“Take a look at the bright side,” we tell our loved ones when they’re feeling down. “See the cup half full, not half empty.” We help lift our friends by saying, “Cheer up! Don’t dwell in the negative. Be grateful. Think about all that you have.” If it seems our friends suffer from low self-esteem, we extol their virtues and exclaim, “People are attracted to positivity in others. Think positive thoughts and good things will happen to you.”

We draw upon a large base of common wisdom in order to combat the slings and arrows of existence. And some of the time, we do all right. When a person carries a cheerful spirit into a room, there is a terrific splendor that is contagious. We support one another. We lend one another positive strength when needed.

[fat_widget_right]

With all its potential for good, positive thinking can at times act as an oppressive tyrant, an enemy of happiness. After all, if the solution were so straightforward, if we could think our way into happiness, then our world wouldn’t be riddled with chronic misery. The mandate to be positive and cheerful in our culture is so pervasive and powerful, even people in psychotherapy feel a tremendous burden in simply communicating uncomfortable feelings to their therapists. Everyday popular treatment of emotions is hardly hearing someone out.

The darker social message of an individual who insists on surrounding himself or herself exclusively with positive energy sounds something like this: “Don’t whine. You sound like a baby. Get over it.” The culture of positivity often forgets the need for the yin and yang, the harmony of opposites. It can squash the voices of hurt, dissent, disagreement, and injustice. Even more oppressive: “You are weak. You’re taking on a victim mentality. Don’t be a victim.” The unwitting oppression marginalizes the voices of victims—victims of trauma, of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse.

The fact is painful experiences can be uncomfortable to listen to. Nobody wants to upset their friends and family with feelings of discomfort. So, people become terrified of identifying as a victim. They deny trauma they have endured in order to spare “burdening” loved ones. They fear being considered weak because they are being asked to do something impossible—to get over it and move on. But in the case of trauma, the attempt to forget about it is the problem. Those who are identified as “victims” in our culture display exceptional bravery, refusing to act as though their hurt has disappeared, succumbing to the majority’s desire for them to get over it. One cannot simply “move on.” To live a fully human life, one must embrace the good and the bad in themselves and others.

It is true that some people dwell in cycles of negativity. But how do we know when we should or shouldn’t attempt to lift them from their sorrows? The key is learning how to listen. At times a person needs to endure a feeling, state, or mood in order to grow. What the person needs is compassion—a trusted other to listen while he or she endures his or her difficulties. Attempts to redirect the other toward positivity may be well intended, but may also lack compassion. Advocating a shift into a positive perspective may be received by the other as dismissive, even uncaring, depending on whether the listener is truly attuned to his or her friend’s needs. After all, how can you truly listen to someone if you’ve already decided what he or she should feel and how he or she should think?

Having compassion means feeling with someone—finding one’s way across the barrier of alienation. Having a need to redirect a friend’s emotions may indicate a difficulty or unwillingness to join him or her in a troubled state. Some may fear being “pulled down” by another’s troubles. Underneath the demand for oneself and others to stay positive is a terror about what lay on the other side of life, the darker side. Under the driven, fiery force of positive thinking lay immense anxiety. Ultimately, that fear inhibits a more fruitful joy—that of authentic connection, an enduring togetherness in the wholeness of life.

Are you a “beaten dog”? Rest assured, I’m not calling anyone names here. But have you been kicked around, treated like nothing, and hurt? Do you not feel loved unless you are treated badly? This is what I mean when I say “beaten dog.” If you are offended, maybe some truth is staring you in the face. If you are not offended, I’m glad—and while this may not apply to you, perhaps it does apply to someone you know.

If it does apply to you and you can see how this role has affected your life, I want to apologize. No one should feel beaten, abused, and treated so poorly that he or she feels unworthy and believes life is cruel. I hope you seek help in breaking this mind-set and take hold of the reality that you ARE worthy!

Some questions you can ask yourself:

1. When someone is nice to me, do I question it? Do I question that the niceness is sincere?
2. When things are calm and smooth, do I need to throw a fit so that I can verify that I am loved via being yelled at?
3. Do I want or tend to take advantage of a person’s niceness because I believe I can?
4. Do I pick negative, hurtful people to be around?
5. Am I envious of others who are in healthy relationships?
6. Do I want a healthier relationship but believe I can’t have one?
7. Do I believe that this is how things will be for the rest of my life and that nothing—not even me—can change?

To change a self-belief statement or self-perception, admitting the need to change is a must. If you change for someone else, the change may not last long. Identifying how you respond to the above questions is key. Looking at ourselves can be a difficult and painful challenge, but it is where healing begins.

A self-belief statement can be defined as how you view who you are, how your “world” is, and how things (positive or negative) happen/happened to you. When someone is brought up in a negative, abusive, and painful environment, a negative self-belief is formed. The self-belief statement can be changed, but it can be difficult and takes time.

To change a negative self-belief statement:

1. Identify and be aware of your negative self-belief statement. As Dr. Phil says, you can’t change what you don’t acknowledge.
2. Self-examine your thoughts and mind-set, and take responsibility for why your belief statement is negative.
3. Acknowledge what you can and can’t change. Example: You can’t change what happened to you growing up, but you can change how you respond and whether the past controls you.
4. Grieve. You lost out on a healthier childhood, the unspoken expectation that the adults in your life would be there to help you grow. Let go of the pain. Mourn. Cry.
5. Forgive. It’s a hard thing to do. Forgiveness is for YOU, not for them. To lose the power that the past has over you, forgiveness is key. Forgive shortcomings, failures, pain, whatever. Let go. Forgive yourself for not being perfect. When you forgive, you’ll feel less weight on your shoulders and be able to move on a little easier. Forgiveness is a part of a cleansing process, allowing healing to begin.
6. Redefine yourself—who you want to be, how you want to be, the type of people you want to be around, etc. Your personality may not totally change, but you can choose to be happier, to not let the same roadblocks stand in your way, and to have healthier relationships. You can choose to be a person who is not going to allow yourself to be kicked around anymore. Find what is good in your life; maximize those things while minimizing your weaknesses.
7. Be at peace with yourself. Self-acceptance is a great accomplishment. No one can do this for you. When you love and accept you, other people will see that and be drawn to it. Self-acceptance allows your inner beauty to shine.

This is a process. It’s not always easy. Personal growth is not a straight journey. It has lumps, bumps, breaks, and is topsy-turvy. But if you are moving toward health, you will get there.

The state of Washington has been working for several years to change the language in its laws to gender-neutral terms. If legislation passes as expected, no longer will there be penmanship, freshmen, and watchmen. Instead, Washington will have handwriting, first-year students, and security guards.

Several other states have followed suit, with about half making moves toward gender-neutral language. Such language is often lampooned as politically correct and excessively burdensome, but research shows that language affects perceptions. Perceptions, in turn, affect behavior, and using gender-neutral language can be a meaningful move toward gender equality.

The Pervasiveness of Gendered Language
Gendered language is so common that it’s difficult for some people to even notice it. From job postings to laws, words such as policeman, councilman, mankind, and fireman abound. This omnipresence of gendered language may be part of the problem. When people stop noticing gendered language, it’s easier to think of male as the default. People who do a double-take when they see words such as policewoman or police officer may be doing so because there’s an incongruence between what their expectation of a police officer is—a male—and the possibility of a woman filling the role. The more frequently gendered language occurs, the more likely it is that people develop male as the prototype for a particular role.

This can affect a wide range of behaviors and lead to subtle biases. A company that posts a job seeking an ombudsman, for example, may envision a male in the role because of the use of gendered language. This can give women a slight disadvantage when they seek out the job because women applicants don’t completely match the hiring manager’s vision for a future employee. The person in charge of hiring may never even be aware of this subtle bias, but this doesn’t mean it’s not there.

Effects on Women
From the time they’re children, women experience an onslaught of gendered language, and this can subtly alter their perceptions of themselves. Even women report that their prototype of police officers and firefighters is male, and this may be due in part to gendered language.

Gender conditioning can affect the choices men and women make, and when women grow up learning that they’re not the ideal image of a particular role, their options are limited.

Male as Default
The use of terms such as mankind is particularly problematic because it treats men as the default. When “man” is used to refer to “all of us,” women are completely excluded, even if the term is intended to be gender-neutral. Thus, men are established as the norm against which everything is judged, and women are treated as deviant from this norm.

Real-life examples of this can be found in the long-time medical practice of using only male research subjects—a practice that has changed over the past few years.

Setting an Example
While gender-neutral language can seem frustrating and cumbersome at first, this is primarily because it’s new, not because there’s anything particularly onerous about its use. When states establish gender-neutral language, they help this language become part of the common lexicon and set an example demonstrating that gender-neutral language is just as easy to use as gendered language.

References:

1. Carmon, I. (n.d.). The effects of gendered language in job ads. Jezebel. Retrieved from http://jezebel.com/5803238/the-effects-of-gendered-language-in-job-ads
2. Lacorte, R. (2013, February 3). State moves toward gender-neutral language. The Seattle Times. Retrieved from http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2020282616_genderneutralxml.html
3. Leaper, C., & Bigler, R. S. (2004). Gendered Language and Sexist Thought. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 69(1), 128-142. doi: 10.1111/j.0037-976X.2004.00283.x

It is not unusual for someone who experiences a loss to romanticize the person, identity, or object they are grieving. This can occur even when what is lost was not just imperfect, but harmful. This tendency occurs more often and can be more harmful with folks who experienced depression, anxiety, or other mental health issues prior to the loss.

Myths can be helpful in meeting the obligation of respect and mourning we may feel toward the person. They can push us to broaden our memory of the person who died or the relationship we had beyond just the negative event to more positive or helpful content. They can influence the “story” of what was lost in a way that makes thoughts and emotions associated with the loss more tolerable to access and communicate individually and within our support systems.

It is natural to go back in time and reevaluate our perceptions of events and the decisions made during that time. Those who struggle with depression or anxiety already have a distorted view of reality that usually presents a world that’s unsafe or themselves as incapable. Both of these factors can set the stage for harmful myths.

Beliefs that drive guilt, regret, and failure are usually present and, when applied to the loss of a relationship, can set the stage for a rewrite on reality. These factors can result in a person deriving a meaning or value from what was lost that is heightened and, in his or her mind, exposes an inability and unworthiness in obtaining and holding onto the things people deserve to pursue. Even if the person holds some, or the majority of, responsibility in the loss, what was lost was probably imperfect and the behaviors that led to the loss are changeable. We’re human, and life is usually a trial-and-error thing.

Myths can also amplify the lack of purpose one feels after losing a job, becoming hospitalized, or losing a relationship. This is particularly true if the loss involved something the person felt defined them: “This is who I was, and now that it’s gone, where does that leave me?” Myths can hold us to the belief that purpose is unchangeable and who we were before the loss was the best we could have been.

In reality, there may have been significant problems and costs to the identity that we were not attentive to; these costs may have been a factor in causing the loss. Myths hold us back from an honest analysis of what led us to “the problem,” which in turn, prevents us from changing our behaviors or priorities in a way that works for us now. Myths can make us risk-averse, because if it can’t be the same, what’s the point? The answer is that “it” being different may be what we need, and the loss could be used as a wake-up call. In holding onto myths, we may reenact patterns and behaviors that are maladaptive.

When the loss involves a person who was both a family member and a perpetrator, myths can act as an obstacle to accessing traumatic content. Survivors of childhood abuse utilize several strategies to survive their environments and maintain a positive view of those they love because of the meaning that relationship may have in their minds (“she is my mother; I’m supposed to love her”). From their perspective, pushing for change may have a greater cost than living with it. This capacity or inclination can prevent survivors from feeling as if they have permission to think about the person they lost in a negative light. These are common issues for any trauma survivor, but holding on to the myth after a loss may make the work in acknowledging and processing the trauma that much harder.

Within a familial context, myths can create a perceived demand for adherence to a “story” that may feel objectionable to some within the family. Trauma survivors can feel uncomfortable in processing the loss authentically with those they may feel closest to for fear of making waves or hurting them.

Grounding ourselves in fact can go a long way in helping us cope with a loss. Being factual means focusing on what we know, not what we believe, so that we can derive a reasonable meaning from the loss experience. It allows us to acknowledge and mourn the good while identifying what was harmful so that the work of adaptive grieving and behavior change can move forward.

One important aspect of remaining factual is communicating the emotional and cognitive content we hold to another person we trust. This allows us to expose any distorted beliefs or thinking to another person’s logic and perception. This is important because it creates an external brace against unreasonable thinking. By not allowing exposure, the only thing left to challenge the distorted narrative is the source of it.

Family, friends, and other natural supports (priests, rabbis, the lady who does your nails) are usually the best options if safety is not an issue because they represent long-term, sustainable resources you can access anytime. If safety is an issue or you are experiencing symptoms that go beyond a normal grief reaction, seeking professional help (therapists, psychiatrists, medical doctor) can provide more intensive support and a greater assurance of confidentiality.

Unconditional love is a concept that is bandied about frequently in religious/spiritual and secular contexts. I’ve been thinking of it more frequently as a result of some premarital counseling I recently provided to a young couple. The opinion (and keep in mind it was my opinion) I expressed was that unconditional love was not possible between adults; that all adult love was, in fact, based on certain expectations and requirements. Because adult love comes with expectations and requirements, it is therefore conditional. I also said that the time we are supposed to receive unconditional love is when we are born and are infants. (Hopefully this occurs, but it is not always the case.) Unconditional love occurs between mother and infant, as well as between human and dog and human and God.

I started to reflect on what I had said about God’s love being unconditional and read a few online articles on the subject. The opinions seem split between those who believe it is unconditional and those who don’t.

What I’ve concluded is that it’s a paradox, intentionally so. God’s love is unconditional, but God also has expectations and requirements. If we don’t meet those expectations and strive to fulfill those requirements, God doesn’t stop loving us—but is not happy, and expects us to continue to strive to do better next time. God is also extremely patient and appreciates effort. God does not expect perfection (unlike some humans, who expect it of themselves and thus think they know better than God) because only God is perfect. From that perspective, perfectionism takes on the qualities of narcissism, doesn’t it? (That’s a whole other article.)

So what are God’s expectations and requirements? I suppose that depends on one’s spiritual/religious orientation. As a Yoruba priest, according to God (Olodumare) and the Orisas (the divinities who interact with humans), I am expected and required to: develop good character (Iwa Pele); honor my ancestors; respect the earth; honor and practice the traditions of the faith; and live in gratitude. (There are others, but hopefully you get the point.)

If I don’t do those things, it’s not as if Olodumare and the Orisas will no longer love me, but my life will not turn out well. Things will not happen as expected or hoped for, and there may be unforeseen reversals of finances, health, and relationships. It’s not that I will be punished (as in the concept of being punished for sins), but rather that I will have blocked my own blessings.
Therefore, it makes sense to do what Olodumare and the Orisas want me to do. I know what they want through divination, which takes some of the pressure off me to figure it out alone. Once I have the information, it is my choice to do it or not, but given the consequences, there’s really no other healthy choice.

I have found that since I became a Yoruba priest almost 12 years ago, when I did what I was told to do by the divinities that guide me, my life either improved, changed in a significant way, or took a direction that might have been scary initially but ultimately worked out for the best. When I did not do what I was instructed to do (which wasn’t very often) or dragged my feet, I felt like I had abandoned not only my strongest supporters but myself as well. In a word, I started to become depressed.

Even though my belief system is specific, I believe we are all looking for that unconditional love we may or may not have experienced as infants from our mothers. Unconditional love (even with requirements and expectations) brings with it feelings of serenity and calm, a sense of completeness and wholeness and a hopeful attitude toward life. For those who have found it on a spiritual path, it is the only love that can fill the space left by not getting that love from other humans.

I watch Lifetime movies. Yes, I help people get their lives back on the “straight and narrow” and be healthier with themselves, their emotions, and their relationships, but I still like to indulge Lifetime movies. That feels good to write!

The Pregnancy Pact is about girls who become pregnant. The issue makes the news, and a reporter tries to not just get the story but to also increase awareness about teen pregnancy. I recommend checking out Lifetime for the rest of the story.

The issue that I want to present today is parents’ responsibility to speak with their children about safe sex—abstinence, using condoms (if they do decide to have sex), and sexual health—and not just leave it to the schools.

It can be a scary thing to talk to your children about sex, but the reality is that they are going to ask because they are curious about their bodies and what they see on television. They don’t want to know that they shouldn’t have sex; they want to know why they should not have sex at a particular age. As a parent, it is part of your job to teach your kids about sexual health. I believe you get the picture.

There is a lot to think about, and no parent is ever truly “ready” to talk with a child about the “birds and the bees,” but again, it’s a necessity—and your child may, in fact, ask you. Of course, they will go to their friends, but they’ll come away with a lot of misinformation. You will give them the facts and help them make a healthy, well-informed decision. Yes, the child may still go out and have sex, but when he or she is informed with the pros/cons, the facts, etc., he or she can make a wiser choice.

When to Start
It’s best to start at a young age. My son will be 2 years old next month. At bath time, I show him how to clean himself, and he does a pretty good job. The other day, we had a conversation about him and Daddy having a penis, but not Mommy. That was it. I also said that only Mommy, Daddy, and a doctor would be able to see it, if needed. In the bath, we talk briefly about making sure our bodies are clean head to toe, and that’s one way to take care of our bodies.

[fat_widget_right]

If your child is older, it might be good to ask what he or she knows about taking care of his or her body. This is part of sexual health, self-respect, and beginning to set healthy boundaries. Our bodies are important, and we need to keep them as healthy as possible.

What to Share
If the child is older, ask what he or she knows first, or what kids are talking about at school. Ask if peers are talking about who’s having sex, if there’s pressure, etc. This will help in pointing you in the best direction to help your child. Of course, if your child is in a sex-education class, and you have waited that long, use it to open up the discussion.

Be calm. Listen to what your child is saying. Observe how he/she is responding to your questions, the looks on his or her face. You need to know what he or she knows and what you will need to correct it, if the information is wrong. Try to limit your responses so that your child does not give you the glazed look on his or her face when you have said way too much or he or she is not interested anymore.

Share Your Beliefs
I grew up in church and was raised to not have sex before marriage. I grew up knowing what the Bible says about premarital sex, what my parents expected of me, and these things helped me develop my beliefs and standards about who I give my body to (or not). It also taught me to keep my kisses for people who are going to respect me and not just what I can give them.

That is definitely an important aspect of sexual health: teaching your child that his or her virginity is important, and whom they choose to have sex with may either take it or nurture it. Kids need to know that when they have sex, they need to make sure that the person receiving their virginity will protect it, respect it, and not take advantage of it.

I am not trying to stand on a soap box or anything like that, but the reality is that kids are having sex—a lot more than statistics will probably show, and sex is not to be used for random wants. Oral sex is often not perceived as “sex,” but it still involves the giving of oneself. There are feelings involved, even with a one-night stand. Whether you go to church or not, you have your own morality about sex, and all parents want their children to make healthier decisions than they did.

How Each Parent Can Help

• Dads: You can help demonstrate to your sons and daughters about how a girl/woman should be treated. You can share how you would like your daughter to be treated by how you treat your wife. Again, not on a soap box, but our children learn from us—verbal communication and nonverbal. You can share with your daughter the lines that boys may say to get into her pants: “If you love me …” “I love you.” “We can go slow.” And so on. You can also help your daughter to be confident in herself; treat her with respect. Tell her how much she means to you, and what type of guy you would like her to find. You can also help your boys to show respect to women—more than just opening doors for them, but demonstrating respect in speaking to them, etc. You are as valuable as your spouse, and you can give insight regarding men because you are one!
• Moms: You can help demonstrate to your sons and daughters how to treat a man. You can share with your sons what girls are like, how they can be, what type of girl they should be with, how to help with communication, how self-respect is important, and how to set healthy personal boundaries.

There are many more points that can be discussed on this particular topic. I wanted to highlight that it is the parents’ job to help teach children about sexual health, potential diseases, and all that encompasses choosing to have sex. Sex-education classes alone may not be enough.

As a parent, you are very important in your child’s life, even if he or she is not going to admit that. Keep the discussion about sex open with your child. Keep listening. Give the facts. Be there.

In a highly anticipated interview with Oprah Winfrey, famed cyclist Lance Armstrong has finally come clean about the allegations of doping that have haunted him for much of his unparalleled career. Armstrong, who in August 2012 was stripped of his record seven Tour de France victories and banned from competitive cycling due to mounting evidence of performance-enhancing drug use, is just one in a long line of athletes—most notably baseball players—who have either confessed to using performance enhancers or whose images have been tarnished by credible allegations of doping.

It’s no secret that many athletes will go to any length for a competitive edge, but performance-enhancing drugs carry numerous health risks, including baldness, impotence, infertility, addiction, psychiatric issues, hypertension, liver problems, and numerous other issues.

In a world where athletes who use performance-enhancing drugs always seem to get caught, often with disastrous consequences for their careers, what would compel an athlete to risk not only his or her health but livelihood as well?

Perfectionism and Pressure to Perform
Competitive sports can be cutthroat. Fans, coaches, and sponsors have high expectations for athletes, and hold in high regard records and never-been-done-before, seemingly superhuman feats. These expectations are frequently unrealistic, but can place considerable pressure on athletes. People in the upper echelons of athletics are often perfectionists to begin with; after all, it’s not easy to make it to the top. These perfectionist tendencies can make performance-enhancing drugs seem not only justified, but necessary.

Particularly when the competition uses performance-enhancing drugs, a dedicated athlete might feel like he or she has no choice. If the competition has an unfair advantage, taking drugs may seem less like cheating and more like leveling the playing field.

Peer Pressure
Particularly as more and more athletes admit to the use of performance-enhancing drugs, it can seem like sport is full of doping. Athletes may experience peer pressure from friends, teammates, and coaches, who may suggest that they can’t keep up with their competitors if they don’t use drugs. Peer pressure can also come in indirect ways. When athletes are criticized by peers, they might feel like their only hope for improvement can come in a vial or pill. Coaches, teammates, and even physicians or trainers may be complicit in doping.

Financial Issues
Not all athletes are wealthy. Particularly among Olympic athletes, financial gain often comes in the form of sponsorships, not from the sport or league. Many athletes spend years paying coaches, trainers, and gyms, and may get deep in debt covering the costs of developing into one of the best at what they do. Athletes are much more likely to get cushy sponsorship deals and contracts when they break records or win competitions. Particularly when an athlete knows or believes that other successful people in his or her field are using performance-enhancing drugs, they might seem like the most attractive or likely way to get out of debt and into financial security.

Secrecy
Although many athletes are regularly drug-tested, dopers try to stay one step ahead of the science. Many athletes have devised novel ways to avoid being caught, and in a high-stakes world, it’s easy to believe you can outsmart the testing mechanisms. Indeed, many athletes have managed to do just that for years, so the risk might seem worth it to an athlete under immense pressure.

References:

1. Oprah: Lance Armstrong confesses. (2013, January 16). ESPN. Retrieved from http://espn.go.com/sports/endurance/story/_/id/8845599/oprah-winfrey-confirms-lance-armstrong-admitted-doping
2. Performance-enhancing drugs: Know the risks. (2012, December 12). Mayo Clinic. Retrieved from http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/performance-enhancing-drugs/HQ01105
3. Shermer, M. (2008, March 31). The doping dilemma. Scientific American. Retrieved from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-doping-dilemma
4. Shermer, M. (2009, September 07). Why athletes dope. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-shermer/why-athletes-dope_b_278861.html

The Family Man, starring Nicholas Cage, is a great Christmas movie, and I watched it last night. Nick’s character makes a choice at the beginning of the movie and, more than a decade later, is a very wealthy man. There’s a message from his old girlfriend, Kate, but he does not call her at that point. After a brush with fate, the next morning there’s a change in his life: He’s with Kate, two kids, little money, and he’s got to figure out what is important to him.

When he finally realizes what is important, he wakes up having never been married, and meets up with Kate—who is going to be flying to Paris and wants to give him back his old stuff. Back in his penthouse, he sifts through a box of memories. He goes to the airport to try to stop her and convince her about the life they would have had if only he’d made a different choice. If you have not seen the movie, I do not believe I totally spoiled it for you, but if I did, I am sorry. I wanted to capture the basics of the movie, but you will have to watch it to get the essence of the movie.

It’s Christmas time, and every year at this time, we are scrounging around to get the best gifts for our families or friends. The stores are packed, the after-Christmas sales will be going on very soon, people will be returning gifts to get what they really want, and the attitudes of people are not always joyous. If you do not need to be out shopping, then don’t. Each year, the shopping comes earlier and earlier, more sales, etc. I also think that each year, the meaning of Christmas—the birth of Jesus, being around family, friends, sharing love, kindness, helping others, and spreading cheer—diminishes. This is my opinion.

We each have a choice to make. Yes, I have fallen into making sure that my family and friends get the “best gift,” and feel so ragged that it can be hard to be joyous. Having a kid changes your perceptions on what is important and what is not.

With my almost 2-year-old son, I am reminded that it is not about the quantity of gifts that I give or receive but rather the quality of the time I spend with my family and friends. Whether it’s baking homemade peppermint patties (York need not worry about going out of business), decorating cookies, reading about the birth of Jesus, or watching holiday movies, it’s what I am doing with family and friends that counts. It’s watching my son’s face light up when we play with Legos together, or crash his trains and get the toy ambulance to come and help the trains get all bandaged up. The quality time I have with my husband is very important as well—how I do my part to strengthen the relationship (not talking about sex), the unity that we have, and help each other stay focused and not get lost in the emptiness that can come with giving a gift because it’s on sale.

Almost all Christmas movies are about being with the ones you love, spreading joy and cheer, laughing, playing, creating memories, etc. Many are also about people who are trying to get ahead and how empty they may feel because they are not connected to their friends or family. It’s like a wake-up call, and it happened to Nick in The Family Man.

This is your wake-up call. Remember: Each day, not just at Christmas time, tell your friends and family how much you love them, and play with your children and friends’ kids when you visit them. Allow the children to help you relive your childhood memories, and after Christmas, keep spreading that joy all year long.

Watch The Family Man. It might remind you of what is really important and help you find balance in your life.

“Owning up to the ‘good-bye’ that is built into our finite human existing makes possible the saying of an authentic ‘Hello!’ ” —Robert D. Stolorow

For most people, death is something that will happen to us someday. Not today. Not tomorrow. But sometime in the future, distant enough that we need not concern ourselves at the moment. In other words, we ignore it and forget about it. Yet in doing so, we forget who we are. Death is not just something that happens at the end of life. It is a part of us throughout, whether we confront it or not. In facing death, traumatic as it may be, we cannot help but change, grow, and clarify what it is that we love and care about most. The preciousness of time comes to the fore.

It’s true that people understand death in different ways. Does the soul continue on or does it die with the body? Is there life after death, or does it end with this one? Whatever one’s beliefs about the hereafter, death is the end of life as we know it. When a loved one dies, he or she departs from us in a way that is undeniable. We are forced to notice their importance to us, as well as everything we value. In romantic relationships, as often depicted in romantic comedies, each partner’s love becomes inestimable often only after it has been tested with the threat of loss.

Confronting death as an ever-present reality means mourning the loss of all we hold dear. It is no mystery that death is not a favored topic for cocktail conversation. It’s often depressing and lacks a joy and levity that is so much a part of life. When a loved one dies, we often say that he or she “passed on,” avoiding the harsh word of death, attempting to soften the painful reality for the sake of our loved ones. Few people choose to spend their lives isolating themselves with thoughts of death. It is isolating because it forces us to depart from ordinary social values.

David Fincher’s film Fight Club (1999) is a dark and violent satire that exposes the superficialities of commercial life and hints at the meaninglessness of life altogether. And yet the film holds great potential to discover meaning. The antihero Tyler Durden recruits a large number of young men into his “fight club,” and insists they shun the values associated with ordinary social life, particularly advertising. “You’re not your job,” he preaches. “You’re not how much money you have in the bank. You’re not the car you drive. You’re not the contents of your wallet.” Durden pulls these young men away from their ordinary day-to-day living into a profound confrontation with themselves. He prescribes to his followers that they let “what truly doesn’t matter slide.” Fincher’s film hints at the sort of existential confrontation I’m trying to describe. Durden insists to his pupils, “You have to know, not fear, that someday you are going to die.”

It would be a mistake, however, to conflate the commentary on death in Fincher’s fight club with my own. Fincher’s Durden develops a following, a cult of sorts. He removes people from the social conformity of ordinary life only to foster a new conformity to the cult of fight club. Confrontation with death, whether through the loss of a loved one, escaping the threat of physical harm, or simply philosophical contemplation, is always traumatic. It leaves one disoriented, forcing us to abandon the thoughts and beliefs that root us in everyday life. Fincher’s fight club finds its way toward destruction and a certain kind of meaninglessness, where there’s little, if any, light at the end of a dark tunnel. The commentary on death in Fight Club treats life recklessly, not carefully. In coming to terms with death, life needs to be respected in order to preserve the opportunity for growth. It is then that from darkness may come great illumination.

Women have many roles. They are sisters, friends, daughters, mothers, and wives. And most women are employed in some capacity, with or without pay. Whether they work at home—raising children and running the house—or they enter the workforce as an employee, most women work. For young women, the transition from student to worker can be challenging. Equally difficult can be the reentry into the workforce for women who return to a job after having stayed home to raise children. How a woman approaches these transitions can affect not only her success in this pursuit, but also her self-esteem and well-being.

David Weiss of the Department of Psychology at the University of Zurich in Switzerland looked at two specific factors in women’s work-related aspirations. First, he looked at how openness influenced the experience. Second, he gauged how women’s gender ideology affected outcome. Weiss conducted a study that followed 61 young women as they left high school and began careers. He then looked at more than 800 women’s transitions from school or parenthood to work. Weiss found that the women who were lower in openness embraced traditional female gender roles, while those with more openness embraced nontraditional gender roles.

Those women who were more open demonstrated high levels of self-efficacy and well-being. Women who were less open fared poorly when they tried to step out into nontraditional female roles. “Taken together, the present research suggests that endorsing an ideology that provides strong behavioral guidelines can help women low in openness to master the challenges of a developmental transition,” Weiss said. He added that for women who approach career choices with an open mind, working within the confines of traditional gender expectations can have negative effects on self-esteem, well-being, and overall work-related success.

Reference:
Weiss, David, Alexandra M. Freund, and Bettina S. Wiese. Mastering developmental transitions in young and middle adulthood: The interplay of openness to experience and traditional gender ideology on women’s self-efficacy and subjective well-being. Developmental Psychology 48.6 (2012): 1774-784. Print.

One of the basic ingredients of good psychotherapy is being understood. People often do not consider what it means for a therapist to understand. Ideas vary from one school of therapy to another—even from one therapist to another.

Some look for understanding through causes. How did you get to be the person you are? What early experiences may have taken part in forming your personality?

Some therapists focus on understanding in a manner rooted in biology. Do you have a shortage of neurotransmitters that are designed to make you feel happy—to give you a sense of well-being?

Others are more interested in understanding what you experience as you go through the world. What does it feel like to be in your shoes—to have your anxieties, loves, fears, and hopes?

Most therapists use a combination of these modes, as well as many others I haven’t mentioned. In my view, there is a critical part of understanding that provides a profound respect for your humanity—a sort of understanding that is familiar to all of us, but is not an ordinary part of the therapeutic literature.

I’m referring to the process of understanding a person precisely how that person understands himself or herself. I believe the modes of understanding that I have mentioned are critical, but having someone see you in the way you see yourself is foremost. There is subtle disrespect in a therapist’s bypassing your self-understanding toward an investigation that lies beneath—whether it be unconscious phenomena, biochemistry, or even felt experience—as your experience in the world is not quite the same as your evaluation of it.

[fat_widget_right]It’s true that we all have blind spots, and therapists are in a position to notice things we may not. We collaborate with our therapists to investigate the mysteries of the unconscious, the unknown, and what we don’t understand about ourselves. That quest has been a part of therapy since its inception. But wouldn’t it make sense for therapist and person in therapy to have dialogue about that first?

For example, does your understanding of self-discovery differ from that of your therapist? Presumably, nobody is the expert when it comes the most important human questions—those that matter most to us. Therapists in their craft have something to teach: Sigmund Freud’s technique ignited a passion for self-inquiry lasting more than 100 years and still burning. However, the extent to which you may have something to teach often is overlooked.

Following one of Freud’s favorite metaphors, as the archaeologist penetrates beneath the earth’s surface, the psychoanalyst does the same with the mind. In a descending excavation, the height of great aspirations—the astronomer’s sky—may be inappropriately understood.

Therapists can become preoccupied with your biases and misconceptions. They may lose sight of the independent dignity of what you see. What are the things you love and hold dear? Why do you love them? What are the things that guide your life? Love? Family? Truth? Beauty? Security? What are your highest aspirations? Your virtues? Strengths? What are your opinions about the most important things? The universe? And how do you understand your place in it?

Many therapists develop understandings of people in therapy in relation to these questions. However, it might be a mistake to believe these investigations lead only to an illusory superstructure under which your real truth lies. These questions are integral to being human and hold an independent dignity. They cannot be reduced to something else. It is a terrific advantage if your therapist welcomes the things that are most dear to you and understands them on your terms with the utmost seriousness.

One of the cornerstones of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) is the concept of workability. The aim of ACT is for our clients to create a rich, meaningful, and vibrant life. Workability is how we determine whether a client’s behaviors are serving that end. Usually, people know when their behaviors are not working for them, but because they are often fused with their thoughts, they may have a hard time acting any other way. Instead of bringing them closer to the life they want, their behaviors are more or less a means of struggling with or avoiding painful thoughts and feelings. To demonstrate how this might appear in a therapy session I’d like to present the case of Samantha (Of course names and details have been altered to protect confidentiality):

Samantha is in her late twenties, single, no children, has her own apartment in a suburban neighborhood, a cat, a steady job for the last year and a half, an unused gym membership, and hasn’t been on a date in four years. She complains about her female co-workers being “fake” and “slutty” yet she secretly wants to be like them and to be liked by them. Any time an opportunity arises where she is invited to attend a happy hour with work people, she has an excuse not to attend. She then goes home and cries before opening a pint of ice cream and watching pre-recorded episodes of “fill-in-the-blank-reality-television.” (more…)