"You MADE me.."?

[Amie]

Some of us are familiar with the concept that other people are not in charge of how we feel. No one can "make" us angry, sad, afraid, or happy.

The idea is that if we assign fault outwardly, we loose personal power. The 'other' around us then pulls our strings like a puppet, our emotions being dependant.

So how do we distinguish between that loss of personal power, and when we REALLY feel somehow because of the actions of another. I'll give some examples..

A Mom or Dad backhands a child in front of friends. Is the child "choosing" to feel humiliation and saddness? Many times the child does choose to feel another way (denial) or not to feel at all (denial again). That is after the fact however.

A husband, who is far larger than his wife, screams in her face, throws things - veins pulsating/eyes bulging. Is she wrong to feel afraid? Should she choose to feel happy?

I feel that to go too far with the "you choose how to feel" is to deny raw emotion. I have some articles in the kid's section of womenbeyond.com that advocate the "you can choose how to feel about it" view.

As well, in the teens section Jay McGraw (like his Dad) says "you teach people how to treat you". He suggests along the lines that the choice to dress outside societal bounds - maybe going out with 50 million piercings and rainbow hair - is a choice to be treated as a person in the margins. I agree that would be a bad choice for a job interview, though it is not an excuse for others to behave ugly (it's a reality though, I know).

Another example of "teaching people how to treat you" would be always saying "yes". People learn to take advantage.. or another example is never sticking up for yourself - people may learn to bully you.

How far does this go though?

Certainly no one can MAKE me happy but me, but lemme tell ya, other people have scared the *expletive* out of me more than once in my lifetime (MADE me scared).

I teach people by my life choices how to treat me though that does not mean that their abusiveness is my fault.

Thoughts?

Amie

[Barry]

Just my thoughts:

Children have few defences. What they feel however is "Why are you doing this to a child", "are all adults this stupid?" ETC.

Beyond this however I feel that some of what we struggle with we do so because we do not put the greater picture in mind.
The greater picture is however lacking while healing is still in great need. One affects the other dramatically.

Also we are still IMHO trying to find ourselves in the first century setting. This we IMHO must move beyond.
To know how legit our anger is our humiliation is, is hard to determine without a better grip on the meaning of life itself.

Is it our ego man (person) responding or is it our feeling from a better understanding of life.
Are we upset with the other or with our self by letting the other get the better of us?
These answers will change from person to person. But what is in view really is "do we understand the meaning of life" and so are we upset with reality of imagination.
These are hard questions!!

Even though they are hard I believe that there are some guidelines.
Since this only addresses a portion of what you are bringing up Amie I'll stop here and get some more input from where you are trying to go with this sis, so that my comments won't be too far off base.
Only this:

Happiness is more attainable than we may think, and the joy of life may be less affected by others than we may perceive. However none of us is immune to the hatefulness of others.
Barry

[Infinite Grace]

Amie,
I hear what you are saying, and would like to offer some clarification (I didn't get to read your entire post, just perused it, so if I say something wrong, or something that you've already conceded to, I'm sorry).

The actualizing event, which would be wife-beating in the scenario, is processed by the woman by her "beliefs" which then lead to consequence. This is the ABCs of Cognition. You seem to imply that the consequence is always anger, and is always considered wrong. That is not so. Most likely, the consequence is the beaten wife staying with this wife-beater, and justifying his behavior. This is WRONG! But why is it so?

The woman's belief system is such that when JERK beats her, she processes it as "I did something to make him mad" (you see the "I made him mad" problem - YOU MADE ME), or "he really loves me, he just doesn't know how to express it properly."

The rest of the ABCs are the DE, which stands for Disputation and Effective change. We, as counselors, must DISPUTE her beliefs that she deserves the treatment, or that JERK doesn't know how to express his "love" properly. When we make the beaten spouse realize that she doesn't deserve this treatment, and that she deserves to be loved, and that her significant other is a JERK (note that I didn't say "spouse". That is due to the fact that over 80% of domestic violence is perpetrated in situations of unmarried couples).

You see, the idea that we control our anger, or emotions is based solely on the reaction or consequence. It is natural, and very appropriate, for someone to get angry if they are beaten. However, it is how they use that anger that may or may not be appropriate. In the movie, The Burning Bed, Farrah Fawcett is beaten and eventually kills her husband (ironically, she sets his bed on fire...hmmm, I wonder if that had anything to do with the title). She is "justified" due to the fact that she was beaten, and her belief system was that she had the right to kill him. Now, we could argue this point all day, and I think that if I, probably the only death penalty advocate here, thinks that she didn't have the right to kill him (unless he was in the act of killing her - which he wasn't, he was sleeping), then we can conclude that her actions were wrong. Why did she do something that was wrong? Because her beliefs told her that she was justified in doing so.

A proper reaction to being abused is anger, but anger that sets in motion a series of goals, all of which must be measurable and attainable. This would be; 1) getting to a safe house, 2) asking the abuser to get help. If the abuser seeks help (Alternatives to Violence), then new goals are established which include supporting the abuser in his help-seeking, and hopefully restoration of the relationship, especially if they were married and children were involved.

All of these goals and actions are precipitated on the idea that cognitions/thoughts founded on our beliefs must be openly disputed when dysfunctional/irrational, and only then can new behavior be initiated.

thanks for listening, thanks for listening

[Amie]

Thanks for the input :)

I am hoping to gain some clarification between:

"My feelings are your fault. If I'm not happy, I blame you. If I'm angry, it's your fault." and "We choose how to feel and are responsible for our own feelings. If someone is mad, it is because they choose to be. If someone is not happy, it is because they choose not to be.

As well as between:

"My actions are your fault. I hit you because you made me." and "We teach people how to treat us. We choose to go out into the world as victims."

Thanks a bunch, I'm looking forward to more of y'alls (and other's) thoughts if you care to share,

Amie

[Amie]

Btw Ed,

It sounds like we agree that there is some 'raw emotion' in that folks who are beaten naturally feel angry, scared, or sad and that you are saying one of the differences (between assigning fault, or choosing a feeling) is that it is from that point, that we then make a choice. (Hope I'm following you)

Amie

[Barry]

Hi Amie,
after reading once again your post and that of Ed's it seems that my above remarks are not really on the mark.
This:...
"Happiness is more attainable than we may think, and the joy of life may be less affected by others than we may perceive. However none of us is immune to the hatefulness of others."

...only touches on what you seem to be getting at.

Let me see if I can mess this up again LOL!
Going to try really hard LOL!

In regards to:
""My feelings are your fault. If I'm not happy, I blame you. If I'm angry, it's your fault." and "We choose how to feel and are responsible for our own feelings. If someone is mad, it is because they choose to be. If someone is not happy, it is because they choose not to be."

IMO much of what we have called selfishness is actually not. We all have needs and one of those needs is to seek out emotional well being. When ignored there is a price. When abused there is a price. [I consider myself a victim of emotional abuse.] One may find his or her self in a situation where they feel that taking care of themselves is selfish. This sort of negative input or influence, unfortunately comes from all directions.

An adult women I know of was at the age of 12 shown pornographic images by her Uncle in his 30's of what he wanted her to do with him. She was fortunate to get out of this situation with very little physical escalation of the situation.
The damage however was done. The feeling of betrayal, fear, and everything else that goes with it had made its impact.
When she had brought up the subject to the mother, the mother responded by, "What did you do to provoke this?". Now a whole new set of negative emotions and feelings.

This women has some responsibility to herself to find happiness in life in spite of what had happened to her. She certainly is not at fault for the feelings that this has produced.
As a society we are very much guilt pushers.
We even feel guilty for trying to take care of ourselves and others push this upon us.
Then there is the "maybe I deserve this" that often seems to bring people to somewhat similar circumstances over and over again.
IMHO our ideas of what is selfish really needs to change.
Barry

[Infinite Grace]

Barry,
Yes, the scenario that you present about the girl's mother is typical of how parents, or others can pass on dysfunctional thinking. The mother's dysfunctional advice was "it is your fault when people attempt to abuse you." That dysfunctional thought is then firmly planted in that child's head until someone comes along to dispute it. This young girl, as she gets older, will find more and more people willing to abuse her in one way or another. Even a spouse may find himself an easy manipulation - e.g., if the husband wants his wife to do something that she might consider dirty (having sex with a third party), the husband can manipulate the situation by saying "I thought that was what you wanted..." The wife (the girl in your scenario) thinks back to her mother's words and says to herself "I must have said or done something that indicates that I want this, it's my fault...what right do I have now, after prompting the thought in my husband, to say 'no'?)

See how it works?

I wanted to address selfishness for a moment. Selfishness is a natural human response. As children we cry when we are hungry, wet, soiled, tired or in pain. This is a selfish motivation - we want to be fed, dried, cleaned, rocked, or soothed. Nothing wrong with that. This is perhaps the reason for the "terrible twos." Children are used to "throwing a tantrum" (an infantile tactic) and getting their needs met. However, when 2, that same child throws a tantrum to get their needs met, and end up in a time-out or with a swat on the butt. The child is usually not that willing to give up, so the process continues until that child experiences some self-care. Selfishness is the reason that we do much of what we do - college, job, etc. Nothing wrong with it.

However, "ego-centrism" is quite another matter. When the "world revolves around us" there are problems. Ego-centrists think that everything is about them. Where this becomes dangerous is that an ego-centrist can walk into a room where folks are chatting. Those folks happen to laugh at something one of them said, and the ego-centrist assumes that they are laughing at him. This causes problems because of the dyfunctional thinking that is obviously present in the mind of the ego-centrist.

I just wanted to make clear that ANGER is NOT EVIL. If someone hurt my family, I WOULD BE ANGRY, and justifiably so. However, anger can become the actualizing event, which then leads to a new consequence with respect to whatever beliefs you may have concerning anger. E.g., if someone hits you, you get angry. If your beliefs are simply "this person has no right to hit me," you would probably walk away and sever any relationship that you may have had with that person.

However, if you had dysfunctional thoughts like "no s-o-b is gonna get away with hitting me..." This thought may lead to a consequence of you hitting the perpetrator back. What you fail to realize is that just as that other person had no right to hit you, you had no right to hit him. So the dysfunctional thinking in your mind caused you to lash out in anger. In this case, the person hitting you did not CAUSE your dysfunctional response of hitting him back - your dysfunctional thinking did. However, that is quite different than getting angry and taking proper measures to remove yourself from a hurtful situation.

One last point - in my opinion, if LIFE is threatened, not just a hitting moment, then self-defense is justified, and a rational response to the mortal danger that you face. IOW, if your spouse has a knife and is going to bludgeon you, find something and beat the hell out of him. This is a rational, self-preservation thought. Getting even, however, is not rational imho.

[Bill]

Hi Amie,

This is Bill. I just wanted to add perhaps a bit of a different perspective from what has been said so far. I don't know much about modern psychology so I'm sure my thoughts are going to be a little askew but they've worked for me so maybe you'll find some good in them as well.

You said, "I am hoping to gain some clarification between:

"My feelings are your fault. If I'm not happy, I blame you. If I'm angry, it's your fault." and "We choose how to feel and are responsible for our own feelings. If someone is mad, it is because they choose to be. If someone is not happy, it is because they choose not to be.

As well as between:

"My actions are your fault. I hit you because you made me." and "We teach people how to treat us. We choose to go out into the world as victims."

My first thought is that we are all part of a series of interconnected relationships. If I beat my wife it is not solely because of anything she did. It is mostly because of how I've been treated in my past. If I have a bad day at the office I'm much less pleasant to be around when I get home than when I've had a good day. Also my reactions to my wife are largely determined by my understanding of God's plan for me. If I view my wife as God's gift to me, as someone He has entrusted me with to express His unconditional love, then I will be kind to her. If I view her as someone whose behavior is failing to earn God's love then I am likely to be displeased with her because her behavior isn't worthy of my love either and I will treat her harshly.

My second thought is that feelings are the result of our concern for others and they are also beyond our control. If we care for others then we are going to have hurt feelings. If we isolate ourselves from caring then our feelings will be fine.

I think that our feelings are also based on our view of God. If we focus our mind's on His unconditional grace for us then we will be gracious toward ourselves and toward those around us. If we focus on our own failure to perform for God then we will be unkind to those who fail to meet our expectations.

I do agree that we can influence the behavior of those around us but we are not responsible. The responsiblity rests on all the past history of each one of us; on how we have been treated by each individual in our past. We can be a part of that past by modeling the behavior that we hope to see, but we can only bear a very small part of any responsiblity for anyone's behavior. I think there's a saying something like this ... be the change you want to see. If you want to live in a world of kindness then be kind yourself. That's all we can do. By modeling God's grace toward us we make the world a more gracious place to live.

Also, as we model God's grace we will become more gracious to ourselves and I think will be much happier than if we try to change those around us by using controlling attitudes and this includes withdrawing or separating ourselves from those whom God has given to us to shine His grace on.

I know this is long and rambly so if you have any thoughts in response I'll be happy to refine and clarify what I've said.

I love your persistence in these questions. They show that you have a true heart of compassion.

Bill

[davo]

One key in all this is REALIZATION. We can all be "justified" in our various REactions according to how WE rationalise such in our own musings, HOWEVER, learning to practice "forethought" i.e., "what will be the consequences of my actions?" can help circumvent much agro.

We can all trace certain "issues" we have back to some originator -- and again maybe even justified in our "not happy about this" position. BUT when it is an issue in the moment i.e., the current moment, then THAT'S where this problem is, our response or reaction then is our choice. To "know thy self" is so important -- all too often we choose to let it all hang out only later to regret having lost it.

This "knowing" is REALIZATION, that momentary window of time where if we are savvy enough, ask ourselves -- "should I or shouldn't I?"

Reacting is natural and easy and feels damn good, in the short, short term. Reacting is 100% impulsive.
Responding is less natural though totally possible -- it takes that moment and considers "what might the consequences be?".

Realization leads to actualization, i.e., what you sow you will reap -- be it a help or a hinderance.

[Infinite Grace]

Bill and Davo,
I agree with everything that both of you said. I apologize if my ramblings were not clear in that. Unfortunately, I had limited time and space to make every facet of the argument. You both have made important contributions towards that end.

If you re-read your own comments, you will see that both rely on "cognition", i.e., what we think and/or believe. If we, due to our childhood, believe that it is alright to beat up our wife (either because we saw our dad do it to our mom, or because we were constantly told that "women are only good for one thing..."), then our beliefs, or thoughts will be such that we feel justified in our beating her. The only way to counter this problem is to DISPUTE those beliefs, change those thoughts, and then change the behavior.

We may force people to change their behavior, but inwardly, they are still prone to do that behavior. Once the actualizing event occurs again, we will REact in a negative behavior. Only by changing beliefs can we change how we feel about the situation, and then change our behavior.

We can control our feelings, but not unless we challenge those automatic, dysfunctional, irrational beliefs/thoughts. E.g., if our thoughts/beliefs are that God hates us, and that the only reason that he doesn't fry our ass is because of Jesus, then we are going to behave hatefully towards others. However, when we realize that God LOVED us so much that HE GAVE HIS SON for us, and that this love is unconditional, then we can feel love towards others, and begin to love them in deed as well.

[Paige]

Just wanted to let you all know that I'm finding agreement with all the thoughts shared here. I think it is so important to discuss these issues, and it also helps me understand where others might be coming from.

Great discussion!

[Bill]

Davo and Ed,

I wonder what you guys think of this.

Davo, you said, "our response or reaction then is our choice."

Ed, you said, "We can control our feelings."

This may be nitpicking so feel free to disregard if I am off base but ...

The most important aspect of my personal "theology" is that we have moved on from an era where we had "choice" and "control" and into an era where we are completely dependent on God's mercy. The Old Way was one where were expected to control ourselves and to make the correct choices. In the New Creation we understand that we are helpless and that our righteousness comes from another.

The reason I am now pretty much at peace with myself and with those around me is that I have come to rest in His choices for me. I have very little expectation for myself or for others. I just wait for God to change me and for Him to change my friends and family and everyone I come in contact with; as He sees fit.

When I thought I could control my feelings and make the right choices I was constantly frustrated with myself because I constantly failed. At the same time my expectations for those around me led me to be critical and just plain mean. Now, as I live under grace, I still fail and people still mistreat me but I am at peace because I know that God is working in all of us in His time and not in mine.

I think you'd both agree that this is what Paul is talking about in Galatians 5 & 6. And by the way, I have learned sooo much from each of you over the past two years or so since I have come to understand the fulfillment of the ages.

Any thoughts?

Bill

[davo]

The reason I am now pretty much at peace with myself and with those around me is that I have come to rest in His choices for me.

My guess is Bill that this is a reflection of your character [personality] built on experience and your consequent gained knowledge [realization] – all good things. IOW you've come to learn [and learning no doubt] the benefits of resting in the progressive revelation you are having of God's grace, i.e., you know He accepts you and so this helps and is reflected in accepting others. None of that means you/we are free from conflict, but it often does mean you/we come to terms with it sooner and easier than in previous days – isn't the passing of time grand ;)


And Ed, your thoughts are good as well – just felt like chiming in with mine :). It's interesting how we name same things differently – what you call "the ABCs of Cognition" over here we call "the ABC theory of emotion" – same difference.

This is why it is possible for example to have identical twins [or whoever] grow up in the same toxic abusive household and yet one end up a total success while the other suffers total failure – it comes down to how they have and are "explaining their worlds to themselves" [subconscious self talk]. Why and how we do that is yet further mix into the pot.

"A" = the Activating event or Adversity does NOT determine "C" the Consequent emotion [as per Freud]; but rather "B" the Belief system determines "C". In other words – wherever our head is at the rest of us seems to follow along.

Example: if we THINK crappy thoughts long enough we'll start FEELING crappy and consequently BEHAVE crappy. Exchange whatever word you like for "crappy" – sad, angry, happy etc.

It's what I call HEAD, HEART, HANDS and predominately it flows from the top down:

HEAD – [B]thinking – Hang ups
HEART – feelings – Hurts
HANDS – behaviour – Habits

Each invariably portrays, or betrays, the other.

[Infinite Grace]

Bill,
I just wanted to say that your comments are totally in line with what davo and I are saying. You see, YOU CHOSE to accept yourself and others where they are. That is a cognitive belief, and it creates the consequence of you being at peace.

Sometimes we only look at the negative side of things when we speak psychology. The truth is, psychological concepts can assist us in living happy and fulfilled lives.

Davo, what I called the ABCs of Cognition could very well have been the ABCs of Emotion. Our instructor has been going over it, and I couldn't recall at a moments notice the exact name. It matters not what we call it, as you point out, but the truth that it contains.

I hope this discussion helps all of us to challenge those thoughts in us that cause us to live in any other way except in the way of God's Mercy and Grace.

[Amie]

We can control our feelings, but not unless we challenge those automatic, dysfunctional, irrational beliefs/thoughts. E.g., if our thoughts/beliefs are that God hates us, and that the only reason that he doesn't fry our ass is because of Jesus, then we are going to behave hatefully towards others. However, when we realize that God LOVED us so much that HE GAVE HIS SON for us, and that this love is unconditional, then we can feel love towards others, and begin to love them in deed as well.


Example: if we THINK crappy thoughts long enough we'll start FEELING crappy and consequently BEHAVE crappy. Exchange whatever word you like for "crappy" – sad, angry, happy etc.

"Wow" - that's all I'm left with.


"My feelings are your fault. If I'm not happy, I blame you. If I'm angry, it's your fault."

Letting go for a sec of the abusive spouse situation and considering a forgotten anniversary, or if your spouse wasn't as excited about a gift that you got for her/him as you were or had expected. Can the other person blame you for their feeling disappointed?

We all know that no one can get under our crawl better than our own life mates. We love them to pieces, but sometimes.. "Pow! Right in the kisser!" as Ralph Cramdon (sp) used to say. We don't literally hit them, but once again he left his dishes just one foot away from the dishwasher on the counter, or she left those shoes out in the middle of the floor - you tripped. Maybe the shower knob is still turned to the 'on' position and when you turn your water on, you get an early spray. Maybe Dad left the golden retriever in the wet backyard so long that you can't tell him from a mudpile (haha, can you tell some of this comes from personal experience?!). Whatever it is, your raw emotion (before cognitive consideration) is frustration, irritation, or the like. Can we therefore blame that feeling on the other person?

If I understand what y'all are saying, you are saying that it is at that point, that we take responsibility for our emotions and choose how to respond. As well, if we have been working at our point of view for some time (getting closer to love for example), it doesn't take long to melt into laughter over the whole ridiculous situation. For that matter, we may be more patient when someone does say "You made me angry".

So the above statement is only true when a person is less aware? Or is never true and the person just doesn't know they're mistaken?

Sounds like you all agree in so many words that this statement is true:


"We choose how to feel and are responsible for our own feelings. If someone is mad, it is because they choose to be. If someone is not happy, it is because they choose not to be."

On a related note, it has taken time for me to accept that "I can't MAKE my family happy" (my hubby and kiddos). Now I'm exploring that on a deeper level and the deeper I go, the more I am realizing that when I try to MAKE them happy is getting the opposite result. The more I try to repair them from or protect them from damage, the worse it gets. It is even healing to accept pain, because it is then that my family (including me) sees that we can endure and come out the other side.


"My actions are your fault. I hit you because you made me." and "We teach people how to treat us. We choose to go out into the world as victims."

I think that Bill summed this one up nicely:


I do agree that we can influence the behavior of those around us but we are not responsible.

How many of us heard this from our parents growing up: "Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to do anything." LOL!

On a grand scale like abuse, it is easy to say "It wasn't your fault". (My Mom blamed me also.) This is going to sound crazy, lol: I believed the abuse wasn't my fault, I believed that enjoying the gains from it was my fault (ie, special attention). I believed that I didn't make it happen, but I believed that holding the family together was my responsibility. If it split up, it was because I couldn't "let go of it". I don't feel that way today and do not have contact with most of my family - I'm stopping the cycle.

Unfortunately in cases of child abuse, what influences the abuser to move forward is the child's own innocence.

Amie

[Bill]

AAARGHHH!!!!

I am "feeling" so frustrated. I am trying so hard to be disagreeable and you kind folks just won't let me. I think I have a good point to make here so I'm going to give it another try.

"We choose how to feel and are responsible for our own feelings. If someone is mad, it is because they choose to be. If someone is not happy, it is because they choose not to be."

I do not agree with the above quote in any way and here's why.

I think that our feelings arise out of our thoughts and our thoughts arise out of our life experience. Take anger. When I get angry it is because I have had similar past experiences that have been added to my memory (my thoughts) which stir similar thoughts now and those thoughts cause me to feel angry.

I do not choose to "feel" anger. It just happens. Now I will tell you that I have had more than one person tell me that they have never seen me get angry and these are people with whom I have had strong feelings of anger on many occasions. They can say this because I don't express my anger. I have learned that anger doesn' accomplish anything and also that it doesn't express God's love. So I don't act angry. But I still feel angry.

Since I do not act on my feelings of anger it would be nice if I could just stop having these unproductive feelings. But, alas, they still happen. They just happen. And I bet they just happen to everyone else too.

All of this talk about being responsible and in control of our feelings sounds to me like the Jedi mind tricks from Star Wars. It would be nice if it worked but it just doesn't. And when we teach people that they can control things that they can't (feelings) then we are setting them up to fail.

And another thing! If I feel like I can control my feelings then it seems like I should be able to use the same Jedi mind tricks to control the feelings of those around me and eventually there won't be any more bad feelings anywhere in the whole world.

And another thing! If I think that I am able (responsible, accountable) to control my own feelings then I am going to hold those around me accountable for their feelings as well. When I hold others accountable then I tend to be less kind and less gracious. Don't you? "Accountable" is one of those words, popular in modern Christianity, that evokes feelings of anger in me, by the way.

Okay, that's enough for now. Now will somebody please find something to disagree with in what I've said!!!

No peace for you,

Bill :mad:

[Amie]

hahahahaha Bill, okay..

I was agreeing with you (sorry!) about the existance of "raw emotion" - which is what you are describing. It is from that point that we decide how we are going to think, then feel, then act. I am able to question my thinking, which raises cognitive awareness.

Let's say something from a past life experience creates a thinking for me like... "My husband shouldn't take a hard tone with children." I am truly and honestly reacting with raw emotion, created by experience. When my Mom used the same tone that my husband has used, she was about to beat us. I felt afraid, angry, protective and desperate.

When I feel something upsetting, I can ask myself "Is that true?" I can ask myself "How do you act when you think that thought and believe that he should not use that tone." Well you know, afraid, angry, protective, and desperate in my situation, was not a pretty thing. I began to protect my children from their own father and create a riffe between he and I. "How would the situation be different if that thought had never occured to me?" I would be calm, I wouldn't be creating division and hurting those I love.
If I am totally sold on an old thought process and still believe he shouldn't talk to them that way, I can explore what his talking to them that way means to me. It means that they are feeling what I felt - the fear just before the beating. Now THAT, is not true. My old baggage begins to fall apart and I don't even buy my own story anymore. As a matter of fact, my reaction scared them and when my husband used that tone they became afraid because of it.

As I work on my own baggage, I no longer have those thoughts - I don't let go of them. After some reflection, they let go of me. Because of that, I no longer have those feelings. I can be the example to my children that things are okay when Dad uses the harsh tone - it is his authoritative voice. We all heal.

There's a book on how to do this entitled "Loving What Is" by Byron Katie, and we go through exercises together in the Personal Transformations course that I co-facilitate to create the momentum in doing it ourselves. Lemme tell you something, many people's stories are the same, as is the work that they go through in becoming aware.

A big one last time was "the church should stop teaching fear". Everyone was behind that person's thought and it turned out to be a big learning experience.

Anyhow, sorry to ramble. Again, I don't discount "raw emotion" and that is why I came up with the example of a guy yelling and inspiring fear. It's true, things people do, inspire our feelings.


And another thing! If I think that I am able (responsible, accountable) to control my own feelings then I am going to hold those around me accountable for their feelings as well.

I don't hold myself accountable for the thoughts that come out of whereever they come out of or for the raw emotion I feel in their wake, I choose to work at it to help create peace in my life, and in the lives of those around me.

The statement above would be an interesting one to run through the questions, lol.

Amie

[Infinite Grace]

Look,
There is nothing to disagree with Bill. And Amie, your points are correct - in each and every case. However, what is causing the "disagreement" is that I am not making my views clear enough.

Here's what I mean - first Amie. In each and every case, I was talking about DYSFUNCTIONAL thoughts. I have never claimed that each and every thought that we have is dysfunctional. IOW, if someone hits me - I'M GOING TO GET ANGRY, and justifiably so. Anyone who doesn't get angry is probably a JEDI, and too freaky for me. Even Jesus got angry. Paul got angry. Anyone who says that you can live your life without anger is a liar (I am paraphrasing the apostle John here).

What I am talking about is when we get angry over benign statements. E.g., let's assume for one minute that you are a stay at home mom/wife, and your husband works all day. You've had a horrible day, busy beyond belief, and you get a late start on dinner. Your husband comes home, walks in the door and quietly says, "oh, I see dinner's not ready yet..." Now, if you have due to some past experience dysfunctional thoughts in your head that say things like "he doesn't respect me, he thinks all I do all day is sit around...", then your reaction to his words will be something like this: "What? Do you think you're the only one with a busy schedule around here? Why don't you make your own damn supper? I'm fed up with this kind of crap..." Poor hubby immediately says something like: "what's stuck in your craw? Damn, just shut up and get my supper." This is probably due to some dysfunctional cognitions that the hubby has such as: "she doesn't realize how hard I work all day. Why can't she just respect me and do what I ask?"

Let's turn this around and say that neither spouse has dysfunctional thoughts in these areas. The hubby makes his statement, and the wife's reply is something like: "Yes, I'm sorry honey. It's been a crazy day - I'll fill you in later over dinner. I just got a late start. It'll be ready in a bit. Would you mind helping me setting the table?" Hubby says: "I understand, sweetie. I had a rough day too. Sure, I'll help set the table. Let me get that serving plate for you..."

See the difference? However, the whole scenario can change several different ways depending on thoughts. What I am talking about here is when responses are irrational. Not when responses are justified - as in the abuse situation.

Now, for Bill. I am sorry that you feel frustrated by me, but I truly agree with you. Let me explain. You said: "Since I do not act on my feelings of anger it would be nice if I could just stop having these unproductive feelings. But, alas, they still happen. They just happen. And I bet they just happen to everyone else too."

You see, when I say that you can control your feelings, I mean that, if you are thinking healthy thoughts, your feelings will be appropriate. E.g., if you write a post that tells me that you are angry with me - two things could happen, and both are MY CHOICE. I could get angry and respond in kind. This would be if my thoughts (as they have been in the past) were something along the line of: "what right does he have to question me? Doesn't he know that I am an expert on this stuff?" However, if my thoughts were something like: "Hmm, I agree with Bill, but he seems to think that I am saying something different. Perhaps I haven't explained myself well enough..." Then my response would be kind, considerate, and respectful - realizing that it is MY FAULT that you don't realize how much I am agreeing with you.

Control of feelings is impossible due to automatic thoughts, cognitive misperceptions. However, once these cognitive misperceptions are disputed and effective change takes place, then feelings become more controlled - not entirely, they still are a result of your beliefs, but technically, it can be argued that IF I am in control of my cognitions, I am then, in a sense, in control of my feelings. Am I finally making sense?

RE: Jedi stuff. You did resort to some improper behavior, probably due to some dysfunctional beliefs about me or davo. We never said that we can control other people, and you know it. We have maintained all along that I am responsible for my actions, whether good or bad. No one else is, and neither can I control someone else. If you choose to think irrationally, I cannot change you. I can dispute your beliefs and cognitions, but if you do not change those cognitions, you remain the same.

I hope that you can see that there is no reason to get mad here, no one is being put down, or told they are wrong, other than the Jedi remark. It is not my intention to control you in any way, shape or form. I am merely discussing an issue brought up by Amie. I hope that we can continue this discussion without anger, or malice.

Peace to you

[Amie]

Ed,

I didn't know there was a disagreement, lol :eek: .

I don't think every thought is dysfunctional either. I think that if we're upset, it's time to have a look at 'em, that's all.

Amie

[Bill]

My dear brother Ed,

I love you man!!!

You are like my spiritual guru. Sincerely! I love it here and I love you all. This is my safe place.

I would never attack you. And if I express disagreement with anything you say it's only to give you an opportunity to clarify or show me where I'm wrong.

The "Jedi mind trick" thing was meant only to be illustrative ... not disparaging.

My only point was to question this,


Davo, you said, "our response or reaction then is our choice."

Ed, you said, "We can control our feelings."

You came back with the appropriate and helpful clarification,


Control of feelings is impossible due to automatic thoughts, cognitive misperceptions. However, once these cognitive misperceptions are disputed and effective change takes place, then feelings become more controlled - not entirely, they still are a result of your beliefs, but technically, it can be argued that IF I am in control of my cognitions, I am then, in a sense, in control of my feelings. Am I finally making sense?


Now you make sense to me and we are in total agreement.

Thanks for bearing with me,

Bill :biggrinbounce:

P.S. I think it would be great to have a group hug icon for some of my posts. :)

[Infinite Grace]

Bill,
Please don't use icons that express displeasure if you are not displeased. I could only go by the "non-verbals" that you sent.

I was so excited when I saw your name come up on the new member list. I knew who you were even though you chose to use your name rather than leo... I was not upset. Honestly, as I have been reading the two books by Dr. Aaron Beck and being taught by my instructors, Dr. Stephen Craig and Dr. Jerry McLaughlin, both of WMU, I am realizing how much I was being ruled by my own psyche, my automatic thoughts and beliefs. Believe me, not too long ago, I would have ripped you up. lol. It is God, working through Drs. Beck, Craig, and McLaughlin. I am merely a servant of God. Life is good.

[davo]

AAARGHHH!!!!

I am "feeling" so frustrated.

Great to know you feel safe enough here to be frustrated [angry]



"We choose how to feel and are responsible for our own feelings. If someone is mad, it is because they choose to be. If someone is not happy, it is because they choose not to be."

I do not agree with the above quote in any way and here's why.

I think that our feelings arise out of our thoughts and our thoughts arise out of our life experience.

You are right – this is what I said before: your experience [adversity, activating event] affects your thoughts [how you reason that event through] which has consequent effect on your emotions.



I do not choose to "feel" anger. It just happens.
TRUE, BUT – there comes a moment where you can choose what to do with that anger. Bill, you've already shown the choice you make with anger – you suppress it – that is a choice, and IMO maybe not always a healthy one:


Now I will tell you that I have had more than one person tell me that they have never seen me get angry and these are people with whom I have had strong feelings of anger on many occasions. They can say this because I don't express my anger.

Non expression of anger doesn't negate it – as you know; the problem is however it then wreaks havoc on the inside emotionally and often physiologically – headaches, ulcers etc.



I have learned that anger doesn' accomplish anything and also that it doesn't express God's love. So I don't act angry. But I still feel angry.

You are right again – you have learned to respond a given way based on certain beliefs [thoughts – in this instance "it doesn't express God's"]. And then because there is incongruity between how you feel and how you [b]tell yourself you should feel, frustration and self doubt reign supreme – or something like that.

You might want to consider your message to yourself that "anger doesn't express God's love" – and maybe explore where that belief came from.



Since I do not act on my feelings of anger it would be nice if I could just stop having these unproductive feelings. But, alas, they still happen. They just happen. And I bet they just happen to everyone else too.

You are right yet again – they DO happen to us all. I do think however that your idea that you DON'T act on your feelings may be a little misguided – I think it is more than likely that you simply internalize them. That is not, not acting on them.

Being responsible and or controlling our feelings does not mean we shouldn't express them. Certainly we can learn that it is unsafe to do so, so we don't, or we can learn it is considered inappropriate to do so, so again we learn to restrain them – and in given situations possibly correctly so. But this notion that wearing one's heart on one's sleeve is wrong possibly speaks more about one's personality than anything else. Some people don't care, and can be quite rude; others wouldn't dream of [in their opinion] offending someone in being so "brash" – we're all different. [take Ed, he flies out of his tree soon as he thinks someone's looking sideways at him – ONLY JOKING MATE ;)].

Speaking from my own experience I know I learned that to NOT show certain emotions meant that "I" was in control – and for me THAT was important. And you would be amazed how much "control" is such an issue in religion. I would subconsciously think people/God will think the better of me if "I" keep it together – and I become good at it, but it's a lot of unnecessary pressure. But the underlying "belief" in all that is ACCEPTANCE – if "I" do thus and so I'll be accepted.

I came to the realization one day that all I ever said about God accepting me was actually true, in spite of what I did or how I was. I then came to the conclusion that what others thought of me was less critical or crucial to who I was – like great if folk like me and if they don't good for them – that's their stuff.



And another thing! If I think that I am able (responsible, accountable) to control my own feelings then I am going to hold those around me accountable for their feelings as well. When I hold others accountable then I tend to be less kind and less gracious. Don't you?:

You may "feel" less kind and gracious based on what you "believe" about such "behaviour" that in your eyes [mind – thinking] is unacceptable to you – but THAT is a standard you have imposed on yourself based on certain beliefs you've come to hold as truth, and for YOU they are truth. But when you start to REALIZE that certain ways of thinking-feeling-behaving are weighing you down you might want to check them out, challenge them, then maybe changing them.

Bill, all the above is just my opinion only and if any or all seems like a load of @#$^& then feel free to ditch the whole lot – I'm just giving my thoughts based on how I'm reading your "stuff" – so of course I'm reading it through my perspective etc, which could of course be off the mark. Anyway, I'm glad you're sharing here.

[Bill]

Davo,

Thanks so much for taking the time to analyze my post. I would love to have you talk to me in person and see if you would say anything different. :) Maybe we could do some kind of chat sometime if you're interested. I especially appreciate your efforts because you didn't really have a lot to go on and so you were making educated guesses, though they were not necessarily far from the mark.

I do want to see what you think about one thing. You said,

You might want to consider your message to yourself that "anger doesn't express God's love" – and maybe explore where that belief came from.


I think that you and Ed and many others have read much more on this psychological stuff than I have. I only have two influences that I am aware of. One is Bob George, although I haven't read anything by him in years. The other is Larry Crabb. I think in his more recent writings he comes pretty close to expressing what I believe. Maybe something like "Pressure's Off." Also James 1:20 where he said, "for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God."

Anyway, thanks for sharing your insights,

Bill

[Infinite Grace]

Bill,
I think that the reference in James refers to anger over a certain issue - the return to the law and self-righteousness. We might call this kind of anger "righteous indignation." IOW, when we get angry over religious stuff, e.g., if we express anger towards sinners, we are not achieving the righteousness of God. Our duty is to express love towards sinners, in the same way that Christ expressed love towards us. Anger is never justified against those who are unaware as of yet of God's love for them as expressed in the life, death, burial, resurrection, ascension, and parousia of Christ.

I still maintain though that Jesus got angry at the moneychangers. Paul got mad at the Judaizers and wished that they would cut off their genitalia. Paul also told first century Christians, and I think it is appropriate today, to "be angry but don't sin." Anger cannot be evil in and of itself. Anger is evil when a matter of self-righteous indignation.

And let me clarify...most anger expressed by anyone today is unrighteous anger (e.g., Christians hating homosexuals, Muslims burning cities, husbands/boyfriends hitting their wives/girlfriends, spouses getting unrighteously mad at each other, parents getting angry and beating their children, parents yelling at their kids in anger...the list goes on).

at least that's my opinion.

ed

[davo]

Thanks so much for taking the time to analyze my post. I would love to have you talk to me in person and see if you would say anything different. :)

lol, yeah it's always easier looking over the neighbours fence talking about their backyard, while all the while standing on the heap of rubbish in your backyard to do so :cool: :biggrinbounce:

I can well imagine in my younger days "picking up the message" that expressing anger is NOT NICE, even a sin – and "we know God doesn't like sin does He?? :( ". So one learns to keep one's mouth shut – and that's where learning to repress feelings "can" start. And if you're someone who sees the world more from an internal locus of control [focus], then doubly the problem.

Anyway, there’s a saying I came across many years ago that says it for me: "most of us are like the rest of us" :)

PS: I do like that verse from James, especially the verse before it – it shows why God gave us two ears but only one mouth – besides that, as someone once said: "the tongue is in a wet place and has a tendency to slip" ;).