Quote:
|
We've since moved past the specific case of the OP and into a more general discussion of the issues involved.
|
Indeed, we were all addressing
ghoastgirl1's comment, not the OP.
I feel that nearly all of your post is derived from one core assumption, with which I disagree. I believe that
one's current inability does NOT make something impossible, nor does it make it universally impossible for all humans.
I'm sure you know this, and I doubt you'd claim that what you do is the case for all humans. However, you've implicitly stated similarly in your post via statements such as:
Quote:
|
Negative comments continue to affect us because we don't have perfect control over our emotions or how they effect us in the long run.We're not robots reflecting on external conditions all the time to decide whether or not they are rational and whether it's reasonable to allow them to affect us.
|
Your use of 'we' inherently makes an assumption that
your inability to act in this manner makes it likely that 'we' cannot either.
I'd like to make the assumption that we can, using myself as an example. With rare exception, I act in exactly this manner - I reflect as objectively as possible on my external conditions, and decide whether or not stimuli should relevant to me, and whether or not they should make me feel a certain way. You can see vaguely in the outskirts of society - someone doing something that they believe to be right despite the protestions of everyone they know - friends, family, society, or government. Martin Luther King is a perfect example of someone who was able to ignore racist comments simply because he rationally decided they were unbased claims and that the speakers of such comments were not worthy of consideration. I would be supremely surprised if MLK ever expressed comments that the comments made him feel bad, or made him feel a certain way. He simply made the choice not to let it effect him at all! (My assumption, of course)
Quote:
|
We learn through internalizing external observations, both through direct and indirect instruction. If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are going to believe that. That's one of the basic elements of pedagogical theory, repetition and practice leads to internalization of the concept being taught. This happens informally also, through assimilation of implicit cultural values.
|
I believe your statement that "If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are going to believe that." should be modified to "If someone tells you something often enough with enough authority, you are
can chose tobelieve that." We are not hapless dogs to authority, and we can chose to disregard comments, no matter the authority of the person or the statement. Again, simply because you are poor at it does NOT make it impossible.
With practice, could you not improve your ability to disregard such comments as irrelevant, unncessary, or unproductive to retain? If so, then you must realize that we CAN have 'perfect control of our emotions in the long run.'
I think you might find "The Zen Art of Teaching" by Peter Gartner interesting. He's modelled what he believes to be the three prototypical models of education. His third method (Teaching III) addresses my point:
He says,
"From a constructivist point of view learning is considered as an active process in which people construct their knowledge by relating it to their previous experiences in complex and real situations in life. In their practical lives people are confronted with unique, unpredictable situations the problems of which are not yet obvious. Therefore, in contrast to cognitivism, the
solving of already existing problems is not the main priority, but the independent generating of the problem. These must be searched for in confusing, insecure, unpredictable and partly chaotic situations."
In short - rather than develop "solutions" to unique situations, we can best learn to search for the problem in "insecure, unpredictable and partly chaotic situations," by focusing only on the problem. What is the problem at the root of insecurity? At the root of 'letting something bother you'? It's your inability to
not let something bother you. Although the chaotic delivery of self-esteem lowering comments might seem unique, they ultimately revolve around a simple problem and solution that you've learned. My solution is the solution I've learned, certainly, but that does not mean that you or ghoastgirl1 cannot learn and practice it.
In this case I am not trying to diagnose specific problems or offer specific solutions, only state that these situations are not unique. If you focus on the analysis of the problem rather than the chaotic real-life solution, you can see that there is a rational and objective manner to approach ALL of the problems.
I appreciate you contributing a real example, because I think it provides the perfect platform for the discussion.
Quote:
|
That those things are generally considered unattractive in our society is a judgement, one which is easy to internalize given how often it's encountered in a variety of contexts, both explicit and implicit.
|
It is also easy to chose NOT to internalize those judgements, if you are aware of them and their potential impact on your pyschological well-being. It certainly becomes more difficult in the case of women, and even more difficult in the case of women and self-image, but that does not make it in unsolvable or unmanageable problem. You may have to become better at it than a similarly equipped man, but that does not mean you cannot ignore societal judgements.
Quote:
|
The target of rude comments and culturally instilled values does have a responsibilty to deal with how those values affect her on a personal level, this is true, but it's a lot more complex than "Don't let it bother you."
|
If you could truly implement a policy of "don't let it bother you" with any statement that you rationally deduced as irrelevant, do you think it would fail? If not, then it doesn't HAVE to be any more complex than "Don't let it bother you."
Quote:
|
If someone were to call me flat chested as an insult, the answers to your little quiz would be yes it's true, yes it matters to me, yes I agree with them (I have to because it is factually true) and no, I can't change it. This is supposed to make me feel better about having been insulted? Not seeing the logic there.
|
If you look anything like your profile picture, and if you truly agree with the sentiment, than you clearly mis-understand what is "factually true." It is not factually true, but biased by your own perception of the words "flat" and "skinny." I, for example, would not evaluate "flat" and "skinny" in the same manner as you, and would arrive upon a different conclusion. This simple contradiction means that it cannot be factual, and that you can dismiss the claim as simply as any other which could cause harm to your pysche.
Furthermore, even if you were to accept it as factually true, yes knowing that you cannot change it should offer consolation. If you recognize a problem but there is no solution, then you should not let that "problem" be a "problem." You either act towards a solution, or you ignore it.
BTW - the Zen Art of Teaching is available as a PDF at
http://www.elearningeuropa.info/extr...ofteaching.pdf if you'd like to read it.