You’re strong. You’re thick-skinned. You don’t take it personally when someone vents emotional distress on you.

These are admirable, useful qualities. Having thick skin makes it easier for people to be themselves with you, and for you to be with other people. It allows you to hear the message beneath the emotion, protecting you from the outburst. If you didn’t have thick skin, you could be emotionally overwhelmed or your ego could be crushed by the anger or criticism of others.

But everything has two sides. The potential negative side of being thick-skinned is being too permissive and accepting verbal abuse. The worst-case scenario is your thick skin keeps you in relationships that devolve into physical abuse. It’s important to consider when a strength has become a weakness.

Here are some questions worth asking when you feel your thick skin being tested:

1. Is the person displacing anger on you? An example of displacement is when a person is angry at a coworker but yells at the dog. It usually occurs when people can’t express anger at the person or entity they’re actually angry at: a boss, a parent, an unjust society. It happens sometimes, but if it happens often, you may have become the dumping ground for another person’s anger.
   [fat_widget_right]
2. Is the person’s expression of anger or criticism an attempt to repair a problem? Anger can alert us to the fact we’re unhappy about something. An expression of these feelings can be an attempt to improve your relationship. When a person’s expression of anger or criticism is controlled and respectful and the goal is improvement, a thick skin is valuable in helping you remain open to hearing what the other person is trying to communicate.
3. Is the person’s anger or criticism an attempt to hurt you? Instead of trying to improve the relationship, sometimes the goal is to hurt you. It’s never OK for someone to try to hurt you. Your thick skin could be detrimental if it allows you to ignore hurtful behavior.
4. Is the anger mild or high intensity? The intensity of anger runs on a spectrum from calm, respectful communication to red-faced shouting that is disrespectful and threatening. Your strength is a weakness if it’s allowing you to tolerate dangerous and disrespectful outbursts.
5. Is this anger coming at me typical behavior for this relationship or is it a rare outburst? If hostility toward you is typical and frequent for your relationship, your tolerance is too high. Even if you think you can take it, the anger and criticism can take a toll on your health and mental well-being. A high-intensity incident, even if rare, is cause for concern and shouldn’t be ignored.
6. Is the experience of tolerating other people’s anger isolated to one relationship or do you experience it in multiple relationships? If multiple people are getting upset with you about the same thing, then that could be an indication you have a problematic behavior you should confront. On the other hand, if multiple people—your boss, your neighbor, your friends—are all displacing their anger on you, then your thick skin may have unconsciously made you into a safe target for other people’s aggression.

The bottom line is other people shouldn’t hurt you. You might be able to take it, but maybe you shouldn’t.

Have you ever been told that you can’t take a joke, that you overreact, or that you are just too sensitive? Well, sit back and find out that there is absolutely nothing wrong with you. You see, sensitivity to criticism is earned. Yes, you read that correctly. No one is born to be sensitive to criticism; one is groomed and nurtured in environments of emotional harm. If you have a history of family members being harsh, judgmental, or verbally cruel, you are more vulnerable to verbal slights, teasing, and criticism than the average person. It’s not your fault, and you are not weird.

Roots in Your Family of Origin
Since you may have grown up in this kind of family, you might think that criticism is normal. Truthfully, I believe any kind of criticism (other than artistic or professional constructive criticism,) is never acceptable, warranted, or okay. Healthy relationships are born of acceptance and tolerance. If a friend or partner can’t tolerate you or your behavior, then they shouldn’t be your friend or partner. If someone is often telling you that you’re too sensitive, that is akin to telling you over and over again that you are not good enough, that you are flawed or inadequate.

These statements wouldn’t make anyone feel good, but it’s especially destructive to someone who came from a family where they were put down verbally, or even silently with rolling eyes and demeaning physical postures. You, the so-called “overly sensitive” person, are actually having a normal reaction to a hostile comment.

[fat_widget_right]

Roots in Mental Health Issues
Did you know that many people who are highly critical of others often suffer from depression and anxiety? Criticizing others is a means of making themselves feel better. They may go on and on about how awful someone is, in order to feel less empty, bored, or depressed. Often, unfortunately, those they criticize buy into these negative comments and end up feeling just as awful as the critics.

If you are in relationships with people who are hurting you with criticism or judgments, you might want to consider why you are surrounding yourself with these people when there are so many kind, accepting, and loving people out there. If you want to perform a little test, a good question to ask yourself after being with a friend or loved one is, “Does this person lift me up or tear me down?” If you have more “Tear downs” than “Lifts” you might want to consider getting some individual counseling. Allowing others to criticize you destroys your sense of being good enough, likeable, capable and empowered.

Roots in Self-Criticism
If you are tolerating this kind of criticism from others, chances are that you are used to talking to yourself like this. Your relationship with yourself could be more loving and accepting. For example, when you make a mistake are you constantly reaming yourself unmercifully for messing up or are you able to forgive yourself relatively quickly and move on?

Self-criticism is actually worse than being criticized by another, as there is no immediate escape from it. So, if you are relentlessly telling yourself that you are bad, flawed, fat, unattractive, stupid, uncaring, lazy, etc., you may have trouble even wanting to get out of bed. You may feel depressed, angry, helpless, or ashamed, because you don’t know how to get out of this cycle. But with guts, patience, compassion, and time you absolutely can change the way you talk to yourself. It is a huge commitment to constantly monitor your mind chatter, but well worth the effort.

Sports generally are viewed as harmless pursuits, a source of social interaction and bonding, exercise, and stress relief. But in recent years, highly publicized incidents of fan violence have raised concerns about the culture surrounding sports. The vicious 2011 beating attack on Bryan Stow at Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles is just one such example. Alcohol-fueled fights and skirmishes are increasingly common at all levels of competition, from playgrounds to professional leagues. Most people who have attended a sporting event have witnessed at least one example of an out-of-control fan.

What’s behind this surge in violence? The problem may not be the nature of sports themselves, but rather the way society treats sports in conjunction with personal factors. A closer look at some factors that may contribute to fan violence:

Overidentification

For many sports fans, their teams of choice become a proxy for their own identities. Overidentifying personally with a favorite team may be a contributing factor to sports violence. A person who watches a favorite team lose, or witnesses an unfavorable referee call, may behave as if he or she has personally suffered. The advent of Facebook and other social media, as well as message boards and other gathering places for fans, may make it difficult to disengage from favorite teams or let go of bad memories. These platforms also provide more access to inflammatory views from rival teams’ fans, fueling deep feelings of loyalty, protectiveness, and anger that boil to the surface amid the emotional current of a live game.

Alcohol

Alcohol plays a significant role in many fan altercations. At National Football League games in 2011, more than 7,000 fans were ejected for inappropriate or violent behavior. Some fans spend all morning and afternoon tailgating and drinking with friends before watching the event and then celebrating—or grieving—afterward. People often are intoxicated before even entering a venue. The feelings of deep loyalty and anger that many fans feel can be exacerbated by alcohol consumption.

Hypermasculine Culture

Despite years of progress toward gender equality, many men feel pressured to meet expectations of traditionally masculine behavior. Sports can be a significant platform for masculine identity, and people who identify with hypermasculine culture may be more likely to attend sports events. Combined with adrenaline, overidentification, and ready access to fans with opposing allegiances, some men may be inclined to be violent when exposed to triggers. Likewise, women in hypermasculine environments that promote disrespectful or violent behavior may also be more inclined to engage in it.

Sociological Factors

Certain people are at a greater risk of engaging in violent behavior. People who have experienced a recent stress such as job loss, the death of a loved one, or a perceived humiliation are already on edge and more likely to react emotionally. Many people attend sporting events to alleviate stress. However, when a favored team loses, a person is heckled, or a person loses a significant bet associated with a game’s outcome, stress may explode into rage.

Group Dynamics

Millions of people attend sporting events every year, and the vast majority never commit a violent act. When 100,000 people pack a stadium, though, the odds are high that a number of them are under the influence of alcohol. Combine this with an emotional, hypermasculine environment and exposure to opposing sentiment, and you’ve created a recipe for fan violence. Proactive measures such as reporting inappropriate behavior immediately, limiting alcohol intake, and actively encouraging sportsmanship among peer groups, can help address an increasingly challenging threat to our enjoyment of sporting events.

References:

1. Aguirre, B. E. (2008). Sports fan violence in North America. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews, 37(2), 157-158. doi: 10.1177/009430610803700235
2. Associated Press. (2012, May 31). Witnesses describe violent scene. ESPN. Retrieved from http://espn.go.com/los-angeles/mlb/story/_/id/7991565/witnesses-depict-violent-scene-bryan-stow-beating
3. Handwerk, B. (n.d.). Sports riots: The psychology of fan mayhem. National Geographic. Retrieved from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/06/0620_050620_sportsriots.html

Dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) is a comprehensive, evidence-based treatment approach used to treat individuals with a wide variety of issues, including relationship conflict, anxiety, depression, bipolar, self-injury, eating issues, and substance abuse. Developed in the 1980s by psychologist Marsha M. Linehan for the treatment of borderline personality disorder and chronic suicidality, this method has since been adapted and utilized to help clients with much less severe issues. The therapy can help clients who exhibit extreme emotional reactions, helping them develop self-acceptance while also learning coping skills to better regulate their emotions and handle distress. DBT uses both individual therapy sessions and group skills training, as well as telephone coaching between sessions.

The DBT model combines a behavioral therapy approach with eastern mindfulness practices. In one sense, the term dialectical refers to the goal of synthesizing the extreme opposites inherent in the rigid “black and white” thinking of many clients who have trouble regulating their emotions. “Dialectical” also applies to the core DBT principle of practicing acceptance strategies while implementing change strategies, in the process of reducing and modifying self-destructive behaviors.

This type of therapy is very support-oriented; it helps clients identify their strengths, build new skills, and increase their self-esteem. DBT focuses on cognitive issues by indentifying destructive thought patterns and replacing them with more neutral and accepting internal dialogues. It is designed to be a nonjudgmental collaboration, with the therapist and client working together to increase emotional awareness and understanding, minimize negative thought patterns and behaviors, and develop new coping and problem-solving skills.

The four modules of dialectical behavior therapy:

• Core mindfulness: The first of the four primary modules of DBT, this concept involves learning to observe one’s emotions, describe those emotions, and fully participate in present experiences. This skill forms the foundation for the other three modules, and is derived largely from eastern practices of living in the moment.
• Interpersonal effectiveness: The second core component of DBT teaches clients assertiveness skills and strategies to ask for what they need, set boundaries and say no when appropriate, and deal more effectively with interpersonal conflict.
• Distress tolerance: The third module entails clients developing nonjudgmental acceptance of themselves as well as their current situation. The focus is on learning to accept the present reality and to tolerate crises, and making use of strategies such as distraction, self-soothing, and improving the moment. Practicing these skills will increase the client’s ability to tolerate challenging events and environments.
• Emotion regulation: The final module of DBT consists of three main goals: to understand one’s emotions, reduce emotional vulnerability, and decrease emotional suffering. With this in mind, some of the specific skills taught in DBT include identifying and labeling emotions as well as evaluating: events that prompt the emotion, interpretations that trigger the emotion, how the emotion is experienced, how the emotion is expressed behaviorally, and the aftereffects of the emotion.

In the case of adolescent treatment, Dr. Alec Miller has adapted Dr. Linehan’s model to incorporate parents attending skills training groups with their teens. There is an additional module, “walking the middle path,” which focuses on helping parents and their children understand each other’s viewpoints and reduce conflict and invalidation.

The five functions:

Dialectical behavioral therapy was designed to fulfill five primary functions:

• Enhance behavioral capabilities: DBT helps clients develop important life skills that help them regulate emotions, experience the present moment, improve interpersonal interactions, and better tolerate distressing situations.
• Improve motivation to changes: DBT supports clients’ motivation to change by tracking and reducing detrimental behaviors, thereby increasing quality of life.
• Generalize capabilities to other environments: In order for the client to make progress, the skills learned in therapy must transfer to a wide variety of situations. This is accomplished through homework assignments and practicing skills. Telephone consultations also can be valuable in helping clients utilize these skills in their daily lives.
• Support client and therapist capabilities: DBT aims to maintain and build the capabilities of therapists through continued training and consultation-team meetings.
• Enhance therapist motivation: The DBT model encourages the use of support, validation, feedback, and encouragement between therapists to avoid burnout and improve their effectiveness.

Stages of treatment:

The course of DBT generally flows through three stages:

• Stage 1: This stage is primarily focused on eliminating or reducing serious behaviors, including self-injury, suicidal thinking, and aggression. Behaviors that interfere with therapy also are addressed, such as missing appointments and not returning phone calls.
• Stage 2: The client strives to increase quality of life and experience emotions in a less intense manner. The client continues to eliminate or decrease destructive behaviors, and address other issues or situations that are interfering with daily life, such as past trauma.
• Stage 3: The client is experiencing increased feelings of completeness, self-respect, and love.

Who can benefit:

Though DBT originally was developed to treat more severe issues, such as borderline personality disorder, suicidal behaviors, and self-harm, the treatment has become a widely respected method for treating clients who exhibit the following, much milder traits and issues:

• Difficulty with emotional regulation
• A high level of reactivity, with a slow return to baseline
• Impulsiveness with a tendency toward self-destructive behaviors
• An inclination toward extreme thinking, unable to perceive a middle ground
• A lack of sense of self, tending to feel incomplete or empty
• A history of instability in relationships, and difficulty with interpersonal interactions
• Extreme sensitivity, accompanied by rapid mood swings, anxiety, and depression
• Fears of abandonment and trouble with intimate relationships

Dialectical behavior therapy has proven to be a very effective tool to help people manage intense emotions, change negative thought patterns, and decrease self-destructive behaviors. Individual therapy sessions focus on current detrimental behaviors in the client’s life, while group sessions involve learning skills from the four modules: mindfulness, interpersonal effectiveness, distress tolerance, and emotion regulation.

Fear can be a strong motivator. People who are afraid of living in poverty may be motivated to pursue any career option in order to avoid financial destitution. In a similar way, individuals who are afraid that they may develop specific health-related problems may work tirelessly to maintain optimal physical condition. Fear often has been linked to motivation, both positively and negatively. Until recently, however, few studies examined how fear of failure affects activity-related performance.

Jocelyn J. Bélanger of the University of Maryland sought to determine how negative feedback on specific tasks affected motivation in individuals fearful of failure (obsessive) and those who were passionate about their activity but less worried about setbacks (harmonious). In a series of experiments, Bélanger found that individuals who are passionate about achieving their goal perform differently based on their style of commitment. In particular, those with obsessive passion responded with positive motivation to negative/failure cues while those with harmonious passion saw no change in performance. In fact, the harmonious passion participants maintained the same level of performance throughout the experiments, regardless of whether they received success or failure feedback.

“Obsessive passion, associated with defensiveness, predicts performance aimed at avoiding failure, whereas harmonious passion, associated with a secure self-concept, predicts stable performance,” Bélanger said. These findings suggest that fear works as a motivator for individuals with obsessive passion. Bélanger believes that people who feel their sense of self is threatened by failure of goal attainment may unconsciously respond to that threat by increasing their performance. However, those who have harmonious passion traits are less threatened and view the feedback, positive or negative, merely as information needed to continue the process of attaining their goals. The results of this study offer valuable information that could be used for the development of goal-attainment strategies in the professional, academic, and sports arenas, and could help clinicians better understand an individual’s reaction to goal-achievement outcomes.

Reference:
Bélanger, J. J., Lafrenière, M.-A. K., Vallerand, R. J., Kruglanski, A. W. (2012). Driven by fear: The effect of success and failure information on passionate individuals’ performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1037/a0029585

“I’ve been suffering for years,” Marcelle said. “When I tell Andrew that he’s hurt my feelings, he gets angry. Can you imagine that? What kind of human being gets angry when he sees his wife crying?”

This is a good question, and one that I get asked often. The answer is that a person like Andrew, who gets angry at being told that he has—once again—done it wrong, is a human who has never heard a word of praise and experienced more criticism in his life than he knows what to do with.

Such a person—often, but not always, a man—is highly conflicted. In moments when he does not feel put on the defensive, he cares deeply for his wife, loves her, and doesn’t want her to hurt. On the other hand, when he thinks he’s being attacked, he reflexively circles the wagons to protect himself.

[fat_widget_relationships_right]

“So finally, I got good and angry myself,” Marcelle went on. “How much of this can I take? I get mistreated and I can’t even express myself. That’s not right! That’s not fair! I deserve better, so I told him a thing or two. I let him have it. And, frankly, I felt much better after that.”

That’s a typical pattern—and highly destructive.

The Elusive Satisfaction of Retaliation
Marcelle has every justification in the world to feel hurt. It is also human for her to be angry at the cause of that hurt when he is so unsympathetic. But her reaction in this scenario is wrong. For one thing, she’s hurting herself more by lowering herself to his level. If she acknowledges that his anger is hurtful, then her anger is hurtful too. If she acknowledges that anger displays a lack of humanity on his part, then it displays a lack of humanity on hers as well.

Later, alone with her feelings, Marcelle will confide that the good feeling of “giving it back” was short lived. Over time, the idea that she had betrayed herself by stooping to his level gnawed at her innermost being. She had always liked herself for her own kindness and goodness. “Now who am I?” she wondered. Not only did she reduce herself to a level that she did not respect, but in doing so, she also became alienated from herself.

Many victims of mistreatment feel this way. They feel estranged from the person they thought they were, they don’t like the person they’ve become, and they’re still depressed over the way they were treated. They add depression to depression. Being mean and striking back is completely self-defeating.

How Retaliation Makes Bad Behavior Worse
There’s another, even worse problem with Marcelle’s reaction: it ensures that Andrew’s behavior will also get worse. Now that’s bad.

Andrew doesn’t want to be the bad guy that he is, but he has no clue how to make the awful feelings go away when he is repeatedly reminded of his failings. When he hears what comes across to him as a criticism, he is thrown into a pit of despair. After all, if he knew how to handle the problem in the first place, he would not have created it. Growing up in a home in which such things as compassion, sharing, consideration, and respect were not taught or modeled, he is unaware of how to deal with situations which call for these traits. How can he fix a problem he’s clueless about?

But Andrew does know the one thing he learned very well growing up: how to defend himself, strike back, or tune out. It’s only natural that when he feels attacked, he’s going to do what it takes to prevent those old feelings from rushing in. What better smokescreen than for him to attack back?

Will he feel better? No, just as Marcelle didn’t feel better when she retaliated. Will the marriage improve this way? Obviously not. What should be done?

Alternatives to Retaliation
Marcelle has to switch her approach from telling Andrew what he did wrong to what she wants him to do. It means changing a negative sentence to a positive one. This might not seem hard to do, but listen to what Marcelle has to say about it: “What about my feelings? Are you telling me to stifle my feelings? He’s my husband; shouldn’t I be able to tell my own husband that he hurt my feelings?”

Marcelle has a point. She should not have to stifle her feelings; she should be able to express them to her own husband. But we are not operating in a fair and just world. Her husband simply cannot hear this until he has healed from his past pain.

So Marcelle’s real job is to deal with her “shoulds.” Theoretically, she should be free to express herself, and in reality, she shoots herself in the foot when she does. What are Marcelle’s options?

• Marcelle has to make a list for herself of healthy ways to self-soothe such as doing affirmations, practicing relaxation and deep breathing, getting sufficient sleep and exercise, and deriving pleasure from her work and daily tasks. She can also journal or talk to a marriage counselor who is pro-marriage. All of these serve both as channels for her bad feelings and as ways to empower herself to feel good, despite the tough hand that she was dealt.

• Marcelle should learn to assertively ask for what she wants in very specific terms, such as, “When I come home with groceries, please help me with them, and please smile at me when you do.” She herself should be pleasant and smiling when making these requests. Andrew did not have the benefit of learning how to handle interpersonal relationships growing up, so part of his attraction to Marcelle was that she was so skilled at them. He is actually looking to her for a way out of the labyrinth. Furthermore, by being pleasant in her request, she is also modeling the very behavior she wants—and putting in a teaspoon of sugar to make the medicine go down.

Retaliation is not one of Marcelle’s options, but she will find that if she follows the options above, she will be empowered and happier, even before Andrew has started to “get it.” Eventually, he will “get it” and then they will both be happier.

Many people, but primarily young, educated, Western women, struggle to sustain a positive body image—for a multitude of reasons that have been discussed in previous posts. Often a negative body image leads to a poor relationship with the body and other aspects of self. It is associated with impoverished self-care and unhealthy eating and lifestyle habits.

Having a negative body image is related to general low self-esteem and depression or anxiety. Women with poor body image often struggle with boundaries in relationship to self and others. In this post, I will attempt to shed some light on the issue of boundaries related to poor body image, a concept often discussed and infrequently understood.

Women with poor body image tend to have a compartmentalized approach to well-being. For example, they may be overly focused on certain parts of the body or particular goals, such as weight loss, while devaluing other important aspects of overall health and fitness. People who have poor body image demonstrate an all-or-nothing approach to wellness, swinging from one extreme to the other, sometimes within the same day. They tend to have an exceptional level of acquired knowledge about what is healthy and set idealistic goals based on this knowledge and also are frequently disappointed and blame themselves when they are unable to attain these goals.

The lack of a holistic perspective is evidenced in an inability to balance fitness with relaxation, healthy food choices with enjoyment of food, and so on. Not surprisingly, it is common to hear that they have dissatisfying relationships with others. The all-or-nothing tendency is implicated in their sense of being overwhelmed in relationships. They sometimes become preoccupied with the other person, swinging from feeling too close to feeling uncomfortably vulnerable even feeling lost in a relationship and wanting to cut it off.

The biggest and most obvious issue I see in working with women with poor body image is that most of the information used to make decisions about relationships and well-being comes from external sources. A total and complete lack of trust in the body and the self’s ability to regulate is obvious in their decision making. There is usually a clear history in the development of this lack of trust with regard to personal, familial, and cultural messages that have been internalized. (A full discussion of these factors is beyond the scope of this article). A lack of trust in the body and in the self leads to poor listening and misinterpretation of the cues that emerge from within. After a prolonged period of not paying attention to these signals, one’s ability to understand and act in accordance to one’s own needs becomes weakened. The needs of others become the focus of too much energy and attention, often referred to as a boundary issue.

Boundaries can be physical, mental, or emotional. Clear boundary violations are easy to identify and are well known as something that is usually morally or legally wrong and/or clearly harmful to another person’s safety, integrity, or well-being. However, there is a huge gray area between what is ideal and what is harmful, and sometimes subtle violations can lead to hurt, shame, self-doubt, and low self-esteem. Violations usually happen by the person who is in a perceived position of power, as in the obvious case of an adult taking advantage of or imposing his or her personal needs on a child, or a doctor over a patient. But there are other relationships in which people can feel vulnerable and open to influence, harmful or positive. In these more subtle cases of power and vulnerability, the delivery of emotional (or more direct) messages about the self can also lead to unhealthy attitudes, self-doubt, and low self-worth. For example, people in positions of perceived or felt power who regularly directly or indirectly impose their opinions and choices can influence others to have doubts about their own choices.

A healthy boundary between people is a perceived buffering zone, whereby a felt sense of acceptable difference exists. Respectful support of differences by people in positions of perceived power and influence can help a person grow a strong sense of self and hence the ability to re-enact these perceived boundaries in other relationships. Good boundaries lead to healthy awareness of needs of the self and also positive choices that enhance the sense of self and relationships. Supporting an individual’s development involves a strong sense of self and honoring differences in others, an open attitude of acceptance and humility. A supportive stance involves allowing another person to feel, think, struggle, learn, and identify what is right for him or her without unwelcome advice or control tactics or too much distance or silence.

Recognizing and accepting differences, a supportive stance, involves sharing personal views and opinions with a sense of humility and recognizing that they are indeed personal and individual and should not be imposed on others. Offering help when it is asked for and refraining from taking over, micromanaging, or rescuing another person is important. Healthy boundaries lead to healthy relationships, and healthy relationships lead to healthy development of individuals.

Where the development of healthy boundaries has been challenged, an individual will often be overly dependent on external information and feedback to feel safe in their decision making and hence may have a poorly developed or negative sense of their own worth. In the case of the person with poor body image, this person becomes adept at information gathering, using perceived feedback to set expectations for the self that are often unrealistic. Perception itself is flawed and is often skewed towards negative, self-fulfilling ideas of self-worth. By engaging in a selection bias, people with low self-esteem will seek out and attend to cues that confirm what they think they know about themselves that is usually negative. In addition, they may believe it is possible to please others all of the time, which is clearly faulty.

Emphasis on interpretation and internalization of other people’s expectations is a recipe for impoverished self-worth. Living according to perceived notions of other people’s expectations often leads to repressed resentment, disempowerment, and disappointment. In some cases, the only way to assert the self is in a passive-aggressive manner, which is usually not received well by others. While indeed it is healthy to have a sense of social expectation and be kind and thoughtful towards others, these behaviors need to be enacted based on a clear and healthy sense of self, which requires an awareness of personal thoughts, beliefs, feelings, and needs and the differences between self and other. Healthy self and healthy relationships interrelate and influence the development of both. The development of clear boundaries has a positive impact on individuals and on others with whom they have relationships.

However, the responsibility for nurturing clear boundaries falls on individuals in a position of power of any kind. Most people in some domain of their lives are in a position to help or hinder the development of another person. It is important that we always be aware of the difference between our own needs and feelings and those of others and to refrain from overstepping and imposing or, conversely, mistakenly taking on responsibility for other people in a way that invalidates or challenges their own development.

Where boundaries were violated, or not properly developed, psychotherapy can help to personalize new ways of being that include more emotional self-awareness and self-regulation, as well as assertiveness and effective communication skills. Healthy boundaries and self-esteem are achievable goals.

Related articles:
Our Bodies/Ourselves
The Vanity Myth: Eating Disorders and Beauty
Self-Esteem and Standards

Which of the following statements are true?

People with high self-esteem:
A. Are convinced they can never be wrong
B. Don’t usually appreciate negative feedback
C. Think whatever they do is great
D. Couldn’t care less what others think of them
E. All of the above

Answer: None of these are true of people with genuine self-esteem! The truth is, the higher your self-esteem, the better you tolerate criticism and disappointment.

Let’s go over these again and get the real scoop on people with high self-esteem:

False: They’re convinced they can never be wrong
True: People with healthy self-esteem aren’t delusional; they know and accept that sometimes they mess up. (more…)

It seems that most couples struggle with criticism, though some tolerate it better than others. Nevertheless, criticism of, or from, your partner will happen periodically. This post provides an alternative way to manage criticism that may help sidestep defensiveness. Here are some common options when we want to be critical of our partner:

1. Keep our mouths shut, and say nothing. Besides, we all were told that if we didn’t have anything nice to say, then don’t say anything, right? (This one probably fell in to the category of “do as I say, don’t do as I do.”)
2. Provide unvarnished criticism, regardless of the impact it may have on our partner, and ultimately on the relationship. If it leads to defensiveness, an argument, a fight, so be it, just deal with it.
3. Sugarcoat it, water it down, either because you can’t deal with your reaction to your partner’s reaction to your critical remark, or you want to protect your partner from his/her feelings that surely will arise from being criticized. (“You can’t handle the truth!”) Maybe there is an alternative, an option that satisfies both sides of a chronically thorny equation: On the one hand, how to get your point across without selling yourself out, while on the other hand lowering the odds of running in to defensiveness.

Enter the complaint. Sit alongside that of criticism, let us compare the two, see how they differ, and why it matters. A complaint is about the one complaining, and a criticism is about the other, the listener. Or, the complaint is about me, and a criticism is about you. Take a guess as to which one will usually be easier for the listener to hear: the complaint. Why? A complaint is not about the listener, and therefore tends to lower the risk of listener defensiveness.

Not only that, if I’m talking about me (instead of you) I have a much better chance of being understood. The goal of transforming a criticism into a complaint is to increase the odds of the speaker being heard and understood, while simultaneously reducing the odds of the listener being defensive. Ultimately, the goal of the process is to preserve the closeness and intimacy of the relationship.

Consider the following vignette: On long road trips, the majority of the driving is done by the same partner. One of the difficulties for the passenger is that the driver tends to speed—we’re talking about 90 mph to 95 mph versus the limit of 75 mph. They have never had an accident, nor a speeding ticket, but they are constantly bickering about the speed and the danger. The driver doesn’t understand what the “big deal” is, and the passenger doesn’t think the driver cares about the passenger.

The passenger criticizes: “You are the worst driver ever! For you, it’s all about the speed and the thrill! You have no respect for the fact that you might get us both killed!  And one of these days you will get a ticket—it’s only a matter of time! You have no respect for what it’s like being a passenger when you’re the driver! Nobody likes the way you drive!”

In this case, there is a lot of accusation, attack and judgment, while focusing on the driver/listener.

The passenger complains: “When you drive 95 mph, I feel so scared! I’m am so afraid of speed, that I literally sit in sheer terror when I look at the speedometer, and when I see us pass other cars at what feels like warp speed! And when I tell you how I feel about all of this, it seems to me it doesn’t matter to you. Please understand I am not telling you what to do or not do, I am telling you how I feel and why. After this last trip, I am going to have to re-think whether or not I can drive with you on long trips. I may have to fly and meet you there.

In this instance, the main focus is the passenger, feeling states, and possible decisions about future travel the passenger might make based on experience. There is no attack, judgmental attitude or accusation.

Re-read each one again. The main difference between them is that the critical one is all about the driver, and the complaint is all about the passenger. Bottom line, which way would you rather hear the speaker? No doubt, some of you who are less conflict averse will prefer the direct criticism, or at least might not be derailed by it. Others may want to hone their skill of complaining.

And by the way, complaining is NOT the same as whining! Complaints require that you talk about yourself, not your partner. Complaints are NOT “I” statements. Complaints are descriptive statements about your experience which, indeed, may contain the word “you,” such as, “… when you drive 95 mph I feel scared!” The purpose of the complaint is to detail your experience, make it real for the listener. While generally not responding favorably to demands, listeners do tend to respond more favorably to hearing the speaker’s experiences and behavioral changes the speaker makes in response to their experiences.

Why? Because when I become aware of the impact of my behavior on you, I can then access empathy or compassion for you. That often results in behavior change because ultimately I do not want you to feel bad. On the other hand, while being criticized, which is often experienced as an attack, it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to simultaneously feel empathic. Attack triggers the fight or flight response, not the compassion response.

Is it possible to be critical without attacking? Certainly, but it takes couples working out a system they can both agree on, practice, become comfortable with, and trust. In the meantime, try developing the art of the complaint. Remember—it requires you to talk about yourself, take responsibility for yourself, while not attempting to change your partner.