent in so many parts of the world, is actually nothing but a failure of self-discipline. corruption is always a surrender to self-serving attitudes of greed, bias, and dishonesty. even the existence of a fair and just legal system becomes of little value when that system is paralyzed by corruption.

with the awareness that comes from contemplating the consequences of a lack of self-discipline, we can gradually develop a greater ability to resist temptation in our own life. eventually, with sustained practice, self-discipline will start to come naturally and will no longer require conscious effort and willpower. at that point, when restraint and moderation come naturally, we begin to feel the great sense of freedom that comes with self-mastery. this virtue of self-discipline is extolled in all the world's major religious traditions. . .

gaining mastery over our destructive propensities through the exercise of awareness and self-discipline at the levels of body, speech, and mind frees us from the inner turmoil that naturally arises when our behavior is at odds with our ideals. in place of this turmoil come confidence, integrity, and dignity"

"classical buddhist texts describe generosity in terms of four kinds of giving: first, the giving of material goods; second, the giving of freedom from fear, which means offering safety and security to others and dealing with them honestly; third, the giving of spiritual counsel, which entails offering comfort, concern, and advice to support others' psychological and emotional well-being; and fourth, the giving of love.

an important point to recognize at the outset is that the aim of any of these four kinds of giving should never be to ingratiate oneself with others, but should always be to benefit the recipient. if one's motivation is in any way connected to seeking one's own benefit, this is not genuine generosity.

classical buddhist texts also note the need to be discerning when engaging in acts of generosity. for example, in addition to ensuring the soundness of one's motivation, they discuss the need to be aware of specific contexts in which giving might not be appropriate. giving disproportionately, or giving to someone at a wrong time, might do the recipient more harm than good. and clearly there are certain items, such as poisons or weapons, which are, by their very nature, inappropriate for giving. if what we give is likely to be used to harm others, the principle of compassion dictates that we shun giving in that context. furthermore, these texts emphasize the need to be sure we are giving out of respect for the recipient, not out of a sense of superiority. a genuine act of generosity will honor the recipient's dignity."

twelve points

excerpt from the drama of the gifted child by alice miller

For some years now, there has been proof that the devastating effects of the traumatization of children take their inevitable toll on society – a fact that we are still forbidden to recognize. This knowledge concerns every single one of us and – if disseminated widely enough – should lead to fundamental changes in society; above all, to a halt in the blind escalation of violence. The following points are intended to amplify my meaning:

1. All children are born to grow, to develop, to live, to love, and to articulate their needs and feelings for their self-protection.
2. For their development, children need the respect and protection of adults who take them seriously, love them, and honestly help them to become oriented in the world.
3. When these vital needs are frustrated and children are, instead, abused for the sake of adults’ needs by being exploited, beaten, punished, taken advantage of, manipulated, neglected, or deceived without the intervention of any witness, then their integrity will be lastingly impaired.
4. The normal reactions to such injury should be anger and pain. Since children in this hurtful kind of environment are forbidden to express their anger, however, and since it would be unbearable to experience their pain all alone, they are compelled to suppress their feelings, repress all memory of the trauma, and idealize those guilty of the abuse. Later they will have no memory of what was done to them.
5. Disassociated from the original cause, their feelings of anger, helplessness, despair, longing, anxiety, and pain will find expression in destructive acts against others (criminal behavior, mass murder) or against themselves (drug addiction, alcoholism, prostitution, psychic disorders, suicide).
6. If these people become parents, they will then often direct acts of revenge for their mistreatment in childhood against their own children, whom they use as scapegoats. Child abuse is still sanctioned – indeed, held in high regard – in our society as long as it is defined as child-rearing. It is a tragic fact that parents beat their children in order to escape the emotions stemming from how they were treated by their own parents.
7. If mistreated children are not to become criminals or mentally ill, it is essential that at least once in their life they come in contact with a person who knows without any doubt that the environment, not the helpless, battered child, is at fault. In this regard, knowledge or ignorance on the part of society can be instrumental in either saving or destroying a life. Here lies the great opportunity for relatives, social workers, therapists, teachers, doctors, psychiatrists, officials, and nurses to support the child and to believe her or him.
8. Till now, society has protected the adult and blamed the victim. It has been abetted in its blindness by theories, still in keeping with the pedagogical principles of our great-grandparents, according to which children are viewed as crafty creatures, dominated by wicked drives, who invent stories and attack their innocent parents or desire them sexually. In reality, children tend to blame themselves for their parents’ cruelty and to absolve the parents, whom they invariably love, of all responsibility.
9. For some years now, it has been possible to prove, through new therapeutic methods, that repressed traumatic experiences of childhood are stored up in the body and, though unconscious, exert an influence even in adulthood. In addition, electronic testing of the fetus has revealed a fact previously unknown to most adults-that a child responds to and learns both tenderness and cruelty from the very beginning.
10. In the light of this new knowledge, even the most absurd behavior reveals its formerly hidden logic once the traumatic experiences of childhood need no longer remain shrouded in darkness.
11. Our sensitization to the cruelty with which children are treated, until now commonly denied, and to the consequences of such treatment will as a matter of course bring to an end the perpetuation of violence from generation to generation.
12. People whose integrity has not been damaged in childhood, who were protected, respected, and treated with honesty by their parents, will be – both in their youth and in adulthood – intelligent, responsive, empathic, and highly sensitive. They will take pleasure in life and will not feel any need to kill or even hurt others or themselves. They will use their power to defend themselves, not to attack others. They will not be able to do otherwise than respect and protect those weaker than themselves, including their children, because this is what they have learned from their own experience, and because it is this knowledge (and not the experience of cruelty) that has been stored up inside them from the beginning. It will be inconceivable to such people that earlier generations had to build up a gigantic war industry in order to feel comfortable and safe in this world. Since it will not be their unconscious drive in life to ward off intimidation experienced at a very early age, they will be able to deal with attempts at intimidation in their adult life more rationally and more creatively.

anticipatory grief

from the art of death by edwidge danticat

"we die containing a richness of lovers and tribes, tastes we have swallowed, bodies we have plunged into and swum up as if rivers of wisdom, characters we have climbed into as if trees, fears we have hidden in as if caves. i wish for all this to be marked on my body when i am dead. i believe in such cartography -- to be marked by nature, not just to label ourselves on a map like the names of rich men and women on buildings. we are communal histories, communal books." - michael ondaatje, the english patient

"i started reading c.s. lewis's a grief observed as part of my anticipatory grief. ('and grief still feels like fear. perhaps, more strictly, like suspense. or life waiting; just hanging about waiting for something to happen.')

each death frames previous deaths in a different light, and even deaths to come. during the time my mother was sick, i found myself crying uncontrollably over the deaths of people i barely knew. i attended a couple of funerals, of relatives of church members, or people from my husband's past, people i'd never even met. mid-sob, i would realize that i was imagining sitting in the front row where the family was sitting, but at my own mother's funeral. if it wasn't her coffin i was looking at, then why had i come? then i realized that i was rehearsing, so it wouldn't hurt so much when it was my turn."

"suicide was common among enslaved people who sought their freedom in the afterlife. they were transitions, spiritual journeys to places from their past, homes that had become idealized -- in their minds. suicide was also the most effective way of nullifying their designation as property. showing that they could decide whether to live or die was one way of affirming their humanity. . .

'dying voluntarily,' camus writes, 'implies that you have recognized, even instinctively, ... the uselessness of suffering.'

literature thrives on suffering. what creates tension and conflict in most works of fiction is some type of useful, even if initially seemingly senseless, suffering. and by useful i don't mean useful to the sufferer but to the writer of the story. we put our fictional characters through the wringer so that we might write (tell others) about it. if we are too afraid to let them suffer, or even die, then we might fail. we also write of our most painful experiences hoping that bringing these horrors to light might serve some greater purpose. our most humble, and perhaps most arrogant, wish is that our writing might help others feel less alone. our suffering, or our characters' suffering - be it internal or external, physical or psychological - is never wasted. it often directs us somewhere, even if inevitably to death."

invisible labor

from the afterlife by donald antrim

"most all of my mother's stories - the angry tales she told me, before and after she got sober - about her life with my father contained, i think, a notion of self-improvement as a process of gathering insights into other people: if we name the faults of those who have hurt us, we will be shielded from pain; if we can collect evidence to justify our anger, we will overcome shame; if we pity our betrayers, we will not have been betrayed, mishandled, misunderstood, or left abandoned. but what happens when the ordeal of abandonment is - as i think it was for my mother, and for me with her - life itself?"

"nonetheless i was attracted by my grandfather's patience, by the care he took with this broken house. it wasn't that i suddenly understood the value in a job well done. far from it. it was that for a moment - a romantic moment destined to resonate and grow in magnitude over the years - i hoped (and this may have been a fantasy that i wanted to have about the man) that my grandfather had something to pass on to me, to teach me. and i imagined (because it did not occur to me to ask him) that what he had to teach me concerned the beauty in labor that is invisible to others, work that seems superfluous but isn't, and that no one except the worker will see or even necessarily appreciate."

the buddha

excerpt from comfortable with uncertainty by pema chodron

when people decide to become buddhists, they participate in an official ceremony in which they take refuge in the three jewels - the buddha, the dharma, and the sangha. i've always thought it sounds theistic, dualistic, and dependent 'to take refuge' in something. however, the fundamental idea of taking refuge is that between birth and death we are alone. therefore taking refuge in the three jewels doesn't mean finding consolation in them. rather, it's a basic expression of our aspiration to leap out of the nest, whether we feel ready for it or not, to go through our puberty rites and be an adult with no hand to hold. taking refuge is the way that we begin cultivating the openness and the good-heartedness that allow us to be less and less dependent.

the buddha is the awakened one, and we too are buddhas. we are the awakened one - the one who continually leaps, who continually opens, who continually goes forward. being a buddha isn't easy. it's accompanied by fear, resentment, and doubt. but learning to leap into open space with our fear, resentment, and doubt is how we become fully human beings. there isn't any separation between samsara and nirvana, between the sadness and pain of the setting sun and the vision and power of the great eastern sun, as the shambhala teachings put it. one can hold them both in one's heart, which is actually the purpose of practice.

taking refuge in the buddha means that we are willing to spend our life reconnecting with the quality of being continually awake. every time we feel like taking refuge in a habitual means of escape, we take off more armor, undoing all the stuff that covers over our wisdom and our gentleness and our awake quality. we're not trying to be something we aren't; rather, we're reconnecting with who we are. so when we say, 'i take refuge in the buddha,' that means i take refuge in the courage and the potential of fearlessness, of removing all the armor that covers this awakeness of mine. i am awake; i will spend my life taking this armor off. nobody else can take it off because nobody else knows where all the little locks are, nobody else knows where it's sewed up tight, where it's going to take a lot of work to get that particular iron thread untied. you have to do it alone. the basic instruction is simple: start taking off that armor. that's all anyone can tell you. no one can tell you how to do it because you're the only one who knows how you locked yourself in there to start.

the world of our emotions

excerpt from beyond religion by the dalai lama

interestingly, in the classical buddhist science of mind in which i am trained, there is no concept of emotion as a single category that precisely corresponds to the understanding of emotion in contemporary western psychology. indeed, there is no word in either sanskrit or classical tibetan that exactly translates the word "emotion." instead, all mental states are understood to include both cognitive and feeling dimensions to some degree, and to contain five omnipresent mental factors, of which "feeling" is one. the other four are discrimination, volition, attention, and contact. so even a cognitive mental process as simple as counting from one to ten is regarded as having some kind of "feeling" or "feeling tone," which naturally is related to context.

there are also various ways of categorizing our emotional states. for example, in contemporary psychology the main distinction is often drawn between emotional states which, on the one hand, are pleasurable or joyful and are described as positive, and those which, on the other hand, are unpleasant or painful and are described as negative.

in classical buddhist psychology, however, the distinction is rather different. instead, the primary distinction is not between those states which are pleasurable and those that are painful, but between those that are beneficial and those that are harmful. "afflictive" mental states, known as nyonmong in tibetan or klesha in sanskrit, are those which undermine our long-term well-being, while "non-afflictive" mental states are those which have no such destructive impact.

given these different ways of categorizing emotional experience, it is important for readers not to confuse those emotions which are afflictive - that is to say, harmful to our long-term well-being - with those which simply don't feel good. of course, sometimes these overlap. feelings of hatred, for example, are both destructive and unpleasant to experience, but there can also be experiences which may not be pleasant but can nevertheless be beneficial, and in the same way there can be feelings that are pleasant which nevertheless can be destructive. for instance, feelings of sadness, grief, and remorse are certainly not pleasurable, but they need not in themselves be afflictive. when faced, say, with the death of a loved one, feelings of grief and sorrow may actually be quite constructive in helping us come to terms with our loss and move on with our lives. in the same way, emotions which may initially seem pleasurable can nevertheless be destructive at a deeper level by undermining our mental peace and stability. one example might be lust, or excessive longing for a particular object. such longing may in some sense seem pleasurable. but eventually obsessive craving will erode our capacity for genuine contentment and undermine our mental equilibrium, and should therefore be considered destructive.

in the context of secular ethics, this distinction between those mental states which undermine well-being - our own and that of others - and those which promote survival and well-being can be very useful, since it is directly relevant to our pursuit of happiness and an ethically sound way of life. given that people come from many different backgrounds and cultures, which states are to be considered destructive and which are to be considered beneficial may vary in particular cases. generally speaking, we can define destructive emotions as those states which undermine our well-being by creating inner turmoil, thereby undermining self-control and depriving us of mental freedom. within this, it is also possible to distinguish between two sub-categories: those emotional states that are destructive in themselves, such as greed, hatred, or malice; and those states, such as attachment, anger, or fear, which only become destructive when their intensity is disproportionate to the situation in which they arise.

from a biological perspective, all our basic emotions evidently have evolutionary purposes. for example, attachment helps bring us together and enables us to create bonds, anger helps us repel forces that are detrimental to our survival and well-being, fear enables us to respond to a threat with vigilance, and envy prompts us to compete with others so that we do not overlook our own needs. scientists have demonstrated that these basic emotions have clear biological dimensions. when we face an immediate danger, for example, and fear arises, extra blood rushes to our legs, and with increased adrenaline and our hearts beating faster, the emotion of fear literally prepares us to flee. in contrast, when anger arises, more blood goes to our arms, preparing us to confront the threat. so the important point to bear in mind is that these feelings are not destructive in themselves; they become destructive only when their intensity is out of proportion to the situation, or when they arise in situations that do not call for them.

as for attachment, which after all is the feeling that holds families and communities together, we do not usually think of it as destructive. however, when this basic emotion becomes excessive and wants to control its object, it does become destructive. this is true also of desire. in itself, desire is not destructive. after all, without desire, the human race would cease to exist altogether! in fact, desire is the emotion that drives many of our day-to-day activities -- from getting up in the morning to eating, working, and pursuing our immediate and long-term goals in life.

similarly, even anger is not always destructive. for example, in some situations strong compassion may give rise to an equally strong sense of outrage -- that is, anger -- about an injustice. again, feeling angry can, in the short term, make our minds more focused and give us an extra burst of energy and determination. in these ways, anger can, in certain situations, make us more effective in getting things done and in obtaining what we seek. however, when anger extends beyond this practical function, most of the energy it brings us is not helpful at all. since all of us have probably, at one time or another, been on the receiving end of other people's anger, we all have experience of its unpleasant consequences.

however, while anger may sometimes have a constructive element, hatred never does. hatred is always destructive.

like anger, fear is not destructive in every situation. fear makes us more attentive and guards us against danger. it is also a powerful motivating factor, forcing us to be cautious and to take care of our well-being. but when fear is obsessive, it can paralyze us and become a very destructive mental condition. furthermore, excessive fear gives rise to a persistent state of anxiety, which is harmful to our health. i therefore often distinguish between reasonable fear and unreasonable fear. the first kind is not only legitimate but actually necessary to our survival. if a mad dog comes running at us, we need to respond to this danger with fear. this is obvious. in contrast, unreasonable fear occurs when the source of threat is largely our own mental projection. we need to keep this kind of fear in check, for it is totally useless and often destructive. what we need to counter unreasonable fear is a better understanding of the situation at hand.

this dual aspect of emotions -- that all of them have destructive and nondestructive sides -- can also be seen in other mental states such as doubt, shame, grief, competitiveness, and even our sense of ego itself. doubt is the mental factor that enables us to inquire and seek out understanding. indeed, i always say that a dose of skepticism is quite healthy in that it opens our minds to questioning and new knowledge. however, when doubt becomes pathological it can paralyze us and prevent us from taking any decisive action. the same is true of shame. at the basic level, shame is an important social emotion which has a constructive function; nevertheless, when shame becomes extreme, it can lead to low self-regard and negative self-judgment, which are clearly not constructive. with respect to grief or sorrow, in some situations this emotion is constructive and has a positive effect. but when it becomes something like a habit of mind, divorced from any realistic cause, it may be destructive, as when it manifests as self-absorbed grief or as depression.

competitiveness, too, can be constructive, as when our competitive urge motivates us to strive to achieve something better or higher. however, when competitiveness acquires an aspect of wanting to put others down or hold them back so we can out-achieve them, it then becomes destructive.

in egoism, too, we can distinguish between two kinds. a strong sense of self can be constructive, the basis for generating self-confidence -- the state of mind that allows us to feel, "yes, i can do this." but another form of egoism is evident when, in pursuing our own self-interest, we become totally oblivious to others' welfare and even willing to exploit others to benefit ourselves. this type of egoism is clearly destructive.

so, when we are dealing with matters as subtle a human mental processes, it is important not to be too dogmatic. it is difficult or impossible to determine whether or not a given mental state is destructive without knowing its context. often we can make this determination only by taking into account the underlying motivation, the specific object of the emotion, the consequences of the emotion, and so on. in the area of the human mind, therefore, we should always maintain an attitude of open-mindedness, pragmatism, and flexibility.

(((())))

one feature that characterizes all destructive emotions is a tendency to distort our perception of reality. they cause us to narrow our perspective so that we fail to see a given situation in its wider context. for example, when we are feeling an extreme form of attachment -- such as intense desire, lust, or greed -- often we are projecting a level of attractiveness onto the object of our desire which far exceeds what is really there. we become blind even to quite obvious shortcomings and in our obsessive clinging we create a kind of insecurity in ourselves, a feeling that we need to obtain the object of our desire and are incomplete without it. excessive attachment tends also to involve a desire to control, which can be very suffocating when the object of that desire happens to be another person. because of this, extreme attachment is by nature quite unstable. one moment we may feel great affection for something or someone, but when, for example, our desire for control is thwarted, this feeling can easily turn to resentment or hatred.

a similar loss of perspective characterizes extreme of intense emotions of aversion, such as anger, hatred, contempt, or resentment. when we are gripped by intense anger, for example, the object of our rage will always appear one hundred percent negative, even though in moments of calm we may recognize that the same person or thing has many admirable qualities. the overly strong emotion causes us to lose our capacity for discernment. we cannot see the long- and short-term consequences of our actions, and as a result we are unable to distinguish between right and wrong. we literally, for a moment, become almost mad, incapable of acting in our own best interest. and then, after the event, when the emotion cools, how often we regret what we have done or said in anger!

. . .

the point about all these afflictive mental states is that, in one way or another, they obscure our vision by clouding our capacity for discernment. they make us incapable of rational judgment, and thus we might say they steal our minds.

(((())))

one helpful approach to understanding our destructive emotions is to view them as related families distinguished by the kind of underlying state of mind they involve. for example, as i have said, the emotions of the anger family, such as hatred, enmity, and malice, are characterized by an exaggerated repulsion, while those of the attachment family, such as greed, lust, and craving, are characterized by an equally exaggerated sense of attraction. the other main families of afflictive emotions -- envy, pride, and doubt -- involve mixtures of excessive attraction on the one hand (such as the excessive attachment to a deluded self-image in the case of pride) and excessive repulsion on the other (such as the excessive sense of enmity toward a rival in the case of envy). as we have already seen, in addition to this element of excessive revulsion or attraction or unhealthy mixtures of the two, all afflictive emotions are further characterized by an unrealistic or deluded perspective.

envy is a somewhat complex family of afflictions, since its root lies in attachment and attraction yet it also has a strong element of anger, hostility, and repulsion. recent scientific research on happiness has found that one of the primary sources of discontent in today's world, especially in the more affluent societies, is our human tendency to compare ourselves to those around us. fundamentally this comes down to the problem of envy.

the afflictive family of pride or conceit, which includes destructive attitudes such as arrogance, prejudice, and even obsessive or unrealistic embarrassment, also involves a mixture of attraction and repulsion: attraction, for example, to an unrealistic or deluded self-image, and repulsion or disdain toward anyone or anything that threatens that cherished self-image. this attachment to an inflated self-image, whether based on social status, accomplishment, or the circumstances of our birth, may prompt us to actions that are disrespectful of others, and such actions are destructive both to the welfare of others and to ourselves.

finally, there is the family of afflictive doubt, which encompasses such destructive emotions as anxiety and obsessive guilt. these are grounded in habitual fear and in unrealistic self-loathing, which are very damaging to our ability to be compassionate. emotions of the afflictive doubt family can therefore be highly detrimental to our own sense of well-being.

these then are the destructive emotions which i consider the main obstacles to human well-being -- not only our own individual well-being, but also that of those around us, and ultimately that of the very world we share. these emotions fundamentally undermine our capacity to put positive ethical values, such as compassion, into practice. only when we fully recognize the negative repercussions of such destructive emotions and expose their futility and impracticality as responses will we be able to go about tackling them effectively.

our inner development with regard to regulating our destructive emotions calls for a two-pronged approach. one the one hand, we must seek to reduce the impact of the destructive potentials that are inherent within us; on the other, we must seek to enhance the positive qualities that also naturally exist within us. this two-pronged approach to mental training is what i consider to be the heart of genuine spiritual practice.

(((())))

in order to go about dealing with these destructive emotions, it is first of all necessary to adopt a general attitude or stance toward them: a stance of opposition.

such a stance involves recognizing that the law of opposition -- whereby positives cancel out or neutralize negatives -- applies not just to the physical world but also to our inner or mental world. in the great wisdom traditions we find clear lessons both on the mental states that are to be tackled and on the need to cultivate and deploy their antidotes. if no opposing forces exist for our destructive emotions, then there is nothing we can do about them. however, if opposite, positive forces do exist, then they can become powerful antidotes. for example, the main antidote for anger is forbearance, for greed is contentment, for fear is courage, and for doubt is understanding.

to use life

from on the shortness of life by seneca

"people are frugal in guarding their personal property; but as soon as it comes to squandering time they are most wasteful of the one thing in which it is right to be stingy."

"how stupid to forget our mortality, and put off sensible plans to our fiftieth and sixtieth years, aiming to begin life from a point at which few have arrived!"

"finally, it is generally agreed that no activity can be successfully pursued by an individual who is preoccupied - not rhetoric or liberal studies - since the mind when distracted absorbs nothing deeply, but rejects everything which is, so to speak, crammed into it."

"the greatest obstacle to living is expectancy, which hangs upon tomorrow and loses today."

"it used to be a greek failing to want to know how many oarsmen ulysses had, whether the iliad or the odyssey was written first, and whether too they were by the same author, and other questions of this kind, which if you keep them to yourself in no way enhance your private knowledge, and if you publish them make you appear more a bore than a scholar. but now the romans too have been afflicted by the pointless enthusiasm for useless knowledge. recently i heard somebody reporting which roman general first did this or that: duilius first won a naval battle; curius dentatus first included elephants in a triumph. so far these facts, even if they do not contribute to real glory, at least are concerned with exemplary services to the state: such knowledge will not do us any good, but it interests us because of the appeal of these pointless facts."

"even their pleasures are uneasy and made anxious by various fears, and at the very height of their rejoicing the worrying thought steals over them: 'how long will this last?' this feeling has caused kings to bewail their power, and they were not so much delighted by the greatness of their fortune as terrified by the thought of its inevitable end."

"so it is inevitable that life will be not just very short but very miserable for those who acquire by great toil what they must keep by greater toil. they achieve what they want laboriously; they possess what they have achieved anxiously; and meanwhile they take no account of time that will never more return. new preoccupations take the place of the old, hope excites more hope and ambition more ambition. they do not look for an end to their misery, but simply change the reason for it."

"there will always be causes for anxiety, whether due to prosperity or to wretchedness. life will be driven on through a succession of preoccupations: we shall always long for leisure, but never enjoy it."

"every great and overpowering grief must take away the capacity to choose words, since it often stifles the voice itself."

"the body's needs are few: it wants to be free from cold, to banish hunger and thirst with nourishment; if we long for anything more we are exerting ourselves to serve our vices, not our needs."

"for to be afflicted with endless sorrow at the loss of someone very dear is foolish self-indulgence, and to feel none is inhuman callousness."

"he will live badly who does not know how to die well."

"inevitably the mind can cope more easily with the distress arising from disappointed longings if you have not promised it certain success."

"there is also another not inconsiderable source of anxieties, if you are too concerned to assume a pose and do not reveal yourself openly to anyone, like many people whose lives are false and aimed only at outward show. for it is agonizing always to be watching yourself in fear of being caught when your usual mask has slipped. nor can we ever be carefree when we think that whenever we are observed we are appraised; for many things happen to strip us of our pretensions against our will, and even if all this attention to oneself succeeds, yet the life of those who always live behind a mask is not pleasant or free from care. on the contrary, how full of pleasure is that honest and naturally unadorned simplicity that in no way hides its disposition! yet this life too runs a risk of being scorned if everything is revealed to everybody; for with some people familiarity breeds contempt. but there is no danger of virtue being held cheap as a result of close observation, and it is better to be despised for simplicity than to suffer agonies from everlasting pretence. still, let us use moderation here: there is a big difference between living simply and living carelessly."

hybridity

from new world border by guillermo gomez-peña

"i also oppose the old colonial dichotomy of first world / third world with the more pertinent notion of the fourth world -- a conceptual place where the indigenous peoples meet with the diasporic communities. in the fourth world, there is very little place for static identities, fixed nationalities, 'pure' languages, or sacred cultural traditions. the members of the fourth world live between and across various cultures, communities, and countries. and our identities are constantly being reshaped by this kaleidoscopic experience. the artists and writers who inhabit the fourth world have a very important role: to elaborate the new set of myths, metaphors, and symbols that will locate us within all of these fluctuating cartographies."

"people with social, racial, or economic privilege have an easier time crossing physical borders, but they have a much harder time negotiating the invisible borders of culture and race."

"in reaction to the transculture imposed from above, a new essentialist culture is emerging, one that advocates national, ethnic, and gender separatism in the quest for cultural autonomy, 'bio-regional identity,' and 'traditional values.' this tendency to overstate difference, and the unwillingness to change or exchange, is a product of communities in turmoil who, as an antidote to the present confusion, have chosen to retreat to the fictional womb of their own separate histories. even our so-called 'progressive' communities are retrenching to a fundamentalist stance."

"my version of the hybrid is cross-racial, polylinguistic, and multicontextual. from a disadvantaged position, the hybrid expropriates elements from all sides to create more open and fluid systems. hybrid culture is community-based yet experimental, radical but not static or dogmatic. it fuses 'low' and 'high' art, primitive and high-tech, the problematic notions of self and other, the liquid entities of north and south, east and west."

"the artist who understands and practices hybridity in this way can be at the same time an insider and an outsider, an expert in border crossings, a temporary member of multiple communities, a citizen of two or more nations. . . s/he assumes the role of nomadic chronicler, intercultural translator, or political trickster. s/he speaks from more than one perspective, to more than one community, about more than one reality. [their] job is to trespass, bridge, interconnect, reinterpret, remap, and redefine; to find the outer limits of [their] culture and cross them.

the presence of the hybrid denounces the faults, prejudices, and fears manufactured by the self-proclaimed center, and threatens the very raison d'etre of any monoculture, official or not."

"the borders keep multiplying. it just doesn't cut it anymore to pretend that the enemy is always outside. the separatist, sexist, racist, and authoritarian tendencies that we condemn others for perpetuating also exist within our own communities and within our own individual selves. we can't continue to hide behind the pretext that 'straight, white men,' or the all purpose 'dominant culture' are the source of all our problems. every community must face this fact: dominance is contextual. we all, at different times and in different contexts, enjoy some privileges over other people and perform the ever-changing roles of victim and victimizer, exploited and exploiter, colonizer and colonized."

"the absurd premise behind this belief is that if we are truly committed to our communities, we must be marginal, poor, angry, and anti-intellectual. . . this is contemporary america: a land of diversity where no one tolerates difference; a land of bizarre eclecticism where everyone must know their place."

"spanglish poetry reading in a public bathroom (cal arts, 1979)
this piece was another attempt to bring performance and language into unusual contexts, and to disrupt people's sense of the quotidian. for twenty-four hours, i sat on a toilet and read aloud epic poetry describing my journey to the united states. whoever happened to come into the bathroom - for whatever reason - experienced the piece. through this and other experiments of its kind, i became interested in the notion of performing for 'involuntary audiences.'"

"performing for the media: the cruci-fiction project (1994)
in early '94, roberto and i crucified ourselves for three hours on sixteen-foot-high crosses at rodeo beach (in front of san francisco's golden gate bridge). the piece was designed for the media, as a symbolic protest against the xenophobic immigration policies of california's governor pete wilson. inspired by the biblical myth of dimas and gestas (two petty thieves who were crucified alongside of jesus), roberto and i decided to dress as 'two contemporary public enemies of california': i was an 'undocumented bandido,' crucified by the INS [immigration and naturalization service], and roberto was a generic 'gang member,' crucified by the LAPD.

our audience of over 300 people each received a handout, asking them to 'free us from our martyrdom as a gesture of political commitment.' however, we had miscalculated their response. paralyzed by the melancholia of the image, it took them over three hours to figure out how to get us down. by then, my right shoulder had become dislocated and roberto had passed out. we were carried to a nearby bonfire and nurtured back to reality, while some people in the crowd rebuked those who were trying to help us, saying, 'let them die!'"

who is responsible for what

quotes from the dance of anger by harriet lerner

"anger is inevitable when we submit to unfair circumstances and when we protect another person at our own expense."

"feeling fuzzy-headed, inarticulate, and not so smart are common reactions experienced by women as we struggle to take a stand on our own behalf. it is not just anger and fighting that we learn to fear; we avoid asking precise questions and making clear statements when we unconsciously suspect that doing so would expose our differences, make the other person feel uncomfortable, and leave us standing alone."

"karen's emotional reaction to her boss's criticism obscured her thinking about what she wanted to ask and what she wanted to say. . . her tears and her willingness to let her boss play the role of advisor and confidant were, in part, her unconscious way of reinstating the status quo and apologizing for the 'separateness' inherent in her initial position of disagreement. . . karen had deep-seated fears of her own omnipotent destructiveness and the vulnerability of men. our very definitions of 'masculinity' and 'femininity' are based on the notion that women must function as nonthreatening helpmates and ego builders to men lest men feel castrated and weakened. . . karen was afraid of transforming her anger into concise statements of her thoughts and feelings lest she evoke that disturbing sense of separateness and aloneness that we experience when we make our differences known and encourage others to do the same. . . karen had a long-standing pattern of attempting to restore the togetherness of her relationships by crying, criticizing herself, becoming confused, or prematurely making peace. at the heart of the problem was the fact that karen needed to work harder at the task of clarifying her separateness and independence within her first family."

"more often, and more crucially, separation anxiety is based on an underlying discomfort with separateness and individuality that has its roots in our early family experience, where the unspoken expectation may have been that we keep a lid on our expressions of self. daughters are especially sensitive to such demands and may become far more skilled at protecting the relational 'we' than asserting the autonomous 'i.'"

 "learning to use our anger effectively requires some letting go -- letting go of blaming that other person whom we see as causing our problems and failing to provide for our happiness; letting go of the notion that it is our job to change other people or tell them how they should think, feel, behave. yet, this does not mean that we passively accept or go along with any behavior. in fact, a 'live-and-let-live' attitude can signal a de-selfed position, if we fail to clarify what is and is not acceptable or desirable to us in a relationship. the main issue is how we clarify our position."

"we are responsible for our own behavior. but we are not responsible for other people's reactions; nor are they responsible for ours. women often learn to reverse this order of things: we put our energy into taking responsibility for other people's feelings, thoughts, and behavior and hand over to others responsibility for our own."

"why is the question 'who is responsible for what?' such a puzzle for women? women in particular have been discouraged from taking responsibility for solving our own problems, determining our own choices, and taking control of the quality and direction of our own lives. as we learn to relinquish responsibility for the self, we are prone to blame others for failing to fill up our emptiness or provide for our happiness -- which is not their job. at the same time, however, we may feel responsible for just about everything that goes on around us. we are quick to be blamed for other people's problems and pain and quick to accept the verdict of guilty. we also, in the process, develop the belief that we can avert problems if only we try hard enough."

"the emotional rescuers of the world can have a terribly difficult time allowing others just to sit with their feelings and learn to handle them. . . when we do not put our primary emotional energy into solving our own problems, we take on other people's problems as our own. . . the problem arises when we are excessively reactive to other people's problems, when we assume responsibility for things that we are not responsible for, and when we attempt to control things that are not in our control. when we overfunction for another individual, we end up very angry, and in the process, we facilitate the growth of no one."

types

from the dance of anger by harriet lerner

PURSUERS

• react to anxiety by seeking greater togetherness in a relationship
• place a high value on talking things out and expressing feelings, and believe others should do the same
• feels rejected and take it personally when someone close to them wants more time and space alone or away from the relationship
• tend to pursue harder and then coldly withdraw when an important person seeks distance
• may negatively label themselves as 'too dependent' or 'too demanding' in a relationship
• tend to criticize their partner as someone who can't handle feelings or tolerate closeness

 DISTANCERS

• seeks emotional distance or physical space when stress is high
• consider themselves to be self-reliant and private persons -- more 'do-it-yourselfers' than help-seekers
• have difficulty showing their needy, vulnerable, and dependent sides
• receive such labels as 'emotionally unavailable,' 'withholding,' 'unable to deal with feelings' from significant others
• manage anxiety in personal relationships by intensifying work-related projects
• may cut off a relationship entirely when things get intense, rather than hanging in and working it out
• opens up most freely when they are not pushed or pursued

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

UNDERFUNCTIONERS

• tend to have several areas where they just can't get organized
• become less competent under stress, thus inviting others to take over
• tend to develop physical or emotional symptoms when stress is high in either the family or the work situation
• may become the focus of family gossip, worry, or concern
• earn such labels as the 'patient,' the 'fragile one,' the 'sick one,' the 'problem,' the 'irresponsible one'
• have difficulty showing their strong, competent side to intimate others

OVERFUNCTIONERS

• know what's best not only for themselves but for others as well
• move in quickly to advise, rescue, and take over when stress hits
• have difficulty staying out and allowing others to struggle with their own problems
• avoid worrying about their own personal goals and problems by focusing on others
• have difficulty sharing their own vulnerable, underfunctioning side, especially with those people who are viewed as having problems
• may be labeled the person who is 'always reliable' or 'always together'

countermoves

quotes from the dance of anger by harriet lerner

"our anger may be a signal that we are doing more and giving more than we can comfortably do or give. or our anger may warn us that others are doing too much for us, at the expense of our own competence and growth."

"if feeling angry signals a problem, venting anger does not solve it. venting anger may serve to maintain, and even rigidify, the old rules and patterns in a relationship, thus ensuring that change does not occur."

"feelings of depression, low self-esteem, self-betrayal, and even self-hatred are inevitable when we fight but continue to submit to unfair circumstances, when we complain but live in a way that betrays our hopes, values and potentials, or when we find ourselves fulfilling society's stereotype of the bitchy, nagging, bitter, or destructive woman."

"our society cultivates guilt feelings in women such that many of us still feel guilty if we are anything less than an emotional service station to others."

"the negative words and images that depict women who do speak out are more than just cruel sexist stereotypes; they also hint at a painful reality. words like 'nagging,' 'complaining,' and 'bitching' are words of helplessness and powerlessness, which do not imply even the possibility of change. they are words that reflect the 'stuck' position that characterizes our lives when a great deal of emotion is flying around and nothing is really changing."

"it is those closest to us who often have the greatest investment in our staying the same, despite whatever criticisms and complaints they may openly voice."

"de-selfing means that too much of one's self (including one's thoughts, wants, beliefs, and ambitions) is 'negotiable' under pressures from the relationship. . . the partner who is doing the most sacrificing of self stores up the most repressed anger and is especially vulnerable to becoming depressed."

"it is the underfunctioning of one individual that allows for the overfunctioning of the other. . . underfunctioners and overfunctioners provoke and reinforce each other's behavior, so that the seesaw becomes increasingly hard to balance over time. the more [one person] avoids sharing their own weaknesses, neediness, and vulnerability, [the other] may experience and express more than their share. the more [one person] avoids showing their competence and strength, the more [the other] will have an inflated sense of their own. and if the underfunctioning partner starts looking better, the overfunctioning partner will start looking worse."

"whenever one person makes a move to rebalance the seesaw, there is a countermove by the other party."

"we are good at anticipating other people's reactions, and we are experts at protecting others from uncomfortable feelings. this is a highly developed social skill that is all too frequently absent in men. if only we could take this very same skill and redirect it inward in order to become experts on our own selves."

"when the 'togetherness force' is overriding, a lot of energy goes into trying to 'be for' the other person, and trying to make the other person think or behave differently. instead of taking responsibility for our own selves, we tend to feel responsible for the emotional well-being of the other person and hold the other person responsible for ours."

"we all need to have both an 'i' and a 'we' that nourish and give meaning to each other. there is no formula for the 'right' amount of separateness and togetherness for all couples or even for the same couple over time. each member of a couple is constantly monitoring the balance of these two forces, automatically and unconsciously making moves to restore more separateness (when anxiety about fusion sets in) or more togetherness (when anxiety about unrelatedness sets in). the balance of these two forces is constantly in motion in every couple. one common 'solution' or 'division of labor' that couples unconsciously arrange is that [one] will express the wish for 'togetherness'; [the other], the wish for 'separateness.'"

"the dilemma is that we may unconsciously be convinced that our important relationships can survive only if we continue to remain one down. to do better -- to become clearer, to act stronger, to be more separate, to take action on our own behalf -- may be unconsciously equated with a destructive act that will diminish and threaten our partner, who might then retaliate or leave."

"fighting and blaming is sometimes a way both to protest and to protect the status quo when we are not quite ready to make a move in one direction or another."

"most of us want the impossible. we want to control not only our own decisions and choices but also the other person's reactions to them."

"repeating the same old fights protects us from the anxieties we are bound to experience when we make a change. ineffective fighting allows us to stop the clock when our efforts to achieve greater clarity become too threatening. sometimes staying stuck is what we need to do until the time comes when we are confident that it is safe to get unstuck."

"emotional pursuers are persons who reduce their anxiety by sharing feelings and seeking close emotional contact. emotional distancers are persons who reduce their anxiety by intellectualizing and withdrawing. . . what is the common outcome of this classic scenario? after this escalating dance of pursuit and withdrawal proceeds for some time, [the pursuer] goes into what therapists call 'reactive distance.' feeling rejected and fed up, they at last proceed to go about their own business. [the distancer] now has even more space than they are comfortable with, and in time moves closer to the other in the hope of making contact. but it is too late. "where were you when i needed you!" the [pursuer] says angrily. at this point, distancer and pursuer might even reverse their roles for a while.

emotional pursuers protect emotional distancers. by doing the work of expressing the neediness, clingingness, and wish for closeness for both partners, pursuers make it possible for distancers to avoid confronting their own dependency wishes and insecurities. as long as one person is pursuing, the other has the luxury of experiencing a cool independence and a need for space."

the third commitment

quotes from living beautifully with uncertainty and change by pema chodron

the three commitments:

1- committing to not cause harm
2- committing to take care of one another
3- committing to embrace the world just as it is

"it's only when the fearful 'i' is not pushing and pulling at life, freaking out and grasping at it, that full engagement is possible. we become more fully engaged in our lives when we become less self-absorbed. as we have less and less allegiance to our small, egocentric self, less and less allegiance to a fixed notion of who we are or what we're capable of doing, we find we also have less and less fear of embracing the world just as it is."

"in the charnel ground, we meet both wretchedness and splendidness -- the totality of our experience as human beings -- and discover that we need both to be a genuine warrior. the splendidness of life lifts our spirits, and we go forward with enthusiasm. when we hear pleasant news or meet with inspiring teachers, when we enjoy the company of good friends or find ourselves in beautiful places, when we feel that everything is ideal and hunky-dory, then naturally we feel joyful and at ease. but should all of this good fortune make us arrogant or complacent or indifferent to the suffering of others, wretchedness humbles us. it cuts through any sense of superiority or entitlement, through any delusions that comfort is somehow our birthright. on the other hand, if there is too much wretchedness - too much misery and despair - it makes us want to collapse and never get out of bed. so the sweetness of life and the harshness of life complement each other. splendidness provides vision, and wretchedness grounds us. just when we're ready to give up, a kind word or the sight of the ocean or the sound of beautiful music can save the day. just when we're riding high and becoming arrogant, a sudden misfortune or bad news from the doctor or the unexpected death of a loved one can abruptly bring us down to earth and reconnect us with our tender heart.

when life is uncomfortable, when we're highly agitated and don't know where to turn, that's the most difficult time to stay present. but that's also the time when doing so can be the most rewarding. it's a challenge to practice staying present when we're despondent or distressed or overwhelmed, when our backs are against the wall. but right then, when we're in a tight spot, we have the ideal situation for practice. we can do something radical: accept suffering as part of our home ground, part of our enlightened mandala, and relate to it straightforwardly. we don't awaken in some paradise where the circumstances are made to order. we awaken in the charnel ground."

"wanting to escape pain is the reason that many people start on a spiritual path. it can be a good motivator, because it drives us to look for answers. the problem is, most of us spend our entire life going from one promise of relief to another, never staying with the pain long enough to learn anything from it.

but sooner or later, we all encounter intense emotion that we can't outrun. it may be fear that arises in a truly disturbing situation or the feeling of being very hooked and about to be swept away. one sign that you've already started charnel-ground practice, whether you realize it or not, is if you perk up when strong feelings come alone and then, instead of trying to get rid of them, you move toward them and get curious. when you're open to inviting difficult emotions to stick around long enough to teach you something, then you're already in the frame of mind to do this practice."

"if we're doing this practice in earnest, the emotions and habitual patterns we're working with can hit us with such force that it takes everything in us not to run. sometimes i felt like odysseus, lashed to the mast so i wouldn't follow the sirens' song. it was as if a giant magnet were trying to drag me away from staying present. i would just begin to sit with an intense feeling when a little voice in my head would start saying things like 'you'd better check to see if you turned off the stove' and 'maybe this is bad for your heart.' our old habits are worthy opponents. even if we're eager to have everything fall apart so we can do charnel-ground practice, when we actually do it, it puts us through a lot. we need strong motivation to stick with it because the desire to escape is so compelling."

the second commitment

quotes from living beautifully with uncertainty and change by pema chodron

the three commitments:

1- committing to not cause harm
2- committing to take care of one another
3- committing to embrace the world just as it is

"taking the . . . vow to help others implies that instead of holding our own individual territory and defending it tooth and nail, we become open to the world that we are living in. it means we are willing to take on greater responsibility, immense responsibility. in fact, it means taking a big chance."- chogyam trungpa rinpoche

"compassion is threatening to the ego. we might think of it as something warm and soothing, but actually it's very raw. when we set out to support other beings, when we go so far as to stand in their shoes, when we aspire to never close down to anyone, we quickly find ourselves in the uncomfortable territory of 'life not on my terms.'"

"opening the door reflects our intention to remove our armor, to take off our mask, to face our fears. it is only to the degree that we become willing to face our own feelings that we can really help others. so we make a commitment that for the rest of our lives, we'll train in freeing ourselves from the tyranny of our own reactivity, our own survival mechanisms, our own propensities to be hooked."

"we probably learn more from our mistakes than from our successes. we have to recognize when something doesn't work and - this is important - not take it personally. instead, we can follow chogyam trungpa's suggestion: live your life as an experiment. adopt an attitude of 'i'm not sure what will help in this situation, but i'm going to experiment and try this.'"

"the ending of a previously close relationship throws us right into the midst of fundamental uncertainty - and that definitely hurts. we've met our edge. we find ourselves caught up in behaviors we assumed we had outgrown years ago. sometimes just the thought of the person makes us close down. but often it is a seemingly irresolvable relationship that teaches us the most, once we're willing to be vulnerable and honest, once we're willing to connect with what chogyam trungpa called 'the genuine heart of sadness.'"

the first commitment

quotes from living beautifully with uncertainty and change by pema chodron

the three commitments:

1- committing to not cause harm
2- committing to take care of one another
3- committing to embrace the world just as it is

"the first commitment is about refraining from speech and actions that are harmful to ourselves and others. it liberates us by making us far more aware of what we're feeling, so that whenever the urge to lie or slander or take something that isn't given to us comes up - whenever we have the urge to act out our desires or aggression, or escape in any form - we refrain."

"refraining from harmful speech and action is outer renunciation; choosing not to escape the underlying feelings is inner renunciation. the precepts are a device to put us in touch with the underlying uneasiness, the fundamental quality of being alive. working with this feeling and the neurosis it triggers is inner renunciation."

"there's a practice in buddhism called sojong that gives us an opportunity to reflect on where we are in terms of refraining and, when we feel that we've really made a mess of things, to put that behind us and start anew. traditionally, sojong takes place twice a month, on the full and new moon days. the day before, each person reviews the preceding two weeks and reflects: what have i done with my body? what have i done with my speech? what about my mind: is it steady or all over the place and never present? as much as possible, we explore these questions without self-criticism or blame. . .

sojong itself is a little like the fourth and fifth steps in a twelve step program, which call for making 'a searching and fearless' self-inventory, recognizing where we've gone off course, then sharing this with another person. sojong is a kind of antiguilt process that allows us to assess ourselves honestly, acknowledge what we've done and where we are, then let go of self-judgment and move on. . .

you don't have to say this aloud to a group or another person, but most people find it easier to let go of self-judgment if they share their observations with someone else - a friend, perhaps, or a spiritual adviser. however you do it, the aim is to be fully honest and, at the same time, to shed feelings of guilt."

"nobody's perfect in keeping the commitment to not harm. but still, students often ask me, 'how can i make this vow with any integrity? if i'm going to break it at all, then what's the point?' patrul rinpoche, a buddhist master who lived in the eighteenth century, basically said there is no way to escape harming. he devotes an entire section of his book the words of my perfect teacher to all the ways we cause harm: countless being suffer from making the clothes we wear, from bringing us the food we eat. beings suffer even when we walk. 'who is not guilt of having crushed countless tiny insects underfoot?' he asks. our situation is inescapable because of our interconnectedness with all things. what makes the difference is our intention to not harm. on an everyday level, the intention to not harm means using our body, our speech, and our mind in such a way that we don't knowingly hurt people, animals, birds, insects - any being - with our actions or words."

"sakyong mipham recommends that as we sit down to meditate, we contemplate our intention for the session. our intention might be to strengthen the natural stability of mind by training in continually coming back to the body, to our mood right now, and to our environment. or our intention might be to make friends with ourselves, to be less stern and judgmental as we meditate, so we might train in noticing our tone of voice when we label and lightening up and not being too tight or goal oriented in our practice."

"it's a tricky business - not rejecting any part of yourself at the same time that you're becoming acutely aware of how embarrassing or painful some of those parts are. what most of us have been doing is gearing our lives toward avoiding unpleasant feelings while clinging to whatever we think will make us feel good and feel secure. from a conventional point of view, this makes perfect sense. but from the vantage point of remaining with our direct experience, the vantage point of opening to the tentativeness of life, this strategy is self-defeating, the very thing that keeps us stuck.

there's an exercise that can help us reflect on this knee-jerk tendency to cling to what makes us feel good and push away what makes us feel bad:

sit quietly for a few minutes and become mindful of your breath as it goes in and out. then contemplate what you do when you're unhappy or dissatisfied and want to feel better. even make a list if you want to. then ask yourself: does it work? has it ever worked? does it soothe the pain? does it escalate the pain? if you're really honest, you'll come up with some pretty interesting observations."

"pleasure and pain drive us all the time. the attraction is simple: we want pleasure; we don't want pain. our attachment to them is very strong, very visceral at either extreme. we can get that clenching-in-the-gut feeling of being hooked both when we crave something - when we're consumed with wanting or needing - and when we're averse to something and try to push it away."

"this has been going on through the ages. they criticize the silent ones. they criticize the talkative ones. they criticize the moderate ones. there is no one in the world that escapes criticism. there never was and never will be, nor is there now, the wholly criticized or the wholly approved." [shakyamuni buddha]

the gifted child part three

quotes from the gifted child by alice miller

chapter 3: the vicious circle of contempt

"what child has never been laughed at for their fears and been told, 'you don't need to be afraid of a thing like that'? what child will then not feel shamed and despised because they could not assess the danger correctly? and will that little person not take the next opportunity to pass these feelings on to a still smaller child? such experiences come in all shades and varieties. common to them all is the sense of strength it gives the adult, who cannot control their own fears, to face the weak and helpless child's fear and be able to control fear in another person."

"for the person who, as a child, had to hide her true feelings from herself and others, this first step into the open produces much anxiety, yet she feels a great need to throw over her former restraints. the first experiences do not always lead to freedom but quite often lead instead to repetition of the person's childhood situation, in which she will experience feelings of agonizing shame and painful nakedness as an accompaniment to her genuine expressions of her true self. with the infallibility of a sleepwalker, she will seek out those who, like her parents (though for different reasons), certainly cannot understand her. because of her blindness caused by repression, she will try to make herself understandable to precisely these people - trying to make possible what cannot be."

"during her therapy, linda, forty-two, fell in love with an older, intelligent, and sensitive man, who nevertheless had to ward off and reject everything - except for eroticism - he could not understand intellectually, including psychotherapy. yet he was the one to whom she wrote long letters trying to explain the path she had taken in her therapy up to this point. she succeeded in overlooking all signals of his incomprehension and increased her efforts even more, until at last she was forced to recognize that she had again found a father substitute and that this was the reason she had been unable to give up her hopes of at last being understood. this awakening brought her agonizingly sharp feelings of shame, which lasted for a long time.

one day she was able to feel this shame deeply in the session and said: 'i feel so ridiculous, as if i've been talking to a wall and expecting it to answer, like a silly child.' i asked: 'would you think it ridiculous if you saw a child who had to tell their troubles to a wall because there was no one else available?' the despairing sobbing that followed my question gave linda access to a part of her former reality that was pervaded by boundless loneliness. it also eventually freed her from her agonizing, self-destructive, repetitive feelings of shame.

only much later could linda dare to connect this experience of 'a wall' with her own childhood history. for a time this woman, who was normally capable of expressing herself so clearly, described everything in such an extraordinarily complicated way and at such a precipitate speed that i couldn't fully understand it. she went through moments of sudden hate and rage, reproaching me for indifference and lack of understanding. linda could hardly recognize me anymore, although i had not changed. in her estranged feelings she now discovered the estrangement of her mother, who had spent the first year of her life in an orphanage and could not give her daughter any tenderness or closeness. linda had known that for a long time, but it was only intellectual knowledge. moreover, compassion for her mother's sad life history had hindered linda from feeling her own plight, the image of the poor mother had blocked her feelings.

it was not until she could make her reproaches, first toward me and then toward her mother, that the core of her despair became conscious: her lifelong search for closeness and contact that had never been met in infancy and had become repressed. repressed memories of the shy, distant, absent mother produced in the daughter the feeling of a wall, one that later separated her from other people in such a painful way. she was finally released from a compulsion to repeat that had consisted of constantly seeking a partner who had no understanding of her and then allowing herself to settle into an arrangement where she would feel helplessly dependent on him."

"an infant must learn that there are things about them for which the mother has 'no use.' she will expect her child to control their bodily functions as early as possible. on the conscious level the parents apparently want the infant to do so in order not to offend against society, but unconsciously they are protecting their own repression dating from the time when they were themselves small children afraid of 'offending'."

"many people suffer all their lives from this oppressive feeling of guilt, the sense of not having lived up to their parents' expectations. this feeling is stronger than any intellectual insight they might have, that it is not a child's task or duty to satisfy the parents' needs. no argument can overcome these guilt feelings, for they have their beginnings in life's earliest period, and from that they derive their intensity and obduracy. they can be resolved only slowly, with the help of a revealing therapy.

probably the greatest of wounds - not to have been loved just as one truly was - cannot heal without the work of mourning. it can be either more or less successfully resisted and covered up (as in grandiosity and depression), or constantly torn open again in the compulsion to repeat. we encounter this latter possibility in obsessive behavior and in perversion, where the mother's (or father's) scornful reactions to the child's behavior have stayed with them as repressed memory, stored up in their body."

"as the child grows up, they cannot cease living their own truth and expressing it somewhere, perhaps in complete secrecy. in this way a person can have adapted completely to the demands of their surroundings and can have developed a false self, but in their perversion of their obsessions they still allow a portion of their true self to survive - in torment. and so the true self lives on, but underground, in the same conditions as the child once did with their disgusted mother, whose memory in the meantime they have repressed."

"what is unconscious cannot be abolished by proclamation or prohibition. one can, however, develop sensitivity toward recognizing it and begin to experience it consciously, and thus eventually gain control over it. a mother cannot truly respect her child as long as she does not realize what deep shame she causes them with an ironic remark, intended only to cover her own uncertainty. indeed, she cannot be aware of how deeply humiliated, despised, and devalued her child feels, if she herself has never consciously suffered these feelings, and if she tries to fend them off with irony."

"every child forms his first image of what is 'bad' quite concretely, by what is forbidden - by their parents' prohibitions, taboos, and fears. the child will have a long way to go before they can free themselves what what they have believed to be 'badness' in themselves. they will then no longer regard it as 'depraved' and 'wicked,' but as a comprehensible latent reaction to injuries they had to repress when a child. as an adult, they can discover the causes and free themselves from this unconscious reaction. they also have the opportunity to apologize for what they have done to others out of ignorance, blindness, and confusion, and doing so will help them to avoid repetitions of acts they no longer wish to continue."

"often a child's very gifts (their great intensity of feeling, depth of experience, curiosity, intelligence, quickness - and their ability to be critical) will confront their parents with conflicts that they have long sought to keep at bay by means of rules and regulations. these regulations must then be rescued at the cost of the child's development. all this can lead to an apparently paradoxical situation when parents who are proud of their gifted child and who even admire them are forced by their own suppression to reject, suppress, or even destroy what is best, because truest, in that child."

"to put it another way: many people suffering from severe symptoms are very intelligent. they read in newspapers and books about the absurdity of the arms race, about exploitation through capitalism, diplomatic insincerity, the arrogance and manipulation of power, submission of the weak, and the impotence of individuals - and they have given thought to these subjects. what they do not see, because they cannot see them, are the absurdities enacted by their own mothers when they were still tiny children."

"political action can be fed by the unconscious rage of children who have been misused, imprisoned, exploited, cramped, and drilled. this rage can be partially discharged in fighting 'enemies,' without having to give up the idealization of one's own parents."

"therapeutic effects (in the form of temporary improvement) may be achieved if a strict conscience can be replaced by the therapist's or the group's more tolerant one. the aim of therapy, however, is not to correct the past, but to enable the patient to confront their own history and to grieve over it. the patient has to discover early memories within themselves and must become consciously aware of their parents' unconscious manipulation and contempt, so that they can free themselves from this."

"the contempt shown by many disturbed people may have various forerunners in their life history, but the function all expressions of contempt have in common is the defense against unwanted feelings. contempt simply evaporates, having lost its point, when it is no longer useful as a shield - against the child's shame over their desperate, unreturned love; against their feeling of inadequacy; or above all against their rage that their parents were not available. once we are able to feel and understand the repressed emotions of childhood, we will no longer need contempt as a defense against them. on the other hand, as long as we despise the other person and over-value our own achievements ('he can't do what i can do'), we do not have to mourn the fact that love is not forthcoming without achievement. nevertheless, if we avoid this mourning it means that we remain at bottom the one who is despised, for we have to despise everything in ourselves that is not wonderful, good, and clever. thus we perpetuate the loneliness of childhood: we despise weakness, helplessness, uncertainty - in short, the child in ourselves and in others."

"contempt as a rule will cease with the beginning of mourning for the irreversible that cannot be changed, for contempt, too, has in its own way served to deny the reality of the past. it is, after all, less painful to think that the others do not understand because they are too stupid. then one can make efforts to explain things to them, and the illusion of being understood ('if only i can express myself properly') can be maintained."

"then there are the people who can seem very friendly, if a shade patronizing, but in whose presence one feels as if one were nothing. they convey the feeling that they are the only ones who exist, the only one who have anything interesting or relevant to say. the others can only stand there and admire them in fascination, or turn away in disappointment and sorrow about their own lack of worth, unable to express themselves in these persons' presence. these people might be the children of grandiose parents, whom they as children had no hope of emulating; but later, as adults, they unconsciously pass on this atmosphere to those around them.

quite a different impression will be given by those people who, as children, were intellectually far beyond their parents and therefore admired by them, but who also therefore had to solve their own problems alone. these people, who give us a feeling of their intellectual strength and will power, also seem to demand that we, too, ought to fight off any feeling of weakness with intellectual means. in their presence one feels one can't be recognized as a person with problems - just as they and their problems were unrecognized by their parents, for whom they always had to be strong.

keeping those examples in mind, it is easy to see why some professors or writers who are quite capable of expressing themselves clearly will use language that is so convoluted and arcane that their students of readers must struggle angrily to acquire ideas that they then can make little use of. the students may well experience feelings similar to those their teacher was once forced to suppress in relation to his parents. if the students themselves become teachers one day, they will then have the opportunity to hand on this unusable knowledge like a priceless jewel (because it has cost them so much).

it greatly aids the success of therapeutic work when we become aware of our parents' destructive patterns at work within us. but to free ourselves from these patterns we need more than an intellectual awareness: we need an emotional confrontation with our parents in an inner dialogue."

"consciously experiencing our legitimate emotions is liberating, not just because of the discharge of long-held tensions in the body but above all because it opens our eyes to reality (both past and present) and frees us of lies and illusions. it gives us back repressed memories and helps dispel attendant symptoms. it is therefore empowering without being destructive. repressed emotion can be resolved as soon as it is felt, understood, and recognized as legitimate. being detached from it becomes possible and this is totally different from repression."

"a person who can honestly and without self-deception deal with their feelings has no need to disguise them with the help of ideologies. . . individuals who do not want to know their own truth collude in denial with society as a whole, looking for a common 'enemy' on whom to act out their repressed rage."