I told a group of women recently that we’re not cool, interesting, or important enough to be wasting time medicalizing our everyday choices. With a slight joking intonation, I took to saying “Who cares?” to most every remark about their step count, their sleep score through their Whoop and Aura rings, and their strategic, color-coded schedule for meditation, breath work, and cold-plunging. Where is the joy?, I wondered. Maybe I’m just the inert sloth of the crew.
Unsurprisingly, they were appalled. I did manage to force a chuckle, probably from someone who resonated with the “Who cares” or “we’re not that important” statements but felt uneasy agreeing with such honesty.
Thanks for reading honestly unorthodox.! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
“Girl stop it, you are aaaaaamazing!”
“What do you mean?!?! You’re just saying that because you don’t know your worth!”
[insert other platitudinal statements here about loving thyself and aligning thy chakra with thy menstrual cycle]
The tendency to control how other people feel is godlike and delusional. It’s also highly addictive and easy to fall into, mostly because we don’t see it as an attempt to control them so much as console them. I do it. You do it. Just recently my Mom was crying about my brother (for new readers, my brother died of a Fentanyl overdose 7 years ago), and my immediate reaction was “Mom, it’s okay.” It’s uncomfortable to feel helpless, and the empty reassurance we give is just a way to make that feeling go away.
People who deviate from widely accepted norms, particularly those which are social and verbal norms (think: political correctness or manners), are often met with rebukes and rebuttals. The heretic like me can be aversive simply because of our unpredictability: I will not bow down to mainstream theories, and will challenge faddish methods without a hint of a smile or a giggle. “Right, I hear you repeating what everyone else says about biological males in women’s sports, but what do you actually think? I don’t think you’ve shared your actual opinion yet.”
And you know what? I get it. It’s hard to simply exist next to people when they say something we haven’t been coached to respond to. Especially if it feels like our identity is tied to our beliefs about something and we therefore experience questions as a character ambush. But, I must remind readers: this is our own discomfort we’re trying to manage by controlling how another person behaves. Some try to make this very normal behavior appear more noble through use of terms like “people pleasing”. Whatever we decide to call it, its features are the same. We don’t like when people infringe upon our unwritten rules.
This lovely girl squad was not trying to reassure me. No. They were trying to manage their own experience of “ickiness” that resulted from my statement which likely assaulted their sense of reality. Kayla thinks I’m not interesting or cool or smart or funny? But everyone I hang out with, especially Mom and Dad, tell me that I’m interesting and cool and smart and funny! Off with Kayla’s head! Cognitive dissonance, in these sorts of social snafus, can occur as a result of the “ick”: when our beliefs or something we’ve heard is incongruent with our reality, we change our beliefs or we change our behavior. This usually occurs subconsciously and as a means to “close the gap”.
Or we try to change the evidence by omitting those facts which hurt our little egos (and do not support our fragile sense of self). This is less time-consuming and strenuous than the other options listed above.
This tendency is best illustrated by use of real-world example. A colleague told me that my thoughts on trauma and resilience are evidence of my ignorance as it relates to mental health. My thoughts on trauma and resilience, which she didn’t fully understand but assumed from my two to three statements about how “mental health” fads are futile, were probably far outside the narratives she’d grown accustomed to. This is a perfect example of contorting reality to better fit what we believe to be true, specifically about ourselves. Let’s take a look at this in a more visual format. Below you’ll find what I believe this colleague’s thoughts to be, and why she determined that I’m an unprofessional shmuck:
I am a trauma-informed behavior analyst. I am a good person.
Kayla is a behavior analyst.
Kayla does not believe people are traumatized.
We are both behavior analysts.
Kayla’s idea of people doesn’t fit with mine.
It must be because she’s uneducated and doesn’t know any better. I’ll educate her.
I’m going to correct her inaccurate experience to better fit my sense of good-heartedness.
That’s way better. Now Kayla knows she’s incorrect.
Now Kayla no longer stains the concept of myself and my profession. We are both trauma-informed behavior analysts.
This is not “educating” people for the sake of understanding their perspective, but grandstanding for the sake of our emotional wellbeing. It’s identical to the disaster that is social-emotional learning: feel all of your feelings, kiddos, but only feel them in the way that I teach you and use only those coping skills which I so beautifully laminated and lectured you about. “You’re sad, right? RIGHT?! Breathe in for 4 and out for 8, damnit!!! IF YOU DON’T REGULATE I’LL REGULATE YOU!” Student or adult, we as humans cannot handle when another person’s experience does not align with our own. This is especially evident when our identity is enmeshed with this carefully constructed reality. If, at your core, you believe yourself to be an enlightened person because of the beliefs you hold, any perspective even mildly different will stand to challenge your worth.
My second step in improving well-being relies on replacing mental health initiatives and social-emotional learning with scientific thinking. It uses only objective measures to assess information, and forces our beliefs through the ringer of empirical scrutiny. How much a person likes it or tolerates it is not a requirement or even a consideration. While I hate to be the person that says “data doesn’t care about your feelings”, it’s important we remember our own “truth” is not always THE truth. Because we’re focusing on logical thinking over feelings, I’m confident we can overcome the initial sting of reality and move toward solution-focused conversation.
I posed a question to my social media followers recently asking if they’d be upset with some common reactions to their anxiety. Many people emphasized their feelings over all else. I posed the question, “If you were experiencing intense anxiety and someone encouraged you to act as your non-anxious self, would you be upset?” Several compared this to being punched in the uterus or to being ignored as a living, breathing, alive person. They equated “behave in spite of your symptoms” with “I don’t care how you’re feeling.” Again, this is a natural tendency: we fuse to our feelings. We becomeour experience and refuse to bend to a more objective reality--- or even an alternative reality. It feels impossible, then, to behave as if we’re not anxious. “How dare you!”, is our initial reaction, “I am an anxious person!”. And this is what is taught in schools, too: every time you feel an emotion to any intensity, any and all plans/responsibilities take a backseat. Those fleeting and often irrational thoughts are far more important to tend to than Shakespeare.
But what if they weren’t? What if we were willing to believe that our feelings are usually incorrect and unreliable, especially when we’re distressed? What would be the worst that would happen if we were forced to silently suffer through anxiety so we can get through our day? Would we die if our struggle wasn’t validated or recognized?
Below are some strategies we can use that would, ideally, replace any of the social-emotional learning objectives in classrooms or even professional institutions. They require the individual to detach from their identity as anxious, troubled, stressed, or incapable, and behave as if they’re… well… better than that.
MENTAL MODELS TO REPLACE MENTAL HEALTH:
FINDING HIGH-FIDELITY INFORMATION SOURCES
When learning about a topic of any kind, it’s imperative we research the source--- and keep the information as close to that source as possible. In doing so, we reduce the risk of bias and personal experience (i.e., feelings) exerting influence over the information.
For example, if we wanted information about childhood anxiety, we may not wish to find details from psychotherapists who make money off of these services, from journalists who are paid to report crises, from insurance funders who essentially fund therapy. Ask yourself:
1. Who is the author or organization behind the information?
2. Is the source well-respected in the field?
3. How can we verify the author/organization?
4. Is the source affiliated with some sort of political, ideological, or commercial group?
5. Evaluate the language; does it seem emotionally charged, one-sided, or exaggerated?
6. Does the source itself use logical reasoning and factual evidence to support their opinions?
HANLON’S RAZOR, INVERSION THINKING, AND COMPETENCE
“Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by ignorance or misunderstanding.” When you find yourself offended by another person’s perspective, or you’re tempted to deem them uninformed compared to you, ask yourself:
1. Is this an intentional attack on my beliefs, or is there a more innocent explanation?
2. If this person’s belief or supposed policy (e.g., SEL in schools) were applied at large scale, what might happen in 10 years?
3. If we were to look at how to absolutely destroy the mental wellbeing of children, what would I do if I wanted to achieve that worst possible outcome?
4. Am I forming an opinion outside of my area of knowledge?
Because compelling narratives and initiatives move so quickly, it can be hard to predict the actual outcome. Do supporters of these movements even think about how this may affect students, clients, and themselves in the short-term? The long-term? Try the following “tests” below when you or your students are tempted to correct another person’s viewpoint:
1. Ask yourself after every statement you make, “and then what?” I actually used this tactic with the person who deemed me uneducated, and she couldn’t even formulate a response to one simple “and then what”.
Example: “If we get SEL out of schools, kids won’t learn about how they feel.” And then what? “Then they’ll end up like our parents, who were forced to suppress their feelings.” And then what? “Then…..” This is usually where people start to struggle.
2. Try the “what if everyone did this?” test. Take an action or belief and try to imagine what would happen if everyone followed it.
Example: What if every single one of our decisions were dictated by our mood?
If everyone did this regularly, and it were allowed to occur, it’s unlikely any work would get done, any conflicts would be managed, any constructive criticism or correction would be allowed to take place, or any learning would occur.
I hope you guys find the results of these “tests” insightful, and, as usual, feel free to let me know how they go!
Thanks for reading honestly unorthodox.! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit honestlyunorthodox.substack.com
