I now know what Sashi Tharoor and the like felt like, when they expressed their views on their blogs. Blogging is a breakthrough medium for the likes of people, who have seen countless rejection slips from publications, simply because what they want to say does not agree with the principle of the publication. One is welcome to access the blog, or simply behave as if it does not exist. But when you do voluntarily reach out to read material in a space which belongs to one single individual, where he or she can voice the opinion they have, I do not think any sane person would think it is an aspersion on their lives!
What I write on my blog are unedited expressions of my impressions of my daily living. And the nature of my profession is such that I go through a variety of intense human emotions through the clients whom I meet anger; anxiety, depression, very low frustration tolerance, and sometimes even denial of the existence of a problem. These are issues which subsist along the spectrum of human relationships and professional though I am in my approach, sometimes when I feel the situation could have been either handled more effectively, (Check out my article: do you have balance) or perhaps avoided altogether, my helplessness shows: not to the people who come in for counseling, but in my outpouring on my blog.
But then, how do you respond to hate mails, generated when someone reads what is written on my blog, decide they are the self-styled moral diagnostic experts of people and conclude that what is written on the blog is the result of a demented, frustrated person, who perhaps may require medical intervention?
What do you think about folks who refuse to accept and admit there are flaws in every social system, and are raving and ranting about it? Playing the blame game only reflects the style of functioning of the person, instead of appraising the situation and doing some out-of-the-box thinking. Just as there have been clients who have been riled because truths hit them, and even though they go ahead and take the steps recommended (as this particular person did, and benefitted from it) they still choose to hide behind a mask, there also have been clients who are profoundly grateful for having been helped in choosing the right track. Unfortunately, they do not visit my blog I think! And I need to thank people who, even through such hate mails invite the mass of humanity to hit my blog!
Is it because my writings touch a raw spot I wonder? And who likes to connect with perhaps the truth of one’s soul? How many of us are able to confront reality and admit that life needs to be reworked? No, no; it is so much easier to blame the other and live in a cosy delusion that someone else needs to pull up socks, not themselves; even though they are wearing them!
Mohana Narayanan
June 21, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Respect: To command or demand
As a counsellor, I am fortunate (?) to experience a varied gamut of human relationships through the cases that come to me for therapy.
One such case was that of a young adolescent boy, who was referred to me for academics, as well as behavioural issues. On meeting the boy, he seemed compliant enough for the questions and answered them willingly, but I could sense intense rage within him. On probing, I found that his primary anger was directed against his mother. Reason? She insults him in front of his uncle and the servant! The mother looked surprised that this was a topic of dissent with the boy. Her logic was that if he is scolded in front of someone else, then he would learn to behave better. When I asked her what her expectations were she had only one thing to say: I want him to respect elders.
I found her need to be very amusing… considering she was using humiliation as a tool to discipline her son.
Everybody has this need in them to be respected, whether young or old. How could the mother expect the child to develop a sense of respect and reverence, when everytime she would deride and belittle him not only in the privacy of their home but also in public? It is, according to me, the lowest form of disciplining tactics, which would have the person at the receiving end seething inside with humiliation. I remember, when I was working in a publication firm, we would have this monthly meetings, which were called “Hall of Shame”. The names of all those editors who had not met their targets would be written on the board, and they would be asked for detailed feedbacks and explanations. This could also be done in the cabins of the senior professionals, but I think they all got a perverse pleasure, seeing them squirm in front of an audience. What irreparable damage was being done to the psyche of the person, I dread to think. A personal memo calling the person filthy names is so much better than this public flogging.
Coming back to the case, when I started handling the issues with the mother, I could understand where she was coming from. She was a perfectionist, and theirs was the most passive marriage I have ever seen! When asked if she expected others to respect her as a person and her opinions, she wanted to know what I was talking about! For the husband, she was just a wife; one who took care of his physical and biological needs. He could not describe the person that she was: her identity was that she was his wife. She was labelled a bad mother because her son did not behave ‘properly’. So to get social approval she was being punitive with the son. Her life revolved on social approvals. She could no longer establish her own identity, and establishing the importance of being herself became the focus of counselling. She was gradually able to understand that you do not demand respect; you command it. And you can only teach how to respect if you practise it. The point took a while to sink in; but when she was able to withdraw from the controlling relationship, and also refused to take responsibility for her son’s misbehaviour, and refuse to accept the label of being a ‘bad mother’ simply because he misbehaved, things started turning around. When people around realised that she was not accepting the blame for his behaviour, they started handling the boy differently; and he too, in subsequent sessions was able to understand the scenario.
Sessions are still on; the husband continues to be passive, though he is beginning to think there is more to a marriage than just staying together, and is slowly willing to enrich the relationship.
It is not ‘all is well’ as yet…. But I hope it would be.
Mohana Narayanan
One such case was that of a young adolescent boy, who was referred to me for academics, as well as behavioural issues. On meeting the boy, he seemed compliant enough for the questions and answered them willingly, but I could sense intense rage within him. On probing, I found that his primary anger was directed against his mother. Reason? She insults him in front of his uncle and the servant! The mother looked surprised that this was a topic of dissent with the boy. Her logic was that if he is scolded in front of someone else, then he would learn to behave better. When I asked her what her expectations were she had only one thing to say: I want him to respect elders.
I found her need to be very amusing… considering she was using humiliation as a tool to discipline her son.
Everybody has this need in them to be respected, whether young or old. How could the mother expect the child to develop a sense of respect and reverence, when everytime she would deride and belittle him not only in the privacy of their home but also in public? It is, according to me, the lowest form of disciplining tactics, which would have the person at the receiving end seething inside with humiliation. I remember, when I was working in a publication firm, we would have this monthly meetings, which were called “Hall of Shame”. The names of all those editors who had not met their targets would be written on the board, and they would be asked for detailed feedbacks and explanations. This could also be done in the cabins of the senior professionals, but I think they all got a perverse pleasure, seeing them squirm in front of an audience. What irreparable damage was being done to the psyche of the person, I dread to think. A personal memo calling the person filthy names is so much better than this public flogging.
Coming back to the case, when I started handling the issues with the mother, I could understand where she was coming from. She was a perfectionist, and theirs was the most passive marriage I have ever seen! When asked if she expected others to respect her as a person and her opinions, she wanted to know what I was talking about! For the husband, she was just a wife; one who took care of his physical and biological needs. He could not describe the person that she was: her identity was that she was his wife. She was labelled a bad mother because her son did not behave ‘properly’. So to get social approval she was being punitive with the son. Her life revolved on social approvals. She could no longer establish her own identity, and establishing the importance of being herself became the focus of counselling. She was gradually able to understand that you do not demand respect; you command it. And you can only teach how to respect if you practise it. The point took a while to sink in; but when she was able to withdraw from the controlling relationship, and also refused to take responsibility for her son’s misbehaviour, and refuse to accept the label of being a ‘bad mother’ simply because he misbehaved, things started turning around. When people around realised that she was not accepting the blame for his behaviour, they started handling the boy differently; and he too, in subsequent sessions was able to understand the scenario.
Sessions are still on; the husband continues to be passive, though he is beginning to think there is more to a marriage than just staying together, and is slowly willing to enrich the relationship.
It is not ‘all is well’ as yet…. But I hope it would be.
Mohana Narayanan
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Do you have balance?
Do you have balance?
I overheard my daughter talking on the phone to her friend, asking her: “Do you have balance?” For a moment, technologically challenged that I am, I wondered whether she had lost it! I mean, imagine asking someone if the person had balance, casting aspertions on the person’s sanity! Of course, a moment later, I realised that the comment was actually meant as a concern for the friend’s account balance in her pre-paid mobile card.
My thoughts, as usual, went off on a tangent. I wish our human relationships also worked as effectively. I mean, there are so many situations created simply because things that should never be uttered are spoken in a fit of anger or in a hot temper, which result in a downward spiral of the relationship. I wish there was some method by which the ‘balance’ of words expire before things reach a cresendo, as there is more damage done sometimes, when one person claims he or she has ‘only been frank’!
When i handle conflicts, as a counsellor I see scope for a lot of situations where damage control could have been done, simply by silence. But then we do not have a built in cut-off mechanism, which could say, balance is over, please recharge! Yes, we could use our inner reserves of sanity and avoid unpleasantness when we find things getting out of hand, but then it is hardly to be expected of a spouse who has been harbouring a lot of unresolved issues, till the situation reaches a pressure cooker situation and the lid is blown off! When you have the other party also offering concern about the ‘balance’ (literally and figuratively!), then this too shows that the receiver is able to understand where the partner is coming from….
Maybe it is in such times, that you wish the battery is also low in the phone!!!
Mohana Narayanan
I overheard my daughter talking on the phone to her friend, asking her: “Do you have balance?” For a moment, technologically challenged that I am, I wondered whether she had lost it! I mean, imagine asking someone if the person had balance, casting aspertions on the person’s sanity! Of course, a moment later, I realised that the comment was actually meant as a concern for the friend’s account balance in her pre-paid mobile card.
My thoughts, as usual, went off on a tangent. I wish our human relationships also worked as effectively. I mean, there are so many situations created simply because things that should never be uttered are spoken in a fit of anger or in a hot temper, which result in a downward spiral of the relationship. I wish there was some method by which the ‘balance’ of words expire before things reach a cresendo, as there is more damage done sometimes, when one person claims he or she has ‘only been frank’!
When i handle conflicts, as a counsellor I see scope for a lot of situations where damage control could have been done, simply by silence. But then we do not have a built in cut-off mechanism, which could say, balance is over, please recharge! Yes, we could use our inner reserves of sanity and avoid unpleasantness when we find things getting out of hand, but then it is hardly to be expected of a spouse who has been harbouring a lot of unresolved issues, till the situation reaches a pressure cooker situation and the lid is blown off! When you have the other party also offering concern about the ‘balance’ (literally and figuratively!), then this too shows that the receiver is able to understand where the partner is coming from….
Maybe it is in such times, that you wish the battery is also low in the phone!!!
Mohana Narayanan
Killer instincts: Love thy neighbour?
We talk about green environment,and people growing practically the entire vegetable needs of their family on their terrace, and thus being environmental friendly. I too am an avid gardener, but time and space constraints do not permit me to indulge in the hobby for longer periods of time. However, I do have some crotons in the foyer of my apartment, with a terra cotta idol of Lord Krishna who acts as my security guard! All the visitors comment on the aesthetic look of the frontage of my apartment, and the greenery is certainly cooling to the eyes.
Nevertheless, there are some killjoys for every situation; I get a notice from the secretary of the society saying that the inmates are not allowed to keep plants in the ‘common area’. I know for a fact, and i have the people who are staying above my apartment vouch for it, that the plants are not at all in the way of their movement. What other reason could there be i wonder, to pronounce such a ‘law’ if it is not to make sure that i do not enjoy the sight of greenery when i open the front door of my flat? And neither do people who visit my apartment?
When i removed one of the pots on a ledge outside my balcony, which had been a hiding place for a pair of pigeons nesting, i discovered two eggs in the nest. I had in fact placed the pot on this ledge, only so that the pigeons could feel safe from the prying crows, waiting to grab the eggs. Many a times i have sat on the balcony, watching these pigeons look at me, wondering if i was a friend or foe. Just when he had his doubts cleared and confidently sat there even when i opened the window to water the plant, I betrayed his trust and removed the pot from there! By the time i returned after placing the pot, i found the crow and flown away with one of the eggs!
I wonder how the society would react, if i question the fact that the people staying on the ground floor have potted plants in the common area? Or that this very person, who has sent the notice, has plants belonging to his wife, on the terrace?
Here we are, talking about planting ten saplings for every tree felled, trying to make the world a greener place to live in, and making sure that the generations to come do not have to look at plants and animals only in picture books. Yet your very neighbour thwarts all your attempts to do your mite to make the world a better place to live in, simply because they have some personal grouse against you which they do not have the temerity to confront you with or talk it out. So they decide to attack the mute plants and the helpless birds which had found haven and a safe place with these plants. How self-centered, and how manipulative can a man get?
Mohana Narayanan
Nevertheless, there are some killjoys for every situation; I get a notice from the secretary of the society saying that the inmates are not allowed to keep plants in the ‘common area’. I know for a fact, and i have the people who are staying above my apartment vouch for it, that the plants are not at all in the way of their movement. What other reason could there be i wonder, to pronounce such a ‘law’ if it is not to make sure that i do not enjoy the sight of greenery when i open the front door of my flat? And neither do people who visit my apartment?
When i removed one of the pots on a ledge outside my balcony, which had been a hiding place for a pair of pigeons nesting, i discovered two eggs in the nest. I had in fact placed the pot on this ledge, only so that the pigeons could feel safe from the prying crows, waiting to grab the eggs. Many a times i have sat on the balcony, watching these pigeons look at me, wondering if i was a friend or foe. Just when he had his doubts cleared and confidently sat there even when i opened the window to water the plant, I betrayed his trust and removed the pot from there! By the time i returned after placing the pot, i found the crow and flown away with one of the eggs!
I wonder how the society would react, if i question the fact that the people staying on the ground floor have potted plants in the common area? Or that this very person, who has sent the notice, has plants belonging to his wife, on the terrace?
Here we are, talking about planting ten saplings for every tree felled, trying to make the world a greener place to live in, and making sure that the generations to come do not have to look at plants and animals only in picture books. Yet your very neighbour thwarts all your attempts to do your mite to make the world a better place to live in, simply because they have some personal grouse against you which they do not have the temerity to confront you with or talk it out. So they decide to attack the mute plants and the helpless birds which had found haven and a safe place with these plants. How self-centered, and how manipulative can a man get?
Mohana Narayanan
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
Power struggle!
Getting out from the departmental store with my shopping bag, i was loading them in my car when i noticed a motorbike parked nearby. A crow was sitting on the petrol tank of the bike, and with a surreptitious look around, he delved into a pouch that was fixed on the bike and pulled out a goodie; a pistachio shell!. He looked around again, noticed another crow nearby, and quickly put the nutshell back again and nonchalantly started to look elsewhere. I am almost sure he also caught my eye!. With another look at the other crow, he seemed to be debating what to do, and then decided to carry the war right into the enemy camp. He flew to the place the other crow was sitting, and chased it away. The poor chap did not know what was happening and with a furious caw, flew away, probably cursing the chaser but deciding to leave the battle scene!.
I did not stop to see whether the crow came back for the nut shell (ironic isn’t it, all this was for not even the nut, just the shell!), but was thinking about how we humans and crows are so similar in our interpersonal relationships. I have seen this happening so often in the corporate jungle. People vie with each other for positions and power, and very often than not, the rules of the game are not followed; if they at all are, they are conveniently bent to suit the needs of the few who know how to win. The winning is all that matters. So these games are played out, in board rooms, in conferences, at meetings, and in cabins behind closed doors. The chase is subtle but it is persuasive. The victim either decides, like the crow in our story, to leave the scene but carries with it anger and resentment and even feelings of being victimised and being a scapegoat. Or he decides to give it a fight, and then the real battle ensues.
These feelings, if not handled constructively, become the emotional baggage that the person carries; and this feeling of having lost out may permeate into his other areas of living, sometimes making relationships also very dysfunctional. See the whirlpool effect?
I think it all boils down to fighting right: even in personal relationships. Squirrels have to bury food: so they do. But it is not seen as ‘hiding’ it away. It is acting in character to its species. But on second thoughts, i think the crow also acted in its nature? Don’t they say crows are supposed to thieve?? But do we humans act in our true nature? Are we not essentially supposed to be ‘good’ ? Then why do we deliberately push down, degrade other fellow beings, all for money, power, position? If we let go of the need for greed for power and control, i think a lot of our interpersonal conflicts can also resolve itself. Most of them start with power struggle: If the need for being in control: of others, not of self, is examined, and saturated not by controlling another human being, but by renouncing the need by itself, then i am sure life would be so much more fulfilling.
Mohana Narayanan
I did not stop to see whether the crow came back for the nut shell (ironic isn’t it, all this was for not even the nut, just the shell!), but was thinking about how we humans and crows are so similar in our interpersonal relationships. I have seen this happening so often in the corporate jungle. People vie with each other for positions and power, and very often than not, the rules of the game are not followed; if they at all are, they are conveniently bent to suit the needs of the few who know how to win. The winning is all that matters. So these games are played out, in board rooms, in conferences, at meetings, and in cabins behind closed doors. The chase is subtle but it is persuasive. The victim either decides, like the crow in our story, to leave the scene but carries with it anger and resentment and even feelings of being victimised and being a scapegoat. Or he decides to give it a fight, and then the real battle ensues.
These feelings, if not handled constructively, become the emotional baggage that the person carries; and this feeling of having lost out may permeate into his other areas of living, sometimes making relationships also very dysfunctional. See the whirlpool effect?
I think it all boils down to fighting right: even in personal relationships. Squirrels have to bury food: so they do. But it is not seen as ‘hiding’ it away. It is acting in character to its species. But on second thoughts, i think the crow also acted in its nature? Don’t they say crows are supposed to thieve?? But do we humans act in our true nature? Are we not essentially supposed to be ‘good’ ? Then why do we deliberately push down, degrade other fellow beings, all for money, power, position? If we let go of the need for greed for power and control, i think a lot of our interpersonal conflicts can also resolve itself. Most of them start with power struggle: If the need for being in control: of others, not of self, is examined, and saturated not by controlling another human being, but by renouncing the need by itself, then i am sure life would be so much more fulfilling.
Mohana Narayanan
Changing tides
I had gone in for a book launch function, where parts of the book were read out by someone other than the author. After the reading was over and when the floor was thrown open for discussions, the lady who had done the reading had a question: Would the author consider writing a book on divorce? (The current book was on marriage) The question was fair enough: but what followed set me thinking…” It is not as if I do not believe in marriage; though I am a divorcee”, she declared.
Her question was perfectly acceptable; what stood out like a sore thumb was an unnecessary declaration of her marital status. I started wondering whether the fact that you are a divorcee today is a reflection of your mental strength! I mean, there was a time when there was stigma attached to you being a divorcee; it was a fate worse than being a widow! The social stigma was irreparable and a woman was scarred mentally and emotionally, for life. But today I think the scenario has changed. A woman is no longer blaming herself for a marriage gone wrong; she is willing to walk out on a relationship where she feels there is nothing coming for her, where there is nothing but compromises and where she does not feel respect and recognized. She has no qualms about declaring it in an open forum, even when the situation does not warrant it!
I have mixed messages regarding this stand. On one hand this apparent strength of a woman helps her cope with what probably would otherwise be a very traumatic event in her life. But when strength borders on defiance, I think it is time for a woman to do a reality check. Are we talking about the triumph of respect, dignity of a woman and her willingness to walk out of a failed relationship, or are we appreciating the defiant stand that she may be in danger of taking, simply because she is laying down terms in a relationship? There are no blanket rules, for the simple reason, each marriage is different. What concerns me though is the current trend of the issues over which divorce is being sought, which somehow makes me feel that the institution of marriage is being tossed around like a ship without a rudder. The casual nature of a marriage ending in a divorce is making me feel very uncomfortable.
Marriage needs to be worked at. A relationship that enters your life after almost one-third of it is over, definitely needs more care and nurturing. It is not a natural relationship: whether it be a love marriage, or an arranged one. The lessons need to be learnt what would otherwise come naturally with people you grow up with. One needs to learn how to play more roles, discharge more responsibilities. The bonding is to be brought about consciously and perhaps even very formally.
But I think the very fact that partners think things should fall in place right from day one of the marriage, lays weak foundations. This expectation escalates into strong opinions where unresolved conflicts assume gigantic proportions. It somehow becomes too much of an effort to accommodate someone else into your life; and it becomes too much of an effort to try and become someone you are not. When thus an option is available which is not very difficult to opt for, then why not take it? I think this also is a question of which came first: the chicken or the egg? Is divorce as an option being considered because it is easier to obtain, and also the stigma is not so great today, or is it the other way around?
Mohana Narayanan
June 15,2010
Her question was perfectly acceptable; what stood out like a sore thumb was an unnecessary declaration of her marital status. I started wondering whether the fact that you are a divorcee today is a reflection of your mental strength! I mean, there was a time when there was stigma attached to you being a divorcee; it was a fate worse than being a widow! The social stigma was irreparable and a woman was scarred mentally and emotionally, for life. But today I think the scenario has changed. A woman is no longer blaming herself for a marriage gone wrong; she is willing to walk out on a relationship where she feels there is nothing coming for her, where there is nothing but compromises and where she does not feel respect and recognized. She has no qualms about declaring it in an open forum, even when the situation does not warrant it!
I have mixed messages regarding this stand. On one hand this apparent strength of a woman helps her cope with what probably would otherwise be a very traumatic event in her life. But when strength borders on defiance, I think it is time for a woman to do a reality check. Are we talking about the triumph of respect, dignity of a woman and her willingness to walk out of a failed relationship, or are we appreciating the defiant stand that she may be in danger of taking, simply because she is laying down terms in a relationship? There are no blanket rules, for the simple reason, each marriage is different. What concerns me though is the current trend of the issues over which divorce is being sought, which somehow makes me feel that the institution of marriage is being tossed around like a ship without a rudder. The casual nature of a marriage ending in a divorce is making me feel very uncomfortable.
Marriage needs to be worked at. A relationship that enters your life after almost one-third of it is over, definitely needs more care and nurturing. It is not a natural relationship: whether it be a love marriage, or an arranged one. The lessons need to be learnt what would otherwise come naturally with people you grow up with. One needs to learn how to play more roles, discharge more responsibilities. The bonding is to be brought about consciously and perhaps even very formally.
But I think the very fact that partners think things should fall in place right from day one of the marriage, lays weak foundations. This expectation escalates into strong opinions where unresolved conflicts assume gigantic proportions. It somehow becomes too much of an effort to accommodate someone else into your life; and it becomes too much of an effort to try and become someone you are not. When thus an option is available which is not very difficult to opt for, then why not take it? I think this also is a question of which came first: the chicken or the egg? Is divorce as an option being considered because it is easier to obtain, and also the stigma is not so great today, or is it the other way around?
Mohana Narayanan
June 15,2010
Tuesday, June 08, 2010
I heard you!!!
I HEARD YOU!
The other day, I went with my family for a music concert. The hall was not very big, and we had reached pretty much in time. We went in and found one row of empty seats, starting from the aisle. As I was about to sit down on the aisle seat, someone sitting behind pointed out that the seat was broken. Thanking him, I moved further and we settled down.
During the first half of the concert, I diligently took over the duty of the person who had warned me of the broken seat, and everytime someone would start to lower himself or herself on the seat, I would repeat the refrain: “excuse me, the seat is broken”. They would thank me and move on. One gentleman however, took objection to my telling him not to take the seat, presuming that I had reserved the place for someone and glaring at me said: “But there are seats further down the row right? Why can’t you ask them to sit there?” Before I could explain further, he walked away, muttering to himself about uncivilized audience! For a minute I was affronted, then humor took over and I could not help being amused! Well, he actually did not even listen to what I was saying right? He was somehow preprogrammed to the fact that I did not want him to sit there, as I had ‘reserved the seats’.
How often we tend to do this in various other situations too. We foresee an answer to some situation from someone, and we are already framing our response to the situation, without giving a thought to what is being actually being said… In other words, we are not listening; we are only busy preparing our counter to the response. And then it goes on... and the miscommunication then assumes gigantic proportions.
There is this game that I am reminded of, wherein you are supposed to give answer to a series of questions. What makes the game a test on your listening skills is, your answer should be not to the current question, but to the one asked just before. So, you need to listen to this question carefully, in addition to remembering the earlier one, and continue remembering the current one, to which you need to supply the answer once the next question is asked. Try it: it is tough! Simply because our listening skills are poor!
We tend to believe that what we say is what is understood; more often than not, what is understood is not what is conveyed, but what the other person infers the meaning as! If only all of us are able to understand this core message in the art of communication, life would be practically devoid of misunderstandings!
The other day, I went with my family for a music concert. The hall was not very big, and we had reached pretty much in time. We went in and found one row of empty seats, starting from the aisle. As I was about to sit down on the aisle seat, someone sitting behind pointed out that the seat was broken. Thanking him, I moved further and we settled down.
During the first half of the concert, I diligently took over the duty of the person who had warned me of the broken seat, and everytime someone would start to lower himself or herself on the seat, I would repeat the refrain: “excuse me, the seat is broken”. They would thank me and move on. One gentleman however, took objection to my telling him not to take the seat, presuming that I had reserved the place for someone and glaring at me said: “But there are seats further down the row right? Why can’t you ask them to sit there?” Before I could explain further, he walked away, muttering to himself about uncivilized audience! For a minute I was affronted, then humor took over and I could not help being amused! Well, he actually did not even listen to what I was saying right? He was somehow preprogrammed to the fact that I did not want him to sit there, as I had ‘reserved the seats’.
How often we tend to do this in various other situations too. We foresee an answer to some situation from someone, and we are already framing our response to the situation, without giving a thought to what is being actually being said… In other words, we are not listening; we are only busy preparing our counter to the response. And then it goes on... and the miscommunication then assumes gigantic proportions.
There is this game that I am reminded of, wherein you are supposed to give answer to a series of questions. What makes the game a test on your listening skills is, your answer should be not to the current question, but to the one asked just before. So, you need to listen to this question carefully, in addition to remembering the earlier one, and continue remembering the current one, to which you need to supply the answer once the next question is asked. Try it: it is tough! Simply because our listening skills are poor!
We tend to believe that what we say is what is understood; more often than not, what is understood is not what is conveyed, but what the other person infers the meaning as! If only all of us are able to understand this core message in the art of communication, life would be practically devoid of misunderstandings!
Pain bodies!
Pain bodies!
It is said that pain is the symptom that something is not right with your body; a signal that you need to attend to the cause of the malady. It may be caused by a ruptured appendicitis or plain simple indigestion, but unless you take care of the cause it would recur, and in the case of the former, it may even be fatal, if you ignore it.
How simple the diagnosis is, if it is seen on the physical level! But we do not understand that our emotional body also undergoes pain. And it tells us in the form of our emotions: of anger, sadness, depression or plain helplessness. But how many of us really understand that what needs to be attended to is the cause of this pain; these symptoms are only the superficial signs of a corrosion happening underneath. We need to sit down and listen; listen to the need of the emotional body, and find out what is causing us so much pain. Is it a failed, or a failing relationship? Is it an unmet need from somebody? Is it something that someone has said, or more important, something someone has not said?
A client who had come to me for a session shared a story with me, wherein the case was of pure unmet expectations. But the hurt was festering for such a long time, that when she came in for the first session, I realised that it was not an isolated incident and the probing revealed the source of the hurt going as far as her childhood. She was the second of three siblings and her parents had always favoured her elder sibling, simply because the latter had been suffering from some deep complex born of her own thinking and inadequacies. Though she resented this favouritism, she was willing to live with it, because she had found succour for her emotional needs outside and maybe she did not have the courage to either fight, or even voice her resentment then. . Things settled down after both of them got married, and since they all got busy with their now extended families, this rivalry took a back seat.
Unfortunately, it surfaced again with the younger sibling now, who was living with her parents in the same city, and who somehow felt victimised by circumstances to take care of the parents. (It may not be out of place to say here that the parents had a fallout with the eldest sibling and are barely on talking terms now; somehow she kept insisting, ironically that she was always put down upon!). Anyway, to cut to the presenting problem, my client called up her mother to share some discord that she had had with the younger sibling, but the mother jumped to her defense, saying that she was never able to understand her younger sibling, and not to bother her with undue conflicts between both of them. Now this was ironical, and the only message my client could get was that she was not given a hearing, (it was very reminiscient of her childhood) and that her sibling was!
The issue of discord is irrelevant here; what hurt was the fact that my client was straight away brushed aside, with a blanket pronouncement. What came to my mind was what a famous psychologist, Adler had written about the profound effect birth order had on the personality of a person. This client of mine had projected to be a strong, mature and rational individual and had been a source of support for the family throughout her life. When she did manifest her emotional needs, I guess the family was unable to understand it and handle the situation. It made them uncomfortable whenever she buckled, even for a while under a crisis. And all along, to live up to her image, she continued to reinforce the behaviour of being a strong, rational person.
She had not understood her deep underlying resentment she bore against her parents for compromising her position every time in a sibling fight. She had been given love: but conditional love. And when the conditions were not being met now, the family was unable to accept her.
How is someone to cope with an unfulfilled need? It was not easy… The level of acceptance had to be very high in her, to surpass this need of being accepted unconditionally by her parents, and she had to work on years of rejection and the silent resentment she had borne.
I had lot of raw emotions to handle; and it was not easy. She was speaking from hurt, not from reasoning. I had to give her time, before I could make her understand where her mother and her sibling were coming from. She had to deal with unmet expectations, and to use a Transactional analysis viewpoint, she was the rebellious child, talking to a critical parent. No wonder there was a cross transaction!
It is said that pain is the symptom that something is not right with your body; a signal that you need to attend to the cause of the malady. It may be caused by a ruptured appendicitis or plain simple indigestion, but unless you take care of the cause it would recur, and in the case of the former, it may even be fatal, if you ignore it.
How simple the diagnosis is, if it is seen on the physical level! But we do not understand that our emotional body also undergoes pain. And it tells us in the form of our emotions: of anger, sadness, depression or plain helplessness. But how many of us really understand that what needs to be attended to is the cause of this pain; these symptoms are only the superficial signs of a corrosion happening underneath. We need to sit down and listen; listen to the need of the emotional body, and find out what is causing us so much pain. Is it a failed, or a failing relationship? Is it an unmet need from somebody? Is it something that someone has said, or more important, something someone has not said?
A client who had come to me for a session shared a story with me, wherein the case was of pure unmet expectations. But the hurt was festering for such a long time, that when she came in for the first session, I realised that it was not an isolated incident and the probing revealed the source of the hurt going as far as her childhood. She was the second of three siblings and her parents had always favoured her elder sibling, simply because the latter had been suffering from some deep complex born of her own thinking and inadequacies. Though she resented this favouritism, she was willing to live with it, because she had found succour for her emotional needs outside and maybe she did not have the courage to either fight, or even voice her resentment then. . Things settled down after both of them got married, and since they all got busy with their now extended families, this rivalry took a back seat.
Unfortunately, it surfaced again with the younger sibling now, who was living with her parents in the same city, and who somehow felt victimised by circumstances to take care of the parents. (It may not be out of place to say here that the parents had a fallout with the eldest sibling and are barely on talking terms now; somehow she kept insisting, ironically that she was always put down upon!). Anyway, to cut to the presenting problem, my client called up her mother to share some discord that she had had with the younger sibling, but the mother jumped to her defense, saying that she was never able to understand her younger sibling, and not to bother her with undue conflicts between both of them. Now this was ironical, and the only message my client could get was that she was not given a hearing, (it was very reminiscient of her childhood) and that her sibling was!
The issue of discord is irrelevant here; what hurt was the fact that my client was straight away brushed aside, with a blanket pronouncement. What came to my mind was what a famous psychologist, Adler had written about the profound effect birth order had on the personality of a person. This client of mine had projected to be a strong, mature and rational individual and had been a source of support for the family throughout her life. When she did manifest her emotional needs, I guess the family was unable to understand it and handle the situation. It made them uncomfortable whenever she buckled, even for a while under a crisis. And all along, to live up to her image, she continued to reinforce the behaviour of being a strong, rational person.
She had not understood her deep underlying resentment she bore against her parents for compromising her position every time in a sibling fight. She had been given love: but conditional love. And when the conditions were not being met now, the family was unable to accept her.
How is someone to cope with an unfulfilled need? It was not easy… The level of acceptance had to be very high in her, to surpass this need of being accepted unconditionally by her parents, and she had to work on years of rejection and the silent resentment she had borne.
I had lot of raw emotions to handle; and it was not easy. She was speaking from hurt, not from reasoning. I had to give her time, before I could make her understand where her mother and her sibling were coming from. She had to deal with unmet expectations, and to use a Transactional analysis viewpoint, she was the rebellious child, talking to a critical parent. No wonder there was a cross transaction!
Friday, June 04, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)