Category Archives: Psychological growth

Is a sociopath training you for evil?: 8 ways to spot one and survive them

A life in the Spirit, Psychological growth, Spiritual direction, , , , , , ,

sociopath portrait

When I first saw Donald Trump’s “official portrait” I had to marvel at the audacious grandiosity of it. There is no hint of humility or welcome in it. It is designed to intimidate. It matches his endless talk about “winning.” I had to turn away, to try to put him away.

But after his re-election, I decided I needed to turn back and face what we are all facing in that face. A sociopath is president. And all the traits of that 4% of the population are now being worked into the government, into world society, and into our individual lives. No one has ever known what to do when these people get into power (which they normally don’t), except avoid them or kill them – but those are not immediate options for me. So I am at least trying to understand them and discern the most helpful responses God can suggest.

The definition of “sociopath”

I am using the term “sociopath,” even though “psychopath” would work just as well. Neither term has a well-differentiated definition and neither appears in the DSM – the repository of approved definitions for psychotherapists and researchers. I’m using the term because when I decided to turn into the topic, I happened upon the “go to” book for people trying to understand: The Sociopath Next Door published in 2005 by Martha Stout. Someone said it should be required reading for everyone experiencing the Trump phenomenon, so I read it.

Stout’s popular book starts with “antisocial personality disorder” (ASPD), which is in the DSM. She lists the disorder’s seven symptoms. Demonstrating any three of these could achieve the label:  1) failure to conform to social norms, 2) deceitfulness, manipulativeness, 3) impulsivity, failure to plan ahead, 4) irritability, aggressiveness, 5) reckless disregard for the safety of self or others, 6) consistent irresponsibility, 7) lack of remorse after having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another person.

There are plenty of critics of this definition, as with any in the DSM. Some say it just defines “criminality.” Stout lists further traits that point toward a more complete picture: 1) sociopathic charisma, 2) a grandiose sense of self worth, 3) the need for stimulation, risk taking, 4) pathological lying, defrauding, 5) callousness, no empathy, the inability to bond.

The Psychopathy Checklist: Screening Version (PCL:SV) provides a list of twelve traits and asks the assessor to evaluate credible evidence for giving  a participant a 0, 1, or 2 score. If someone scores above 17, they are a confirmed psychopath. 1) Superficial, 2) Grandiose, 3) Deceitful, 4) Lacks remorse, 5) Lacks empathy, 6) Doesn’t accept responsibility, 7) Impulsive, 8) Poor behavioural controls. 9) Lacks goals, 10) Irresponsible, 11) Adolescent antisocial behaviour, 12) Adult antisocial behaviour. One forensic psychologist dared to rate Trump, in absentia, with the help of descriptions in books and articles about him and felt sorry for the world.

Some professionals work hard to differentiate between a psychopath and a sociopath. This is a helpful article to that end. Some have characterized the difference with this simple phrase: sociopaths are made and psychopaths are born. Stout goes to some length to demonstrate the genetic and physiological roots of sociopathy that lead to their lack of conscience, the trait that makes them uniquely different human beings. But it also seems to be true that young people labeled with ASPD can give up their behavior in later years and develop well-adjusted relationships.

After reading up on sociopaths, I am again convinced, when it comes to human beings, most labels are suggestive, not definitive. And most behavior needs to be assessed on a spectrum, with the therapist maintaining an ongoing sense of curiosity about how common traits are working out in an individual.

The sociopath spectrum

There is a cluster of disorders on a spectrum that describes a small percentage of the population who have an out-sized influence on everyone else because of the conscience they barely have or lack altogether. It is a bit easier to see them if we inspect their intent. What do these poor disordered people want?

Start with Narcissistic Personality Disorder in the lower range of the spectrum (NPD = 0-6% of the population). They want to preserve the image that protects their weak ego. Some of them feel remorse and empathy and can make functional relationships. They have probably been severely wounded.

Next add people labeled with Anti-social Behavior disorder (ASPD = .02-3.3% of the population). They want to gain self-esteem from power, personal gratification or  pleasure. These people are also known as sociopaths, though, as noted before, people labeled so when they are young have been known to change. Some say trauma creates them.

Next add the sociopaths. The term is used, often arbitrarily, to describe anyone who is apparently without conscience and is hateful or hate-worthy. Sociopaths make it clear they do not care how others feel. They are more likely to react violently when confronted with the consequences of their actions which makes it very hard for them to maintain work and family life. But violence is not an inherent trait of sociopaths or psychopaths.  Sociopaths can form attachments, but it is rare and very difficult. Their environment probably exacerbates their innate inability to care.

The term psychopath is sometimes used describe a sociopath who is simply more dangerous, like a mass murderer. They have no conscience (about 4% of the population). The only thing they really want is to “win.” The psychopath pretends to care but fails to recognize other people’s distress. They can follow social conventions when it suits their needs. Psychopaths are unable to form genuine emotional attachments. They have fake and shallow relationships designed to further their goals, which could be small or large, and which are usually unimagined by the 96%.

In describing the sociopath/psychopath end of this spectrum of disorder, Stout describes such a person whose

most impressive talent is his ability to conceal from nearly everyone the true emptiness of his heart – and to command the passive silence of those few who do know. …He knows how to smile. He is charming…He lies artfully and constantly, with absolutely no sense of guilt that might give him away in body language or facial expression. He uses sexuality as manipulation and hides emotional vacancy behind various respectable roles – corporate superstar, son-in-law, husband, father – which are nearly impenetrable disguises.  And if the charm and sexuality and role playing somehow fail, [he] uses fear, a sure winner. His iciness is fundamentally scary. Robert Hares writes, “Many people find it difficult to deal with the intense, emotionless, or ‘predatory’ stare of the psychopath,” and for some of the more sensitive people in his life, [the stare may be] the dispassionate hunter gazing at his psychological prey. If so, the result will probably be silence.

Protect your conscience

I think the society is being trained by sociopaths, right now. The president is their leader. If you just go through the behaviors listed above, you probably have little doubt about many people in the news. The innumerable lawsuits being filed are all about combatting behavior on the sociopath spectrum.

If you are a Christian, you probably agree with the New Testament writers who teach that our consciences can be injured, and blunted — and if you develop a “hardened heart,” it can wreck your all-important relationship with God. There is a lot of healthy discussion in the Bible about maintaining a conscience that resembles Jesus’ and stays open to the Spirit of God. But let me give you the teaching in just one little book, 1 Timothy:

But the aim of such instruction is love that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience, and sincere faith. Some people have deviated from these and turned to meaningless talk, desiring to be teachers of the law without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions. (1:5-7)

This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies made earlier about you, so that by following them you may fight the good fight, having faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have suffered shipwreck in the faith; among them are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have turned over to Satan, so that they may be taught not to blaspheme. (1:18-20)

Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will renounce the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, through the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared with a hot iron. (4:1-2)

If you feel like you must be living in the last days, you might be right. Pundits, protesters, prophets and preachers are working overtime to stand against the present “hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared with a hot iron.” As Paul teaches Timothy, having a living relationship with God, which keeps our consciences soft and clear, is a fundamental step in our self care.

8 ways to respond to a sociopath

There are many practical responses psychotherapists recommend when you are married to a psychopath, work with one, are led by one, or are just on the freeway with one.

  • Understand the tools of their trade

They are charm, seduction, and charisma — whatever draws us to let down our guard. Add the kind of “spontaneity” that draws you into taking risks you know are too much. Add acting skills — think Eve and the serpent. If you feel you are a step behind this person or your buttons are being pushed and you are being led along unwillingly, it is probably true.  Accept there are people with no conscience.

  • Watch the leader who says only they can save you.

They will seem good for you and then fold you into their aggressive plans. They use your empathy and compassion, creativity and desire-for-good against you. If your instinct tells you something is wrong with the leader, check out your instinct before proceeding — there are a few wolves in sheep’s clothing out there. Don’t hate everyone in case they are a wolf; just have discernment

In an age of lies, every light looks like a gaslight. If you think that, the sociopath wins their terrible game. Accept that people who find pleasure in dominating or scaring you are not like you. Their terrible behavior might be unimaginable, and you may blame yourself for being crazy to think they are terrible — and they will tell you that’s true. But remember that people with a conscience reflexively doubt themselves. Sociopaths don’t.

  • Habitually stand up to bullies.

In the age of psychopath billionaires competing with one another to win, many lesser bullies are being nurtured. If the 96% of us who have a conscience speak up and stand up to them, they tend to fold. You will have your doubts and fears, but you are not “rocking the boat,” you are keeping it afloat when you speak the truth in love.

  • Watch our for the “pity play”

Stout says “The most reliable sign, the most universal behavior of unscrupulous people is not directed, as one might imagine, at our fearfulness. It is, perversely, an appeal to our sympathy.” In Trump’s famous tweet, above, he brazenly says his impeachment, which was justified according to the evidence, is a “lynching.” But, of course. “We will win!”

  • Flee three-timers

One lie, one broken promise, or a single neglected responsibility may be a misunderstanding. Two may be a serious mistake. But three lies says you’re dealing with a liar. Deceit is the linchpin of conscienceless behavior. Cut your losses and get out. Consider Jesus and liars:

Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot accept my word. You are from your father the devil, and you choose to do your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. (John 8:43-45) 

  • Keep respect separate from fear

Many Christians have read in the Bible they are to “fear God.” They end up feeling overpowered by God and God seems like another predator in their jungle. But honoring God and others is what honorable people do, not coerced ones. Anxiety is not awe. A trauma reflex is not respect. “There is no fear in love.” Respect people who are strong, kind and morally courageous. When you obey out of fear, it is probably not in line with God or your own self-respect.

  • Don’t keep secrets for people

Obviously, confidentiality is a good thing, when appropriate. But you do not need to collude with people who beg you not to tell or insist you “owe” them silence in relation to their dirty deeds. You do not owe them anything. You are not part of their game, don’t play.

Most of these responses are very strong and do not sound loving — they are not normal for relating to people with a conscience. Definitions and lists make the process of discernment seem cut and dried. It is not. For instance, we cannot effectively label a person a sociopath, but even if we do, God is greater than psychopathy. Even if we are not certain, we must do our best to discern the motivation behind someone’s behavior and respond to them as they are, not according to their deception or our idealizations. We must attend to our personal health and the health of society. We might not have all the solutions or have the power to effect the necessary changes — but our voices matter; our responses matter. Having a clear conscience before God and others matters.

We can have some empathy for the conscienceless and imagine the horror they do not experience. Stout says:

Imagine — if you can — not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken … You can do anything at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are kept in line by their consciences, will most likely remain undiscovered. How will you live your life? What will you do with your huge and secret advantage?

But don’t offer them pity and don’t waste your time shaming them (which is essentially negative pity). Keep asking, “What are they doing with their huge, secret advantage?” And tell the truth about your answers, to yourself and to everyone who will listen.

________

Same picture going up on buildings

Your suffering matters: Now is the time to know it

A life in the Spirit, Psychological growth, , , ,

We don’t like it, but our suffering is where transformation usually takes place. Psychotherapy and other systems that should help us, even our churches, often do not help — mainly because the story they offer hollows out the meaning of our suffering. In their quest to shape a less permeable behavior for us, our healers can undermine our inborn capacity to endure our pain and even be reborn from it.

Psychiatry and clinical psychology are often accused of being consumed by a biomedical model, overrun by neurophysiology, sociobiology, and behavioral genetics. As a result, the everyday troubles we once described with the language of suffering are now described as diseases. Instead of suffering moral and spiritual challenges, we have infirmities caused by insuperable  external forces coming at us, as well as biochemical mechanisms and processes infecting our insides.

dansunphotos.com

In his fascinating book Facing Human Suffering: Psychology and Psychotherapy as Moral Engagement [Goodreads], Ronald B. Miller says the suffering experienced by psychotherapy clients has been replaced by

“a concern with eliminating what are construed as symptoms or manifestations of mental disorders, disabilities, diseases and dysfunctions. The client’s agony, misery, or sorrow is viewed as a mere epiphenomenon to be replaced by a description of a clinical syndrome that is presumably more easily defined, measured, and scientifically explained as the consequence of some technical design flaw in the person’s nervous system, cognitive processes, or learning environment that is amenable to change.”

Miller is eager to restore the moral and spiritual center to the discussion of suffering. Because our suffering matters. Even when we have medical issues to face and medicines we need to take, we are still wrestling with our meaning and yearning to live in safety and love.

Like Miller, I try to respect a psychotherapy client’s moral dilemmas and spiritual capacity, even though it often goes against the scientific assumptions they’ve been trained to bring to our process. They may have already been subjected to the biomedical model and see themselves as a set of debilities looking for expert cures. Janet Gotkin became a well-known leader in the psychiatric survivors movement after ten years of treatment by callous psychotherapists, hundreds of electroshock treatments and high doses of psychotropics. This is a bit of how she described her transformation:

I watched the Seine as it flowed and flowed.

“For eons, since there have been human beings,” I thought, “there has been this river. There has been this pool of suffering.” It was as if a light came into the darkness that was in me at that instant.

“There has been this despair…Women and men have looked down into the pit that is themselves and that life is and questioned the meaning and mourned the futility of it all. No amounts of Thorazine will ever make this feeling go away.

In the blackest pit of desolation, I felt I had found myself for the first time in my life. (pp. 376-9)

The Martyrdom of St. Thomas — Rubens, ca. 1636

As Christians we are reminded by Jesus, especially as we shared his travail during Holy Week, our suffering is important, too. In some sense it makes us human; it is elemental to love. You are more than a set of malfunctioning molecules. Last Thursday night after Jesus had handed his disciples the symbols of his unique suffering in the bread and wine, he taught them:

I am the vine; you are the branches. Those who abide in me and I in them bear much fruit, because apart from me you can do nothing. …

Remember the word that I said to you, “Slaves are not greater than their master.” If they persecuted me, they will persecute you; if they kept my word, they will keep yours also. But they will do all these things to you on account of my name, because they do not know him who sent me. — John 15:5, 20-21

Everything I do has meaning and everything I am is valuable. The world has been questioning those truths for decades, now. At this moment in our political history, Donald Trump is bringing the argument to a head by disappearing innocent people without due process as if they mean nothing. He is brazenly undoing years of struggle to undo our unequal society as if love is merely “weak” or “woke” and power is everything.

Grassley gets a lesson in morality

Donald Trump is so shockingly and relentlessly immoral [a list], the population seems to be jolted into remembering all the morality it has sloughed off for years. Like Gotkin, they are staring into the pit and many people are waking up to what is important. Chuck Grassley, the 91-year-old senator from Iowa, learned something about how awake people are at a town hall last week. Here is a two-minute clip from ABC’s report.

The New York Times reported on the meeting, as well. ABC skipped Grassley’s responses to his frustrated constituents, but here is what the Times reported:

[A man] shouted: “ Are you going to bring that guy back from El Salvador?”

The question was met with enthusiastic claps from many in the crowd of about 100.

“I’m not going to,” Mr. Grassley said. Pressed to explain his stance, he added, “Because that’s not a power of Congress.”

When the man replied that the Supreme Court had ordered the Trump administration to facilitate Mr. Abrego Garcia’s release, others in the audience began piling on. Some noted that Mr. Grassley chairs the Judiciary Committee, which oversees immigration policy and judges, prompting the senator to stammer, then fall silent and wait for the shouting to die down before trying to respond.

“El Salvador is an independent country,” Mr. Grassley said. “The president of that country is not subject to our U.S. Supreme Court.”

The crowd practically erupted in jeers.

Others have noted that the Administration (and Donald Jr.) had no trouble intervening to free Andrew Tate from his 2-year detention in Romania. They questioned the ruling in February, made contacts, and soon Tate was back in Florida. [Guardian]

Grassley is on his eighth term as a Senator. Since 1980 he has presided over an increasingly immoral country.  On the right, radicals rebel against how the basic morality of the Ten Commandments is ignored and their form of Christianity is undermined. On the left, radicals rebel against the overwhelming forces of capitalist oligarchs, climate change avoidance, and military destruction. I think both sides are rebelling against the limitations of the Descartes-spawned separation of natural forces/Science and spiritual experience/Church which infects all our institutions, including psychotherapy and the Church. Psychology replaced the Church as a “scientific” replacement for soul care and many people are not completely well as a result.

During the Grassley era, people have increasingly become, at least in their minds, subject to causes beyond their control. Their behavior is functional – an expression of an advertising scheme (as in the “GenZ” marketing generation), the outgrowth of their innate “identities,” a reaction to being helpless before climate change, in need of a strong man to tell them what to do. Grassley’s audience wanted him him to choose and act, not just explain the limits of his function.

I think most of us can’t lose the intuition that we are free to make good choices and we have responsibility for what we do. We are not just reactions to external stimuli whether from our gene pool or our environment — or Amazon. Both left and right seem to be clamoring to get their meaning back. The causal facts of life are never the most important ones, it is what we do with what happens to us that’s important. We are actors and creators, not just observers or passive conduits of the latest winner of some power struggle.

Miller says, “like the sculptor who must work with the piece of rock that is available, one fashions one’s life, or chooses not to and remains an ill-defined weighted object.” The crowd jeered at their senator, the weighted object. I think Grassley was surprised to see they thought they mattered and could do something about their situation.

A.I. might make our suffering more meaningless

Perhaps the most overwhelming piece of science determined to bring us under its power is artificial intelligence.  We are all quickly conforming to A.I. It is making us its conduit. It is undermining the meaning of our suffering as it becomes the authority to which we answer instead of our own spiritual awareness, feelings, reason and face-to-face community.

We had a lively discussion about using ChatGPT as a therapist in our counseling consortium meeting the other day. Several of us were not A.I. users but more of us were already learning. I think I was the only one who had a client who used their A.I. platform as a therapist.

A computer screenshot from a conversation with Therabot, a generative A.I. therapist developed by Dartmouth researchers.

I found it ironic to open the NY Times a few days later and see this article: “This Therapist Helped Clients Feel Better: It Was A.I.”  In our discussion, I suggested my clients who used A.I. might also be trained by it. I have heard of people who love it for it’s “authority.” When they see me face-to-face there is all the uncertainty of feelings in real time, ancient and immediate mistrust arising, and the fear of exposure. I think an A.I. therapist is pretty good with the externals, but we must also have an internal, moral, spiritual and relational  process to be whole.

When Donald Trump paraded the tech oligarchs before us at his inauguration and then set Elon Musk loose on the bureaucracy, it slowly dawned on people they were losing their meaning or had already lost it. The science of the economy, employment, food distribution, and entitlements were all subject to the whims of immoral psychopaths. This was always the case, but we had acclimatized to trusting science and experts as the only authority we needed. Once awakened, being ruled by Meta’s algorithms became even more distasteful.

If we go to A.I. to alleviate our suffering after it has been party to creating the suffering, who are we? And, of course, who is God? Where is our soul? What love is left?

Suffering has meaning

The biomedical worldview and the causal philosophy behind it has left us thinking our suffering is some kind of evolutionary, genetic “fate” or, more likely, our fault, since we must have missed the memo or we forgot our password and couldn’t log in to purchase the right help in time. Me, alone against the world, with only machine-operators to help, is exhausting and traps us in avoidance.

What I am exploring here and attempting with my clients, when it seems appropriate, is to question the meaninglessness that causes us so much anxiety and despair. It causes us to keep going to the empty wells of function and expertise to find solutions to our problems. We end up feeling like we are the problem and are stuck unsuccessfully trying to push down the pain.

Jesus reminds his followers that not only his suffering will have meaning, so will ours. The night before his state execution he told them:

Very truly, I tell you, you will weep and mourn, but the world will rejoice; you will have pain, but your pain will turn into joy. When a woman is in labor, she has pain because her hour has come. But when her child is born, she no longer remembers the anguish because of the joy of having brought a human being into the world. So you have pain now, but I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take your joy from you. — John 16:20-22

Your suffering can result in transformation, sooner or later. That does not mean suffering should not be avoided, or that you deserve it, or it will never go away, or you should not cooperate with what frees you from it. It does mean it is a place our true selves are born, it is also a way we matter, if we welcome that possibility.

If you cannot welcome the possibility, just trust Jesus with it. That trust, in itself, will do a lot of good. Your act of faith says, “I am a person who has faith,” which is an alternative to “I am alone and helpless before forces that make me suffer.” Such a story about yourself says you matter to God and you matter to yourself. It says you are worth saving and healing and helping and deploying – even when you are suffering, or you are afraid you will suffer, or you remember when you did, or you think you’ve suffered enough, or think you should never have to suffer. You matter whether you are suffering or not, and that means your suffering matters, too.

*******************

Today is Anselm of Canterbury Day! Europe was awash in change and development during his day. He was in the thick of it, theologically, politically and mystically. Get to know him at The Transhistorical Body. 

Say “No” now: It won’t get better

A life in the Spirit, Doing Theology, Psychological growth, Spiritual direction, , , , , , , , , ,

I know my Evangelical friends believe humans are sinful from birth and our main work is to save them from their just deserts. But we are also a very nice species. The vast majority of us hate conflict, we’re easily hurt by slights, and we care about stray animals and lost children to the point of obsession. We can be awful, but most of us are rather polite, and all of us are desperate for love. We are so desperate we have a hard time saying “No,” even when we ought to, if we think it detracts from getting or giving love.

No is often important

Whether we like it or not, though, sometimes saying “No” is very important, and loving. Here is an example of when saying “No” was surprisingly effective. I’ve heard of it happening this way many times:

A mate appeared in the TV room at an unexpected time and turned off the tube. They said, “We need to talk. I can’t keep it in anymore. I want a divorce. You are terrible.” Their partner said, for once, after years of going up and down with their mate, “Well. I guess you’ll have to decide what you need to do.” The mate said, “No. I don’t want to file for divorce; you need to do it.” The partner said, “Well, I am not going to do it” — for once, they said, “No” to their dysregulated mate. They did not get mad and add fuel to the mate’s anxiety-making fire. They did not withdraw and reinforce their fear of abandonment. They calmly said “No.”

The instigator stormed out. It could not be predicted what was going to happen next. It was tempting to go find them and reassure them, or fight with them, or offer a grievance just as powerful as theirs. But the partner did not do it. An hour later, the mate came back and said, “I’m sorry. I should not have said what I said. You are my life. I can’t imagine the future without you.” The “No” actually helped their mate get a handle on what they wanted apart from the fury of their overwhelming feelings.

How to helpfully say “No” is basic training for working with “borderline personalities” (another label which probably needs retiring). I had to learn that the hard way when I was a pastor, since dysregulated people look for love where people will say “Yes” (like in the church), even though their desperate anxiety will usually get them kicked out — the seminal book about them is I Hate you, Don’t Leave Me. I actually invented a few “contracts” that helped people find their way in, safely.

Saying “No!” is crucial when responding to anyone who is acting irrationally or contrary to their own best interests. If someone presents to us and we are drawn into their mania or anger or despair or any unconscious reaction, we should probably say, “No. I don’t want to do that with you,” before we jump in, get hurt, and start hurting others.

Right now we all could use a refresher course on saying “No.” Our surprisingly irrational, megalomaniacal new government keeps turning off our TV and saying something dreadful. Fortunately, we are not married to our leaders. But the need remains. Before we get enmeshed in the dysregulated, abusive pattern being presented, we need to say and act “No.”

Say no to psychopaths

The president is not a normal person. Right now we he is challenging all of us to think about our boundaries, or whether we even have any (“officers” are driving up in unmarked vans, in hoods, to snatch people off the streets these days, after all). And A.I. is collecting what I write — maybe monitoring what you are reading; who knows what can be done with that when the president is so capricious! If he were your houseguest (which is unlikely due to his germ phobia) he’d rearrange your rooms to suit himself and dare you to say “No.” You probably wouldn’t say “No!” because you care, and because dealing with a person who brazenly does not care is hard. But we need to say “No!!”

This week’s brazenness has School Boards and Universities all over the country wrestling  with whether to say no to the regime’s attempt to roll back anything that looks like preferential treatment to people of color, including the ancestors of slaves. Some programs I love and support are now causing problems with Universities charged with getting rid of them. Here are people near Nashville having the problem:

People are worried that something resembling a “DEI expenditure” will be in the budget somewhere and potentially noticed by some new bureaucrat rooting out diversity, equity and inclusion and rooting in uniformity, inequity and exclusion (as Pete Buttigieg aptly points out). Are we going to say “No” to uniformity, inequity and exclusion or not? Or will we rush to ChatGPT and ask it to scrub our statements? Again, what would Jesus do?

There is no real process for losing the funds, of course, yet. We’re still just under the onslaught of dubious presidential decrees and illegal impoundments. But schools are conforming because they fear they’ll lose some funds, get outed on Truth Social, or infuriate donors – they can only imagine what might happen. And they do imagine it and act on their fear. That’s the authoritarian playbook in action.

Many states have hopped on the bandwagon and begun to pass bills to eradicate DEI. Here’s a list of bills and what they mean [link]. In my opinion, they mostly just demand we stop saying “No” to racism and pretend white supremacy is equality. But you can decide for yourself.

@diddlyfrickinsquat

the cherry on top of this is that my undergrad is in history… I’m so numb at this point #cabaretmusical #thoughtdaugher #returntotiktok #dearcolleagueletter

♬ only politics – dani 🎭

It got started with the “dear colleague” letter

It is unnerving when you wake up one day and a previously-unknown bureaucrat gives you an order. Educators got a letter designed to undo decades of assistance to students who bear the weight of systemic racism. Last week many of them finally read the “Dear Colleague” decree from the soon-to-be-dismantled Department of Education issued on Valentine’s Day under the authority of Craig Trainor, Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights.  You should read it. It is a breathtaking sea change.  I’ll give you some highlights that show you why people are wondering who they invited to spend the weekend. I highlighted my highlights:

  • Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon “systemic and structural racism” and advanced discriminatory policies and practices. Proponents of these discriminatory practices have attempted to further justify them—particularly during the last four years—under the banner of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (“DEI”), smuggling racial stereotypes and explicit race-consciousness into everyday training, programming, and discipline.
  • Nebulous concepts like racial balancing and diversity are not compelling interests. As the Court explained in [the Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard], “an individual’s race may never be used against him” and “may not operate as a stereotype” in governmental decision-making.
  • Although SFFA addressed admissions decisions, the Supreme Court’s holding applies more broadly. At its core, the test is simple: If an educational institution treats a person of one race differently than it treats another person because of that person’s race, the educational institution violates the law. Federal law thus prohibits covered entities from using race in decisions pertaining to admissions, hiring, promotion, compensation, financial aid, scholarships, prizes, administrative support, discipline, housing, graduation ceremonies, and all other aspects of student, academic, and campus life.
  • Other programs discriminate in less direct, but equally insidious, ways. DEI programs, for example, frequently preference certain racial groups and teach students that certain racial groups bear unique moral burdens that others do not. Such programs stigmatize students who belong to particular racial groups based on crude racial stereotypes. Consequently, they deny students the ability to participate fully in the life of a school.
  • All educational institutions are advised to: (1) ensure that their policies and actions comply with existing civil rights law; (2) cease all efforts to circumvent prohibitions on the use of race by relying on proxies or other indirect means to accomplish such ends; and (3) cease all reliance on third-party contractors, clearinghouses, or aggregators that are being used by institutions in an effort to circumvent prohibited uses of race. Institutions that fail to comply with federal civil rights law may, consistent with applicable law, face potential loss of federal funding. Anyone who believes that a covered entity has unlawfully discriminated may file a complaint with OCR. Information about filing a complaint with OCR, including a link to the online complaint form, is available here.

Anti-racism is now racism. Animal Farm and 1984 will soon be banned from schools, I suppose, since we’re supposed to unlearn what Orwell taught us. I will let you dialogue with Trainor’s claims, since an argument can be made. But I find his thinking a short step away from a slave being told, “You should be happy you have a Christian master.” Regardless, the main message that came to me and educators I know was, “There is a new sheriff in town. Change your mind and change your ways, or you won’t get your share of the tax money.”

If I lose money as a consequence, will I still say “No?” Will the institution fire me if I suggest resistance? Will I stick out, in contrast to compliant people, and my family will wonder what I’m doing to them?

Again, what would Jesus do?

Since Jesus was a teacher without an institution and a psychologist without a license or guild, I guess it is kind of obvious what he would do. He found it quite easy to say “No” to all sorts of dysregulated regulators — people who actually believed the Son of God was going to ruin their world!  He’s never been too tied to the present homeostasis.

I don’t think Jesus cares much about the latest status quo, he has deeper things to do. When he says from the cross, “Father forgive them for they don’t know what they are doing,” that is his most loving “No.” Your borderline loved one does not really know what they are doing, either. Donald Trump and Elon Musk do not really care what they are doing to you as long as they rule you. Jesus on the cross is a big “No” to that, and big “No!” to whatever destroys love and peace. The cross is a big “No!” to sin and death, right? The resurrection is a big promise that you will flourish, one way or another, later if not now, if you say “No” with Him.

April 5, 2025 – Hands Off protest in DC

I am going to try to keep saying “No!” in direct and loving ways, as needed. The easiest way to do that is, in the case of Trump/Musk, to get out on the street with a sign and 5000 friends. (You see my latest sign above from April 5 in DC).

The hardest way to say “No” is when I have to say it to a co-worker who wants to advance a truth that is not true like, “Educational institutions have toxically indoctrinated students with the false premise that the United States is built upon ‘systemic and structural racism.’” Or you have to speak to your mate and say, “No. I do not want to do that with you. I’d rather relate to your true self. I’d rather both of us relate to God right now.”

I think one of the messages of the Gospel is “Say ‘No’ now. Things will not get better or just stay the same.” If you go along with the powers you might “gain the world and lose your soul.” Paul says it clearly:

Be strong in the Lord and in the strength of his power; put on the whole armor of God, so that you may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil, for our struggle is not against blood and flesh but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places. Therefore take up the whole armor of God, so that you may be able to withstand on the evil day and, having prevailed against everything, to stand firm. — Ephesians 6:10-13

I know, Master Trump says DEI is the devil and Venezuelans are demons, and that uniformity, inequity and exclusion is the law now. Yes, I am saying “No” to that and “Yes” to freedom, forgiveness and fellowship. And I think we all need to say “No” now, because it may soon be too late to say anything at all.

Empathy: Love in the crossfire of political warfare

Doing Theology, Psychological growth, , , , , , ,

While I was ignoring podcasts, a rebellion against empathy was bubbling in them. Post-WW2, Eurocentric, therapeutic moralism was under attack! I was not completely ignorant of these rumblings, since Rush Limbaugh was like a non-resident member of my Central PA Church, and Trump has been getting away with various forms of grabbing for years. But I was still shocked when Elon Musk, who does not lie and dissemble as well as Donald Trump, parroted a line of reasoning that seems to be taking hold.

Elon on Joe Rogan

Musk spoke out on the Joe Rogan Experience. Young men who listen to Rogan, among others, are being taught they are fearful empathy-robots who will lose their country if they don’t grow a pair. I thought that must be an out-of-context exaggeration when I heard about it. But then I found a person who makes transcripts of Joe Rogan episodes (!). I had already reacted on hearsay when I wrote my congressman. Then I found out he actually taught it!

Since I work on connecting to people empathetically all day and hope they feel safe enough to explore who they are and who they want to be, I was understandably alarmed. So I wrote the 20 congresspeople on my list, as follows:

Elon Musk got on the anti-empathy bandwagon with Joe Rogan last week. In his own autistic way, he justified why he cares more for humanity (which he thinks Tesla and SpaceX will save) than for the people right next to him. This is consistent with his neurodivergence. He thinks his heartless capitalism will save us from overspending our love on nonsense – and he will decide what is nonsense.

He said, “We’ve got civilizational suicidal empathy going on.” He slightly qualified that with “I believe in empathy, I think you should care about people. But you need to have empathy for civilization as a whole, and not commit civilizational suicide.” After repeating multiple falsehoods about immigrants, he claimed it was empathy that had allowed immigrants to become a threat to the United States. “The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy. The empathy exploit—they’re exploiting a bug in western civilization, which is the empathy response.” In truth, empathy is a “bug” that threatens his lust for power. He needs our resentments to outweigh our regard for other people, and ourselves.

Senator, please help us oppose him. Help us focus on our connectedness and our shared regard for the people being harmed by DOGE, Musk, and Trump. Please keep this administration’s victims front and center in your narrative. Uplift the stories of people whose lives are being lost, endangered or undone. Please help us build a narrative around our shared humanity, rather than grounding our politics in contempt. Form a more perfect union. “Love as I have loved you” is not the downfall of civilization.

I hadn’t explored the Rogan podcast yet, or I might have mentioned that Musk goes on in the conversation to lament if he walked the streets of San Francisco in his MAGA hat, he would get harassed and maybe beat up. I thought, “Oh, so you would like some empathy instead of being bullied!” He yearns for empathy as those empty of it usually do.

The anti-empathy movement

I missed the anti-empathy movement as it was percolating. But it was prevalent enough for Paul Bloom to write a book about it and get a review stored by the NIH. In the review, Trevor Thompson checks out the binary argument the author conducts, beginning with his title: Against Empathy. The Case for Rational Compassion. The book takes a strong line against empathy, arguing that it is not only not useful, but positively detrimental to human progress. Bloom says empathy leads to biased, shorted-sighted, and practically useless action. What Musk might call “civilizational suicide.”

Bloom is working with a reduced definition of a very large and varied human experience. We are all wired for empathy and express it on a broad spectrum. Even autistic people experience empathy on all sorts of levels and have all sorts of neurodivergent struggles with it, in just a different way than neurotypical people do. Yet Bloom says empathy is merely the “act of coming to experience the world as you think someone else does.” — as if it were just Bill Clinton performing “I feel your pain.” He seems to think most people are just unconsidered reactions to their mirror neurons — irrationally sending useless children’s gifts to the scenes of mass shootings.

Simplistic and debatable, but gives a whole picture

Researchers also name “cognitive empathy,” which Musk could have called “rational compassion.” The label states the obvious: we don’t just feel empathy, we think about it, too. People can react with any of their faculties to the empathy they feel, and generally do. When we feel the pain of another, we may also understand their experience, or respond viscerally, automatically to it, or care about it. Or we may metabolize the pain spiritually and suffer it. We might ignore it or mock it. No one is a robot (yet).

There is a noisy, Christianity-claiming faction with a lust for power dominating the government. Members of it are mounting an argument that love – especially love for strangers – is a distraction, the Bible notwithstanding.

The bandwagon seems to be bulging with new adherents. Last year Allie Beth Stuckey, a Christian podcaster wrote a popular book called Toxic Empathy: How Progressives Exploit Christian Compassion. Lately, Joe Rigney, a Minnesota pastor and theologian, published The Sin of Empathy: Compassion and its Counterfeits (for which, he laments, he gets no empathy). He  redefines empathy as self-immolation: “If someone’s drowning, empathy wants to jump in with both feet and get swept away. Empathy jumps in. Whereas compassion says, I’m going to throw you a life preserver. I’m going to even step in with it and grab you with one arm, but I’m remaining tethered to the shore.”

Of course people do foolish things and get exploited. Their empathy might make them a sitting duck for people like Elon Musk if they stop mentalizing. But I think most of us know that humans created civilization with empathy. It is one of our most basic and best instincts. We can be trusted to work out the daily decisions we have to make about it and not get killed. It is not always that easy, since the U.S. government has relied on empathy to get Marines to kill and sacrifice themselves. Even if we don’t want to protect loved ones from “the enemy,” the soldiers want to take care of their comrades in the unit, who pulse together like a common set of neurons.

Jesus will not destroy civilization

When Elon Musk gets ahold of empathy, you know it is being used for something except empathy. He’s not pondering how to best help people or how to alleviate suffering. He’s hard at work finding ways to de-prioritize alleviating that suffering – all the while assuring us he is rooting out the waste in the budget, saving those hard-earned dollars previously thrown away on people who don’t deserve help or should help themselves or might be trans. He’s muting the voices of the dispossessed — it has always been a slave economy, after all. Musk notwithstanding, I find hope in the fact that few people, including the Pope – would accept that the interests of power should be prioritized and the least powerful forgotten.

Jesus does not forget the powerless. Here is a bit of what the Bible actually says about empathy:

  • “Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep” (Romans 12:15).
  • “But whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him?” (1 John 3:17)
  • “This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you” (John 15:12).
  • “Whoever closes his ear to the cry of the poor will himself call out and not be answered” (Proverbs 21:13).
  • Jesus wept (Luke 19:41).

In building his robots and longing for Mars, has Musk forgotten what it is to be human? Has he forgotten that history shows how empathy knits societies together? Has he missed how empathy leads people to volunteer, which then boosts their mental health? Hasn’t he heard that kids who have low empathy are more likely to bully?

Have all these bullies missed learning what happens when we ignore pain and mute the cries of the suffering? Maybe. It happens.

Any post featuring Elon Musk gravitates toward Nazis. So let me end with this warning. Psychologist Gustave Gilbert, interviewed Nazi leaders during the Nuremberg trials and wrote a book about it. He said, after all his work examining the psyches of those who committed the most horrendous acts of World War II, he had come close to finding a definition of the nature of evil: “It’s the one characteristic that connects all the defendants,” he said, “a genuine incapacity to feel with their fellow man. Evil, I think, is the absence of empathy.”

***************

Today is Patrick of Ireland Day! Get to know him better at The Transhistorical Body.

Let’s lose the labels: A step toward Jesus in the storm

A life in the Spirit, Psychological growth, , , , , , , , ,

The peace we are seeking in the midst of our personal and societal storms is much deeper than the superficial labels we wear. Let’s mentalize.

As with so many things in the postmodern era, our sense of what is spiritual has become thin. As a result, mental health is weakened. Much of what I read assumes “spirituality” is a broad and universal “concept” boiled down to a personal search for meaning, purpose, hope, value, and, for some people, God. So many people are left alone in their valley looking toward a fixed horizon of imaginary wholeness which seems to be distant no matter how far they travel.

We are in need of thicker descriptions for wholeness and a broader sense of our horizons. In his book Finding Jesus in the Storm: The Spiritual Lives of Christians with Mental Health Challenges, John Swinton says the question cannot simply be “Where can I find meaning in the midst of my brokenness?” We need to be more specific, “Where and how can I find Jesus and hold on to God in the midst of this experience?” How do we find Jesus in the storm? The question is thin enough to grasp. The answer is much thicker.

It starts with describing the world

I have been culling my books, lately. But I could not part with Nancy McWilliams’ Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual. The PDM-2 offers analytic-leaning therapists an empirically based, clinically useful alternative or supplement to the DSM (APA) and the ICD (WHO) categorical diagnoses. People never fit neatly into categories, but comparing my inkling to years of expert study makes me a better helper.

The problem is, the categories can cause more harm than good. Whenever I use a diagnostic term with a client like “narcissism” or “masochism” (which is rare) I like to make them promise not to wear is as a label. I’d rather they see the description as “weather,” or “scenery,” or as part of a “journey.” Mental health labels can become straitjackets or even identities.

Swinton is mainly focused on the label “schizophrenia” in his book and generally sides with the movement seeking to eradicate the use of the word, since it has become associated with “being schizophrenic.” People say, “I’m schizophrenic” like they say, “I am an alcoholic” or “I’m bipolar.” The labels are too thin for the thick experiences people are having.

I’m with the people who oppose the stigmatization that comes with an insurance company needing an approved label for an illness before they pay. They whole system creates “epistemic injustice.” The labels should be provisional and descriptive, but they end up being formative. I went to YouTube and typed in “how to deal with a narcissist” and found scores of entries (ironically, one by Dr. Phil!). Labeling narcissists without much awareness of the tested descriptions is a cottage industry.  The fact someone can get even with an abuser by labeling them a narcissist says a lot about what the categories mean to us.

“Evidence-based” labels

In 2013 the director of the NIMH stated that the DSM did not describe authentic disorders because they had no “biomarkers” attached. Therefore, they could not be empirically verified. The diagnoses are based on a consensus about clusters of symptoms, not laboratory measurements. So the director said they were useless.

His concept of “mental illness” is that it can be fully explained on a biological basis. I think he believed he was democratizing mental health by getting the labels out of backroom dealing and into the sunlight of science. But he did not destigmatize mental health challenges by making them just another biological reality. Instead, his view taught people they no longer had an illness, they are an illness. If your genes, chemistry and brain processes label you, there is not much one can do.

“Mental illness” is not like having the measles. What is happening in our wildly complex brains, ever-developing bodies, and our changing environments cannot be reduced to a genetic marker. The biological, medical models are too thin.  If Jesus showed up at the NIMH he might be labelled schizophrenic when he said he heard from his Father!

Thick spirituality

The spirituality that sneaks into clinical practice is usually reduced to a very Eurocentric model that assumes the primacy of individualism, freedom, autonomy, choice and the right of people to create their own destiny. I know my studies, even in a Christian-oriented university, baptized me behind my back and forced me into a thin description of spirituality and humanity.

What faith in Jesus brings to the discussion about mental challenges is an antidote to the detriments of the DSM. The labels are instructive, but I don’t think we benefit if all we have is a comprehensive conceptualization like the ICD categories hovering over us. The satellite image from Google Maps provides an astounding outline of my house but has no clue about what is inside. Even the street view automatically captures a moment that is now past. We need a guide walking with us on the ground, noticing the details firsthand: the bumps, curbs, turns, and everyday accidents that make the journey of mental health interesting, difficult and complex.

Jesus is a walking exercise in such phenomenology. The incarnation intrinsically questions the assumptions we use to control and disempower. “What is an hallucination?” is recast as “What does it feel like to experience hearing voices?” Likewise, “What are the best practices for dealing with these symptoms?” is recast as “Where is God in this storm? What is the suffering making me? Where can I find joy in it? How can I receive healing? How can I appreciate my goodness and sort out my collusion with evil?”

Lose the labels

My clients who are organized masochistically look toward a horizon of joy with deep skepticism. They tend to label themselves as losers. They are from some “shithole” country where trauma and anxiety rule. I try to help them see that their sense of horizon is important; we need to look toward our ideals and see how we are distorted and isolated in comparison to what we hope. At the same time, we all need to grasp that a horizon is always changing. As we keep moving, the horizon looks different from where we are now standing. An unchanging horizon is only real in the abstract; it is not an everyday experience. We need to look and listen, not just keep talking about yesterday’s snapshot from Google.

From the Gospel Book of Otto III, 11th century

In Mark 5, Jesus has a famous conversation with a “man from the tombs with an unclean spirit.” That is a very evocative way to describe him, and it fits how many people I’ve known describe themselves, in one way or another. The man Jesus met was known to howl like the man on my block hearing negative voices. He bruised himself with stones like someone secretly cutting themselves or injecting street chemicals. Jesus spoke to the man’s inner tormentors and told them to come out of him.

Then Jesus did an unusual thing. He asked him what his name is. 1) Jesus did not treat him as a possessed man, just a man who has a name. He was not a diagnosis. 2) The man did not give his name but rather named his condition “My name is legion for we are many.” He self-stigmatized, as opposed to Jesus, who refused to go with the label he’d acquired. When the villagers came out to see about their swine, they met this man who used to scared them to death sitting with Jesus having a conversation.

Finding our way through mental health challenges can start with having a Christlike relationship with ourselves. Jesus names us as a friend, his beloved. We can receive that fundamental label. When we can’t see the forest for the trees, we can turn to Jesus who can show us the way,  Even more, Jesus can be the joy we seek even in scary, shadowy places of suffering beyond our understanding.

We can all make the world a better place for people by listening to where they are and helping them see the horizon they can see. None of us is our diagnosis. We are not really trapped in a box of symptoms, even when we feel we are. No one is their lack of perfection or their inability to meet the standards of the sinful world. Jesus names us, and we emissaries of the healer.

We can help people hold on to Jesus in their personal difficulties, and as they move through these difficult times in an atmosphere of our blessing, wonderfully free of  unnecessary guilt or blame. Understanding and valuing the perspective of others brings epistemic healing. Coming to rejected, lonely, humiliated and demonized people with gentleness and tenderness is the superpower that keeps peace at the heart of a soul-weary world. Let’s lose the thin labels and regain the thickness of each person finding their unique way through creation, known and loved by God.

The inside and out of mentalizing

A life in the Spirit, Psychological growth, , ,

Mentalizing, if we boil it down, is just thinking about wat we think and feel, and feeling about what we feel and think — with a clear mind and balanced heart. Normally we don’t think and feel about what we think and feel; we just do what we do because it’s “normal” – at least as far as we are concerned. But most of what we care about and what troubles us is circling around how we mentalize, or don’t. The more mature our process is, the more peace of mind, harmonious relations, productivity and spiritual satisfaction we feel.

At the end of the month, we are doing a presentation to the PAMFT centered on mentalizing. I’ve been refreshing my awareness of the literature. The term “mentalization” emerged in psychoanalytic literature in the 1960’s. It became more widely applied in the 1990’s. Peter Fonagy and others applied the concept of mentalizing to attachment relationships gone awry — that is where I encountered the idea in the 2000’s.

At that point I was especially interested in how so-called “borderline” personalities might learn to live in the church. These kind of people, with a “disorganized” attachment style — likely due to physical, psychological or sexual abuse and other trauma, have difficulty developing the ability to mentalize. Had they experienced their parents doing it, they would be better able to imagine and represent the states of their own and others’ minds. But their weakness leaves them mistrusting themselves and others and desperate to find a way out of that arid place.

We’re mentalizing in our dreams

Mentalizing is something we need to learn if our insides are wounded; there is a disconnection we are rejoining. As hard as that may be, there is good news: it is a natural process. I think we naturally do some mentalizing when we dream. When we are asleep and our waking self is not reacting to the outside world as it usually does, our undistracted mind is repairing and forming understanding that we might discover later. I had an interesting experience of the process that led me to write this post.

I woke from an intriguing dream. I can’t remember what went before, but I remember wanting to hang on to it — to mentalize. The part I do remember was me walking through a hall, like a cafeteria, filled with people scattered about. I saw a table across the way filled with some of the cool kids. They were looking at me, apparently talking about me. One of the all-around athletes in my high school was there. They were commenting on the 3 ft. piece of 4” PVC pipe I was carrying. The people I passed seemed to think I might use it as a weapon. The cool kids made fun of me for having it, like it was foolish and I didn’t know it. I heard them and went over to their table. I sat down with them. A table behind them was filled with women teachers, significantly. The women acted like they could not hear what I said but smiled approvingly.

I asked the group “What do you think is successful?” No one answered as I looked around. So I said, “Let’s try this. At what is each of you most successful?” No answers. So I turned to the football star, “What do you think Phil is successful at?” There was no immediate answer, so I talked about how he was good at football. I looked around circle. My intention was for each of us to tell the others what we are good at.

That is when I began to wake up. I woke up realizing I was dreaming about the kind of affirmation exercises I led many times in many groups — which seemed like a very strange thing to be dreaming about! Before I was fully awake, a Bible verse I memorized as a child floated up from the King James Bible:  “Be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.” My mind was working out what I think and feel about success.

When we are asleep, we are still mentalizing. I got to see what was going on because I have a cold and kept waking up. Responding to the urge to remember and even write it down, as I later did,  sealed the process.

We are mentalizing in a psychotherapy session

Some might say connecting the concept of mentalizing to dreams is the opposite of the word intends. Because the whole idea the theorists were going for included intention. People with a mentalizing deficit are awash in automatic thoughts, unmanageable feelings and unruly behavioral habits. Mentalizing is about putting our inner and outer processes under control, balancing out, slowing down and speeding up when you intend to, not just following the chaos around. That’s a very important skill for everyone to develop.

But the theorists might be going too far, by implying our good intentions have enough power to get things under control. We say “I didn’t do it intentionally” all the time because we often don’t intend our bad behavior and we are afraid to enact our good behavior! Dreaming is a built-in process, like breathing, which we don’t control. When we experience our dreams at the edge of sleep, we get a peek into what the brain is doing when we sleep to repair and prepare. I think my dreams represent my God-given capacity to chill out and get better. We are not just our intentions, we are intended. We are designed to heal and grow. When we are awake and mentalizing (even thinking and feeling about our dreams), we are cooperating with our innate capacity, not just trying get the monster within to act according to as better rubric.

When we come to a psychotherapy appointment, no matter what kind of method is being used, a basic thing we are doing is mentalizing. It is a lot like I was doing in my dream, wandering around my inner world, learning to understand my own mental states and others’ feelings, desires, wishes, goals, purposes, and reasons — only now  I am starting with a therapist in front of me in a small “hall” so to speak. It is all quite doable.

The therapists helps me to mentalize and helps me to do it with another person, which is that much more complex. We humans are all about relating, all the time. In my dream, the scenes were filled with people. I was relating to myself in all the many ways I do, all represented by people I love or want to love or who I wish loved me or don’t. In therapy I can explore all that with a safe partner.

Often, no matter what techniques the therapist has or goals they might have for their client (even if they are a very bad therapist!), if all we are doing is wandering around in a safe place to explore our inner world with another person, something good is likely to be born. Not long ago a client complained about all the bad therapists they had paid. I later wondered if he wanted me to feel good about him by complimenting me for not being so bad! I thought, “All those therapists were just helping you along the way, and now you are here, able to imagine what would be good therapy and eager to take advantage of this new season of growth.”

I hope I have learned to be a decent therapist. But, I have to admit, as my dream reinforced, the best thing I do, probably, is to show up and be kind. I am tenderhearted toward my clients, which means I have learned to mentalize. I can feel along with them, not only empathize, but understand their misunderstandings with them. I don’t impose my understanding of God on my clients (as if that would do them any good), but I do the last part of the verse, too. I forgive them as Jesus forgave me. All their self-loathing and resistance, their willful ignorance and self-destructive behaviors, the harm they cause in the world and all their immoralities — it is not “all good” but I am intentionally putting it all in God’s good care.

We should intend to mentalize all day

We are all working on mentalizing, whether we know the word or not — or how did this famous song get so popular? There are so many covers of Nina Simone’s “Don’t Let Me Be Misunderstood,” it may be the mentalizing national anthem. A lot of us are desperate to do the work.

 Yeah, baby, sometimes I’m so carefree
With a joy that’s hard to hide
Yeah, and other times it seems that
All I ever have is worry
And then you’re bound to see my other side

… Oh, I’m just a soul whose intentions are good
Oh Lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood

Everyone is wandering around in their dreams and on the sidewalk wishing they understood what was going on. And their minds are racing to figure it out, one way or another. People are looking to each of us to help them.

Here are some examples of how we come to feel better and better understanding when we mentalize:

  • A woman told me she had “one of those moments” when the preacher was speaking directly to her. It was like “he was reading my mind.” She was stopped “in her tracks.” I think connecting spiritually is real. I am glad some pastors give people the impression they empathize and think alongside their people.
  • If you are out on the street you can probably tell which people you can talk to when you need help. You get the idea they will understand you and feel with you.  I practiced this a lot when I first got to Philly and intended to meet prospective church members right there on the sidewalk. If I got lost, I would look around and spot the likely helper.
  • There is a look on someone’s face when they see that you see them. Sometimes they melt. We love our dogs because a lot of them can’t help but wait to see if they are going to be seen. Before TikTok is banned you’ll probably see a bull dog sitting on his master’s chest, looking him in the eye and then putting his head down to cuddle up under his chin. We all feel that way if we think someone is attending to us with positive feelings and thoughts.
  • Since we just finished Christmastide, let me end with another song. The “Coventry Carol” was working on mentalizing long before their we psychology folk discovered it. The chorus is “Lully. Lullay, thou little, tiny child.” The women are thinking about the danger the bloodthirsty king, Herod, presents to Jesus. Some people say the words are 14th century slang for “I see. I saw.”  That would be great for my point if it were true, but I haven’t verified it. It is a lullaby. It brings us into a “lull” where we can feel safe, go to sleep and dream ourselves toward connection and peace.

When our mother or father cradled us in their arms and looked us in the eye, we began to feel the safety of being seen and seeing back, even before our eyes could focus well. You might like to try listening to the carol intentionally as if the singers were seeing you in your sorrow or your threatening situation. Feel the sadness, the fear, the awe, the lull and also think about the story, find yourself in it, wonder about how you would react to the situation. That would certainly be an antidote to the shallow soundbiting we are taught all day! You’d be mentalizing. You might feel better or deeper when you were done. You might even gain some mental strength or spiritual courage to face the troubles you face,  and move with the positive desires drawing you, inside and out.

The rulers need slaves: Chains shall He strike

A life in the Spirit, Music, Psychological growth, , , , , , ,

For, some reason, when I sang “O Holy Night” for my sister on Smule the other day, I changed a word in the third verse. Instead of “Chains shall He break, for the slave is our brother,” I sang, “Chains shall he strike!” I think the line could have been translated from French either way. But I  may have had a  “Freudian translation slip.”

Click for Mom’s favorite version (Andy skips the verse in question)

I think I wanted a more violent image. I’m mad about the enslavers enslaving. I was trained as a systems psychotherapist, in part, and the system is not on my side. Our leaders are more interested in profit than health. If I hear right, they think profit is health — even our health system must return a healthy profit for us to be healthy, even if it makes us unhealthy. I’m upset about all the examples of young people, especially, ensnared by things they will find hard to escape and which may, like a slaver, use them up and throw them away. Those chains and chainers need to break!

The latest enslavers

Within my clientele and relationships, here’s evidence of enslavement. They often willingly collude with their masters, but there are masters, just the same, scheming to dominate them and use them.

  • Microchips: In general, machines that deliver the internet have taught us to serve them. For instance, I walked out of the house without my phone, again, when I went to worship today. And again, I kicked myself because it is the key to me getting back safely! The King of Apple was down at Mar-a-Lago the other day to make sure it stays that way.
  • Porn has colonized teenage boys (and younger). The Progress Action Fund put out an ad telling young men that pervy old Republicans were going to invade their masturbation time by restricting porn. It seemed like an emergency to them. The porn industry is unregulated because it is deemed free-but-not-harmful speech, but it is a freedom stealer.
  • Gaming and social media have eaten up many a client’s time and self-esteem. The games are designed to keep us playing (and buying or adding to ad views). The social media platforms are designed to connect us to products – and become one to be exploited ourselves. Prominent Silicon Valley creators are well-known for limiting their children’s access to technology and social media, essentially not allowing them to become addicted, because they know what their creation has become.
  • Gambling: The newest enslaver I hate is online sports betting and other gambling. There is absolutely no benefit  to luring people into the “fun” of giving their money to ever-available casino. The oligarchs call it de-regulation. I tune into a news story and before I get there NBC  gives me a pitch for Philly Harrah’s (in Chester). I watch the Eagles and Jamie Foxx will be onscreen constantly luring me into the latest scheme.

  • Drugs: Everyone uses drugs. Some of the substances are needed and I thank God for them. But there is so much avoidance-using! And I’m surprised we still think recreation drugs are fun after an opioid epidemic — which is capitalism at its most obvious. What’s more, I’m discouraged with how many people think pot and booze enhance their life — put them to sleep, wake them up, make them someone else, etc. Sounds like a prison guard, right? And hallucinogens have become big business — especially now that the FDA approval process is deep-state “socialism.” If you ever watch commercial TV, you can’t miss how often we are promised freedom from any malady we can imagine via a weirdly-named new drug, along with every side-effect we can’t imagine.

Slaves are needed to protect capitalism

I refuse to blame individuals for how they “use” all these things. The oligarchs are using them. Capitalism is not a freedom-loving economic system; it needs slaves. Our socialism for the rich means Elon Musk can buy elections and function as an unelected, unappointed, unaccountable government agent, right there in the Presidential box at the Army-Navy game. Billionaires are able to create a government-adjacent slush fund (inauguration / transition fund) for the billionaire-in chief. Do you imagine they will allow anything to steal their riches, like your real, systemic freedom?

There is always an enslavement scheme in the back pocket of every billionaire capitalist or oligarch in any system.  Saying that out loud might sound crazy — that has been suggested before about me for other reasons, so you decide. But let’s remember, when the U.S. went to war over freeing slaves, someone had been teaching that slaves should appreciate how the masters supply them beneficial work. They claimed the Bible taught slaves to obediently stay in their place. In fact, it was taught slaves try to escape because have  a mental issue — much like homeless people are described today, or anyone else who lives outside the system.

Samuel Cartwright of Jackson Mississippi (1779-1863) invented a disease to explain the cause of runaway slaves. He called it Drapetomania — the “disease” that caused slaves to irrationally run away from their awesome plantations, not considering the death-dealing infection the plantations were themselves. People made wealthy by the system often patted themselves on the back for bringing civilization to savages and lifting them out of poverty. Job creators.

From the perspective of people who supported slavery and were supported by it, preserved it was necessary to save the country. It is the economy, stupid. George Fitzhugh wrote in  Cannibals all! or, Slaves without Masters (1857):

We warn the north, that every one of the leading Abolitionists is agitating the negro slavery question merely as a means to attain ulterior ends, and those ends nearer to home.

They know that men once fairly committed to negro slavery agitation – once committed to the sweeping principle, “that man being a moral agent, accountable to God for his actions, should not have those actions controlled and directed by another,” are, in effect, committed to Socialism and Communism. To the most ultra doctrines of Garrison, Goodell, Smith and Andrews – to no private property, no church, no law, no government, — to free love, free lands, free women, and free churches.

I had never read that until recently. But I have heard the principle espoused in one way or another my whole life, like in the last election. I’ve heard it preached.

Chains shall he break

I know the third verse of “O Holy Night” has issues. Singing “For the slave is our brother” is benevolent, but of course it is sung from a place of privilege. The slave is not singing with him. And women are excluded. It was written in 1843, after all!

But we mustn’t throw out the sentiment with its dirty bathwater. Jesus is the anti-capitalist of all time. It is his intent that we throw off our masters. I’m not going to get into whether capitalism, socialism or fascism is the better system, since I think  they are all oligarchical. And regardless of the system, people under oath to save the system — who would kill to save it — the leaders/owners/dictators, are often saving themselves. They are as good as gods. Regardless of them all, Jesus is, in truth, without rival.

“In his name all oppression will cease,” no matter what the system. The system is not God; it is not our master. Jesus is Lord. And if you think economics Trumps Jesus, you’re right where the masters want you. If you mindlessly consume their latest scheme to dominate you, you are not free.

Spiritual Bypass — a new resource article

A life in the Spirit, Doing Theology, Psychological growth, Spiritual direction,

In John 8 Jesus proclaims he is the light of the world. His presence is a challenge to all who listen to Him. John records he said to the “Jews who had believed him . . . ‘the truth will set you free’” (John 8:31-32). But there were many others who were not set free. Many very religious people had a difficult time unseeing what they saw was obvious: they were already free. They responded to Jesus, “We are Abraham’s descendants and have never been slaves of anyone. How can you say that we shall be set free?” (John 8:33).

Often the truth about ourselves is the hardest truth to see, particularly when our view of the self is consciously and unconsciously tied to our religious practice and belief. The Jewish leaders saw themselves as descendants of Abraham. With this firm understanding of who they were in the world intricately intertwined with their religious practice and belief, they could not consciously imagine that they were not already where they ought to be. Nevertheless, Jesus insists each of them is “a slave to sin” (John 8:34).

They were caught in spiritual bypass. When religion is used as a defense, it is twisted to help us avoid a deeper truth. As a result, it might cause us to miss seeing reality facing us in our own backyard. Jesus presents a new way.

That should get you started.

I reduced an academic paper Dr. Gwen White wrote in 2005 for my many clients who are facing the interesting and challenging reality that they use their faith as a defense against facing their psychological needs and, surprisingly, entering their next stage of spiritual growth. In the article I’ve provided a link to the original paper housed at CircleCounseling.com where you can find the referenced work, an extensive bibliography ,and a case conceptualization. 

To continue reading, please select the “Spiritual Bypass” link from the right column or follow this link.

 

Why isn’t the election about climate action?: Your prefacts and gists

Climate, Psychological growth, The Mission, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The election has apparently boiled down to a discussion about the economy (which that doddering old fool, Joe Biden, led into the post-pandemic envy of the world), and the border (which is challenged but apparently better off under the present administration,

Click for SPLC bio of Trump propogandist Stephen Miller

even though Trump torpedoed the rare bi-partisan solution the Senate hammered out). Meanwhile, the existential threat to the whole world, climate change, is not even on the radar. How are our leaders not talking about the biggest issue we face and why are we allowing them to get away with it? We have our reasons.

The false prophets who rule the world, right now, or threaten to do so, could kill us all. So why do they do it, and why do so many of us keep listening to their lies? We seem to have very little capacity to see the wolves under all that sheepskin (Matt 7:15).

Controlling the airwaves

As Donald Trump has proven over and over, liars become powerful when they control the narrative. Back in the day, when our church was training an expanding pool of cell leaders, one of the hardest lessons to learn was what to do when a person dominates the evening’s conversation. A fledgling leader could easily let a needy or naughty person lead the group down an annoying or unhelpful path just because they could not figure out how to make them share the airwaves. The loudest person in a small group is often the de facto leader. Trump lies loudly. He knows that even when he gets attention for being bad, he is controlling the news cycle.

But why do so many people end up believing his loud lies, or forgive them, even after they are told the Haitians are not eating pets in Springfield Ohio?

Since Donald Trump’s successful playbook started surprising people in 2015, psychologists have been writing about why wannabe autocrats do what they do and why so many people commit to them.

We can see why Trump does it, he wants power. But why do people buy the big lie? There are reasons. Let’s not call them “good” reasons, but we have reasons for preferring something other than truth. [Here’s one article about that I’m using today].

Four reasons people follow false prophets

See what you think about this explanation:

  • We believe “pre-facts.” We are generally preoccupied with what might happen (we spend a lot of time “what-iffing”). It is good habit for surviving. There may be no cars in sight, but we still teach our kids to look both ways because, “You never know.” So we believe a car might run us over. That’s a pre-fact. It hasn’t happened yet, but it is true. It could happen. When we believe something might happen, if someone says it is happening, even if it isn’t, we will likely believe them, or forgive them for lying. Fearsome immigrants in the heartland could be eating beloved pets — or they might, you never know.
  • As a result, we get on unethical bandwagons. If we believe someone’s lies will become true, we reserve the moral condemnation they deserve. In one study, participants who were primed to believe a lie was likely to become true were less likely to hold others accountable for spreading lies on social media and more likely to share disinformation themselves. The stronger the gist was felt to be true, the stronger was the prefactual effect.
  • We become committed to the gist despite the facts. When participants imagined prefactuals more vividly and believed there was a good chance of the facts changing, they were less likely to judge lies as unethical, because they experienced the gist of the statement as true, even if the facts weren’t quite right.
    ……It is astounding, isn’t it, how the Mosaic Law flies in the face of every nation’s fear of being overrun or polluted by strangers. Leviticus 19:34 says, “The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as a native among you, and you shall love him as yourself” That never seems to go with the gist.
  • Our fears compel us to preserve a lie that fits with our bias. We like to think we are rational, but unconscious things motivate us all the time. If we are focused on the what ifs, negative or positive, we are motivated to “go with our gut” which is often a pre-factual “gist.” We all deny unwelcome truth and adjust the facts to conform to preferred outcomes.
    ……In Western cultures, especially, “motivated reasoning” is a mechanism people commonly use to preserve a favorable identity. To maintain positive self-regard, we (unwittingly) discount unflattering or troubling information that contradicts our self-image. It’s a way we avoid or lessen the distress we feel when we get information that makes us uncomfortable — instead of naming the wolf, we dress it in sheep’s clothing. It’s easier.

I can’t stop thinking that Donald Trump might win the election because enough of us prefer his delusional presence, which distracts us and confirms our own wishful delusions. We prefer going with his lies to dealing with the climate terror facing us and the painful changes every society needs to make to save the planet. After all, accepting that climate change is real portends unpleasant environmental consequences and would require most people to head them off by making significant changes in lifestyle. Changing one’s mind and changing one’s lifestyle is hard work; people prefer mental shortcuts—in this case, having the goal fit their ready-made conclusions.

Undermining climate action

Instead of having anything helpful to say about the recent hurricanes in the South, Trump kept himself in the news by suggesting FEMA was going to deprive Republican areas of aid. State officials, red and blue, immediately debunked the lie, but his narrative fit the gist many people live in – a pre-factual world where something is coming to get them, the government, Venezuelan rapists, or trans-loving Army colonels.

The most discomforting reality, however, is blowing in with the latest storm. In case you missed it, the increasingly powerful “El Nino” climate pattern has reduced the flow of the Amazon River in Colombia by about 90%. In Ecuador, which relies almost entirely on hydroelectric power, people are enduring energy cuts of up to 14 hours per day, knocking out the internet and sapping the country’s economy.

In Colombia’s capital, Bogotá, the government is cutting water to residential homes at regular intervals and the mayor has suggested that people “bathe as a couple” to reduce consumption.

A drought-stranded boat in the Solimoes River in Brazil, one of the largest tributaries of the Amazon River. Credit: Bruno Kelly/Reuters

Long sections of the Amazon River have turned into dry, brown beaches, and officials are dredging sections to make them deeper. In Brazil, wildfires fueled by searing heat and prolonged dry conditions have consumed vast swaths of forest, wetlands and pastures, with smoke spreading to 80% of the country. It has led to canceled classes, hospitalizations and a black dust coating the inside of homes. (NYTimes)

A drought covering large parts of the Amazon rainforest is especially worrying because it is the globe’s most important carbon sink, absorbing heat trapping gases.

Carlos Nobre spearheaded the multi-disciplinary, multinational Large-Scale Biosphere-Atmosphere Experiment in Amazonia that revolutionized understanding of the Amazon rainforest and its role in Earth’s ecology.

Carlos Nobre, the climate scientist, says dryer conditions diminish the forest’s ability to take in those gases, worsening global warming. The less rain means less effective trees taking carbon out of the air. Then they burn, adding carbon to the air.

Nobre notes that the recent drought has crossed several unsettling milestones: never has so little rain fallen in the rainforest, never have dry conditions lasted so long, and never has such a vast region of the jungle been affected.

The drought comes amid another worrisome moment: In January, for the first time, the planet’s average temperature hit 1.5 degrees Celsius over preindustrial levels for 12 consecutive months. Temperature levels beyond that would lead to consequences that would make it challenging for societies to cope, to say the least. Nobre confirms that many scientists and policymakers did not expect the globe to hit that mark for years. They are worried the earth’s warming is accelerating. “We are scared,” he said.

Keep your feet on the way of Jesus

People cherry pick the Mosaic law to find things that are ill-applied to postmodern culture.  It is like a party game or it makes an amusing meme to pass around on social media. Meanwhile they ignore the revelations that contradict their pre-factuals. That’s why the law had to tell people, “Don’t kill or ostracize the stranger, treat them like God treated you when you were a refugee in Egypt.” And why Jesus, the fulfillment of the Law, says, “No, don’t just love people who love you. Love one another as I have loved you.” We strain out some gnat of preferred gist and swallow a camel of lies about reality. Save us, Lord.

Right now the false prophets are loudly leading us to ignore the most important truths about our life together on Earth. They help us occupy ourselves with fantasies which fit our warped views of ourselves. Even those of us who know this are flummoxed about what to do. We scroll screens to calm our anxiety and withdraw from difficult community-building right when we are most needed.

I have not managed to changed the U.S. political system – I’ve tried, but it got worse under my watch. I have reasons to give up. I could not even make significant change in the church – what we did was great for a season, but it got blown away. I have reasons to be cynical. But I still feel obligated to walk with Jesus, the way, the truth and the life and trust God, step by step, no matter what storm arises.

The liars are providing delusions. We’re set up to believe things that confirm our alternative facts about ourselves and preferred futures. The overwhelming info machine in our hands is not helping. Even so, many more of us need to invent and support radical climate action or there will be little future to enjoy. I think Jesus would like to help us with that.

********************

If you want to read more of what I’ve written on climate action, here’s the link.

Defensiveness wrecks love: Respond to it inside and out

Marriage and Family, Psychological growth, , , ,

When I sat down to pray, I realized I felt steely. I didn’t think I was defending against God; I was just generally ducking and covering, not wanting to get defamed or abused again. I was a bit brittle, withdrawing, muted. My short stint on the condo board has been accompanied by a daily dose of attacks by a distinct minority of unhinged homeowners. Plus, gangs of kids are doing do-nuts next to our City Hall,  Netanyahu is bombing apartment houses in Lebanon and J.D. Vance is doing what he does — it all has me on higher alert than usual.

We need to be reasonably defended, or we will end up being rolled by the evil players in the world, right? But if I am over-defensive, even knee-jerk defensive, I will be spending my prayer time recovering (thank God that is possible), and when it comes to love relationships, I may be more troublesome than intimate. There is nothing worse than feeling attacked on Broad St. and then attacking my wife in retaliation soon after I come home!

Being defensive can become a way of life, instead of being the inappropriate behavior it is. My marriage counseling clients often demonstrate their habitual defensive dialogue right before my eyes. If I suggest they are being defensive, they often get defensive. (Note to self: “If you label someone to their face – as in ‘You’re being defensive,’ they are likely to feel attacked or demeaned.”) It would not be unlikely for someone to respond, “No I am not being defensive, I am trying to be heard.” Or maybe even, “I don’t want to be in a relationship like I had with my mother, cowering and hopeless.”

It is often very helpful to learn to listen to your partner according to the deep things that make them feel defensive. Try not to say, “I feel like you are talking to your mother and I don’t want to be your mother.” If you can say something like, “I think I hear you, can you tell me more?” They are more likely to be more than merely defensive before long.

Defensiveness kills relationships

Defensiveness is a serious problem. According to John Gottman, it’s one of four patterns—criticism, defensiveness, contempt, and stonewalling—that lead to divorce. [Video]

Defensiveness is also very frustrating. You may feel you’re “just trying to be honest” and your partner “isn’t really listening” to you when you are mostly just being defensive. While you are making your defense, it may seem like they’re just rehearsing a comeback, because they are. Your defensiveness is calling their own defense system into alert.

Maybe you’re doing the best you can, but they can’t hear you because they’re too busy explaining that you misunderstood them to begin with (or even misunderstood yourself)! Or they are clarifying their intentions. Or making excuses. Or saying you caused everything. Or saying you do it too. Or pointing out something else you do wrong.

Click pic for thoughts on breaking habits

Such a defensive dialogue is a bad relationship habit. (Yes, relationships have habits). It needs to change. There are inner and outer aspects to that change. Let’s start with the inner.

You’ve got to be OK with yourself.

I told a client not long ago — a charming, rather religious, wife, “It is important to let your mate develop. They are on their way to their best self and you can help them. But you can’t just defend against their incompleteness. Their sketchy insides are not a reflection of you nor are you in charge of them.” Then I held up clasped hands and separated them into two fists. “I think married love is two healthy people coming together in a kiss. It’s not being wadded up into a messy ball. Married love is like the verse in Psalm 85 that envisions a great future: ‘Steadfast love and faithfulness will meet; righteousness and peace will kiss each other.’” We unpacked my micro sermon together.

Marriage is one of the best relationships we are given to work out love – the kind of relationship we desire from the moment we are born. Our loves are wounded and even broken, but they are healable and realizable. Marriage helps us heal and develop — and often because it is so messy.

The defensiveness that inevitably comes up in marriage most days, needs to be listened to in love: first in God’s love, and then in our own love for ourselves. Then, hopefully, we can hear what is going on with us in the context of lasting love with others: parents, mates and friends. Exercising the trust we build on the secure base on which we stand is a daily process. But if we know we are in that good process, we love better.

Like all our personal feelings and experiences, defensiveness has a few sides to it. Acting it out unconsciously will almost always have a bad effect. But having no sense of being defended will not work for good, either.

Like I was saying before, appropriate defense is crucial to have a secure sense of self. I am myself and not a part of someone else or subject to someone else’s power. If you violate me or you don’t accept or respect me, I need to respond to that.

But then there is Israel. Everyone keeps saying, “Israel has a right to defend itself.” But did thousands of people need to die and whole territories laid to waste? Married partners often feel they have a right to self defense and feel justified in laying waste to their partner!

Having the power to destroy someone is not the key to a love relationship or living peacefully with our neighbors. Not reacting defensively is better. Lack of defensiveness allows for listening; it is better for making real change possible – the kind of change every person and every relationship must experience to grow and to build the intimacy we all crave.

But an unconscious lack of defensiveness can easily become a defense in itself. For instance, I thought a long time about responding to an email from the Condo Board’s loyal opposition this morning. I decided to get involved because they had told an outright lie about what I had said in the Association meeting. It might have been easier to hide, to “let it slide,” instead of being vulnerable enough to be who I really am.

In our Bible study last night we edged on this topic. Is the opposite of being defensive being accepting? Or can accepting also be a lack of healthy boundaries? Is the opposite of being defensive being curious? Being hopeful? Being uncertain in a good way? We all need to figure that out. We might need to hold our conclusions lightly as we continue to love and learn.

I think not being defensive is a very spiritual process, full of discernment and of trust in God’s presence. It can be painful. Not being defensive can look like the same kind of self-giving, even suffering love Jesus expresses. I find it painful because defensiveness is often a response to criticism and I felt a lot of criticism when I was growing up. It may set off an alarm bell in you, too. Should I respond to the alarm bell or take a better way?

Throwing a wrench in the pattern

Therapist say things like “Let’s see if we can nip this defensiveness pattern in the bud,” Or  “If you don’t like your partner’s defensiveness, make sure that you’re not causing it by being critical.” Or at least they imply you can fix things if you just stop doing things wrong. They write whole books about it.

They are right of course. People do make their relationships a lot better when they are taught to relate. When they change their mind and their behavior, an old pattern is violated and a new pattern can form. Love gets a chance to grow. When we see a pattern and throw a wrench in our relationship’s habit, things get better. Things can change from the outside in as well as the inside out.

The therapists give us “five easy ways to stop all this defensiveness.” They are probably right, of course. Applying good ideas is picking the low-hanging fruit of change. If you are not willing to take basic relationship advice, then you should just accept you’re going to stay unhappy in love. “Why would any one do that?” you ask.  They are defending themselves.

Likewise, if all you are going to do is keep defending against someone’s defensiveness and blame all the issues on them, you’ll just be playing your part in the endless relationship-breaking cycle. “Why would anyone do that when they can see their behavior is ruining what they want?” They can’t see through their defensiveness.

Change takes more than good intentions and rigorous discipline, both of which can feel a bit false. It takes a good heart. I think inside out is probably more important than outside in. But while you are waiting for everyone to come into their fullness, pick some low-hanging fruit. Daily small steps are usually how we humans get to deeper destinations.

Three ways to stop defensiveness from wrecking love

The worst-case scenario is when your loved-one’s criticism leads to your defensiveness. Then your defensive response leads to their next criticism — which then leads to your next defense.

This can happen in a flash. I hear about it all the time. In a few minutes, defensiveness and criticism can escalate, and turn into contempt and stonewalling. That’s not good. A cycle like that can go on indefinitely—for weeks, months, or years. Couples who bicker constantly can be this cycle for decades. That’s not a happy life.

First idea. When you need to talk about a problem, make a soft start. Don’t “blow them out of the water” to get their attention. Don’t initiate the conversation with an abrupt, loud, or angry remark. Instead, use a soft tone, say that you want to talk, and ask “When would be a good time?” Get their consent. Make an appointment. Don’t give up, but wait if you need to. If you avoid asserting yourself because it feels like conflict to do so, you might need to rehearse what you need to say.

Second idea. Figure out how to turn your criticism into a request. Criticisms are about the past; requests are about the future. Criticisms are about negatives; requests are about positives. Shift from a past negative to a future positive.

For instance, instead of the criticism, “You never lock the door!” you could use the request, “I feel safer when the door is locked. How about putting it on your mental checklist for a week?”

If you try behaviors like this you’ll help undo what is threatening. You’ll figure out what your loved one could do, going forward, that would help. You’ll be addressing the solution, not just the problem. When you make a request like this, people are much less likely to be defensive.

Third idea. One of the best cures for defensiveness, if probably the hardest, is to find some part of a request or criticism for which you can honestly take some responsibility. And respond to that first.

You might not agree with everything that has been said. But find some part of it you can acknowledge in good faith. Address that part first. Stay on that topic until your partner experiences some relief. Don’t shift to other parts too soon.

For example, if a wife says, “You’re working too many hours, like you always do.” Don’t say, “Well, I wouldn’t have to work so late, if you’d do more.” That response would be A+ defensiveness and we are trying to fail. Try saying, “That’s true, honey, I have been working late.”

The first response probably leads to a fight — our fears are screaming, “Man the battle stations!” The second response doesn’t lead to a fight. It seasons the conversation with validation and vulnerability – our fears are soothed, “I am being heard.”

The first response is a classic turn-around: “I didn’t do it, you did it.” Maybe you even got in their face or made yourself look bigger when you said it. Maybe they could see your face turn red or get “that look.” The second response acknowledges some responsibility for what the other person is experiencing.  Maybe you gave a soft answer to their hard-edged statement. “A soft answer turneth away wrath, but grievous words stir up anger.” (Proverbs 15:1 KJV).

Listening to people explore their loves and lack of love makes me marvel that love springs up in the world every day. No matter how many ways we try to kill it, our desire for it comes up with the sun. I think we were built for love — the deeper we look inside, the more we find it. I think our relationships were built for love, too — the more we look out at all those people with grace, the more opportunities we find to build it. Defensiveness is a basic way we can ruin it. Discerning where we are reacting to fear instead of having healthy self-respect is the work of prayer and I hope it was the conversation you had inside while you read this.

With some help from David Woodsfellow and John Gottman