Conversations with Nana

Sometimes, no matter how hard you try to avoid it, you end up on the receiving end of criticism. Being criticized is not a pleasant experience. The emotions called up may make you want to run away, stay away, or turn around and fight. But, for your own peace of mind, it is important to remember that this disturbing moment of being exposed and even labeled is sometimes an inevitable part of the on-going process of maintaining a relationship. The key to a healthy and stable relationship is not in measuring how seldom annoyances occur, but in how they are handled when they do occur.

Almost all relationships have to deal with critical moments at times. Of course, there are mannerly and ideal ways to approach the issues, but in some cases the person who calls the problem loses sight of the ideal. The best possible situation in receiving criticism is to have first introduced the other person to the constructive steps involved in giving criticism. However, even with the best intentions, people don’t always follow the blueprints they are given. If sufficiently upset, a person may blame, label, insult, and generally break all the rules, either inadvertently or with intention. When people become angry with you, and stay angry for extended periods, claiming that you are the cause of their anger, they are actually reacting to something within themselves. Certainly there are actions in life that cause irritation. However reasonable anger shoots up only momentarily (minutes at most) and then subsides into some version of problem solving. You are not responsible for another person’s protracted anger. Your responsibility is to recognize the intention behind your actions, and honestly assess when your intention was to cause a negative reaction in the other person. Are you deliberately jabbing, digging, or hurting? Then, yes, you have caused a reaction. Otherwise, any guilt you feel does not help the other person to gain clearer perception, and only undermines your ability to stand as an equal in the relationship. Preserving a relationship when you are under heated attack, means your first objective is to protect yourself by helping the other person calm down. And, after gently reminding him or her of how difficult it is for you to hear when feeling blamed, the fastest way to calm another is to listen with the intention of trying to understand.

However, even with your best efforts as outlined below, if the other person is not returning to a more workable level, you may need to take some time-out in order not to get emotionally caught up in the tirade. Some people are not able to remain calm once they tap into their deeper anger, or have never developed the skill it takes to negotiate their own darker emotions, and some have serious, even dangerous, personality problems that need to be addressed in more professional settings. Listening with the intention to understand is not going to be mutually effective where patterns of abuse or lack of empathy are already established. Furthermore, anytime psychological or physical threat is part of the encounter, you need to remove yourself immediately. The following suggestions and guidelines assume that the criticizing person and the target of the criticism both hold the other’s welfare at heart.

The overall goal is to diminish the heat and the sting of the criticism without losing sight of the content. At first, if at all possible, don’t interrupt, unless perhaps there is a need to find a more suitable place to carry on the discussion. Let the person express him or herself while you take in the message. However, merely remaining calm and undiminished by the negativity is not enough. Mute attendance or unresponsive silence often comes across as indifference or assumed superiority on your part, and may actually fan the flames of criticism. The reason the person is upset about the issue is because he or she feels unheard or ignored. People often raise their voices or repeat themselves because they think the other person isn’t getting the point. Listening actively, with the intention of wanting to understand, requires non-combative, even warm, eye contact, responsive facial expressions and gestures, such as nods or shrugs, and occasional verbal prompts, such as “I get it,” “Hmn,” or an occasional clarifying question. When people really believe they have been heard and understood, they almost always return to a more reasonable stance.

Ask for specific examples rather than categorically denying the accusation. Asking for specifics can be scary the first few times you try it, so it may take a concentrated effort to actually listen to the details. Defending ourselves by denying the charges feels right and comfortable compared to the non-interruption rule. But denial, which is defensiveness, only keeps the problem unsolved. Asking for specifics helps you to understand the whole picture and helps others to believe that you really do care about what they are feeling and thinking. Later, after you are seen to clearly understand the details, you will be able to explain your side of the story to a much more receptive audience.

Don’t use the person’s critical remark as a confirmation that it is all right for you to respond with an equally critical response. Avoid making a counter-attack. The old adage “two wrongs don’t make a right,” really applies here. The last thing you want to do is escalate unnecessary anger. Countering each accusation with a cross-complaint of your own, such as, “Me? What about the time you…” leads to escalation with each complaint getting worse than the previous one. Keep calm, breathe slowly, maybe even count the next ten slow breaths, anything to keep your inner churning to a minimum. Your reaction at this moment may be the difference between beginning to come together or moving further apart.

Instead of defending yourself at this point, paraphrase, or try to sum up the other person’s ideas to show that you understand. Paraphrasing is not mimicking or simply repeating. Rather, it is a conscientious effort to say the same thing in a slightly different way. “In other words,” you might begin. First, you are making sure that you really do understand exactly what the other person is trying to get across. If you fully understand, then you are better able to respond. Second, the other person sees that you are really trying to understand, which is like a gift. It is difficult to aim anger and resentment when the target is on the same side. Understanding softens people. Third, if you are inaccurate in your summation, the person has the chance to correct you and clarify the point, which makes negotiation that much easier.

In some cases, this might be a good time to take notes. If what the person wants to tell you is complicated or involves many details, taking notes will help you to remember everything when it’s your turn to speak. Even though it may feel and look a little strange, pausing to draw out a pencil and paper gives you some breathing room and makes the other person slow down. The overall message you are sending is that the information is important and you don’t want to miss anything.

In order to figure out what behavior to change, or if you have to change anything at all, you will need to assess the potential damage. Find out the consequences of your continuing to behave in the way that the other person is now criticizing. You both may discover that just in the process of your trying to understand, the original problem fades away. Or, you may discover that this behavior that you find so innocent could do serious damage to your relationship if left unchecked. Knowing the potential consequences will help you in making plans and decisions that further your relationship in the future.

Thank the person for bringing their feelings and thoughts to your attention. This may seem strange, especially if you feel that a load of garbage has been dumped right in the middle of your nice life. But wouldn’t you want to know now, when the problem is manageable, rather than suffer a lot more grief after it’s gone too far? Thank the person for trying, even if in a confusing, emotion-laden, or clumsy way, to mend the relationship and keep the communication lines open.

That old expression about the pot calling the kettle black is usually more true than we like to think. In many families, some protective elder manages to warn at some point, “If you can’t say anything good, don’t say anything at all.” On the other hand, another good piece of advice is to “not stuff it,” not to push down your emotions, because suppressed anger because will rise up eventually anyway, and when it finally rises, it is usually much more explosive than the original feelings. So, how does one juggle these two contradictory maxims in maintaining a long lasting relationship?

Sometimes we must speak up. Whether the issue is about how one squeezes the toothpaste tube, or about much more serious matters, we reach a point where we cannot remain silent and continue to peacefully coexist. Certain behaviors must change in order to make the relationship a workable one. When this is the case, the first step is simply to ask the person to change. Easy — just say, “Instead of doing that, would you do this?” The surprise is that often that’s all it takes.

Or, if you think that the person has something invested in the way he or she is currently behaving, and that to ask for change may be hurtful or feel insulting, then the second approach is to ask, “What would it be like for you, if you were to do this instead of that?” The key here is to ask from a genuine place of wanting to know how certain changes might affect him/her. This is not a trick question. According to the answer, you will have a better idea as to what to do next.

Simple. You can ask for change directly. But maybe not so simple if the other person tends to react defensively, or assumes your request is coming from malice or a power play. In order to comment about another without too much fall-out, the first step is to understand the nature of criticism. First of all, the word “criticize” altogether has a nasty ring to it. Try for something more neutral and less threatening, such as, “making constructive comments.” Using different language may seem like subterfuge, but the change of words can serve as reminders about your sincere intentions. When the need arises to make constructive comments, always remember that the primary purpose of the comment is to solve a problem, not to hurt someone. Once the other person understands that you are trying to shore up the relationship, not tear it down, he or she will be more receptive to what you have to say.

Sometimes we get carried away. Once we know we have the other person’s attention, we figure we’d better get in as much as we can. Or, the freedom of finally saying what has been bottled up inside is so exhilarating that we just keep going. Rather than bringing up a long list of past wrongs, try to make your points one conversation at a time, at least until the other person shows enough trust and relaxation to go on. Too many issues at once can cause someone to feel hopeless. People can only sustain a sense of failure for so long before they walk away altogether or turn the blame back on the attacker.

Change is going to depend on the other person really understanding what it is you are saying. It may feel great to vent for the purpose of letting off steam, however venting alone will do little to further the relationship. Avoid vague insinuations or ambiguous statements such as, “there you go again,” or “you always do that,” or “this has to stop.” Make your language as specific as possible. Define in clear nouns and verbs such vague phases as “this, that, it.” Specific language takes a lot of practice. While we often think what we are saying is perfectly clear the other person’s interpretation is often different enough to cause miscommunication. When someone claims the offending person already “knows” just by association, it’s a good bet that confusion and misunderstanding is at play.

Remain as realistic as possible, even if it means rehearsing the conversation ahead of time. Don’t exaggerate. Exaggerations such as “never” and “always,” are rarely accurate, and cause you to appear dishonest. While the person defensively thinks of exceptions the real point has been missed.

Reframe your words to say what you mean without sounding mean-spirited. Examples might include changing  “pushy or bitchy” to “assertive,” or “lazy” to “unmotivated.” The goal is not so much to soften the blow, as to getting the person to hear you without losing contact through defensiveness. Don’t use insulting language, negative labels, or sarcasm. Sometimes we think sarcasm is funny and if the other person doesn’t laugh it’s simply because they don’t have an advanced sense of humor. The rule of thumb:  sarcasm during an argument or painful encounter (and many other times, too) will hurt no matter what are your intentions. The primary purpose of constructive comments is to solve a problem, not to hurt someone.

Watch your tone of voice. No matter how innocent your words are, with a negative tone of voice the other person is always alerted. Without even realizing they do it, people listen for non-verbal clues. Keep your voice tone neutral, if not kind and loving. This would be a good time to gently hold the other person’s hand, if your relationship warrants such affection, or at least briefly touch the person in some way to silently affirm that you are still present in spirit and not trying to destroy the good feelings you share.

Accompany your constructive comments by specific suggestions for behavioral change. Try to give concrete, detailed examples of what you need changed. In that way the other person has a clear idea if he or she will be able or willing to comply. If not, it’s better to know right away than to create a false agreement that will only lead to disappointment in the future. It’s important to know that asking for what you need is reasonable and necessary, but expecting to be given exactly what you ask for is a demand and not reasonable. If others can and will change in just the way you ask, wonderful. If they cannot or will not meet your demands, that’s wonderful, too, because now you know where you stand. Further negotiations are possible.

Avoid making constructive comments in every conversation or encounter. If you critically approach others too often, they will regard you as a fault finder or develop a defensive attitude in your presence. General rule: Praise as much, or more, as you criticize. At least an equal (if not twice as much) amount of genuine praise needs to be expended for every constructive comment.

Some people believe so strongly in what they are saying, they feel they have not been truly heard until the listener agrees with them. In order to maintain his or her stance, the speaker listens to the other perspective only to collect information to counter. Eventually the conversation turns to argument or unfriendly impasse. While the goal of convincing others can be a worthy one in some circumstances, it need not be the only way to express oneself. When we are understood, even if other people don’t agree with what they are hearing, we have the satisfaction of knowing that we have clearly communicated and have been clearly heard.

Surprisingly, clear and effective communication is made up of just a few simple parts. Sometimes all the parts must be in use in order to make the communication work, sometimes only a few are needed, and sometimes all are used but spread over several conversations. Ultimately, however, it is the combination of the parts that makes the communication work so well, not just good intentions, or well chosen words. Of course, when things are going well and you want to communicate happiness or love, maybe only a look or a brief expression is needed. The method described below is used for the more difficult times, for example when you need to tell others about behaviors of theirs that really bother you.

The first step is to be sure you are describing what you think are the facts of the situation. There will plenty of room later in the conversation for your opinions, interpretation, and evaluation. Facts are straightforward, concrete events that you have observed, without any interjection of what you think those facts mean, what the motives of the other person might be, or whether you think they are right or wrong. Remember to keep your voice tone and body language as neutral or non-judgmental as possible. Examples of factual communication: “You said you would be here by 9:00 and instead it’s 9:45.” “When you talk to me your voice gets louder and louder.” “I was talking to you and you walked out of the room without saying anything.”

By stating the facts so specifically, you are making sure the other person knows exactly what you are talking about. Imagine if someone told you there were strange noises in the house. Vague words like “strange” are a clue, but simply do not give you enough information. Factual language will help you know whether to check for leaky pipes, call an exterminator, or call the police. Conversely, when others approach you with something bothering them, it is fair to gently stop the flow and ask first for specifics so that you are sure you understand their references exactly. Sometimes, the mere act of pointing out the troubling behavior is enough to change the situation, although this is not often the case.

The second step, once you are sure the other person understands you, is to explain why this situation is a problem. Chances are the other person is truly not aware that what he or she is doing is troublesome. At this point you may want to add your feelings and/or interpretation of the other person’s motives or behavior if your perception is part of what’s bothering you. Since this person is not an enemy, but part of a relationship both of you have chosen, there is a good chance that once the problem is explained, the situation can be modified to everyone’s satisfaction. On the other hand, your interpretation may only be one of many possibilities and at this point the other person can alert you to an alternative version, which may be much more innocent or well-intended than you imagined. In either case — whether you relax in the discovery that you had misinterpreted, or, others awaken to the negative effect of their behavior — often these two simple parts, being factually specific and explaining why there is a problem, are all that are needed to begin the process of change. Examples of explaining why the situation or behavior is a problem: “Everyone’s schedule is disrupted when you are later than expected.” “I can’t hear what you are trying to tell me when I feel that you are yelling at me.” “I’m hurt to think that you would walk away without hearing what I have to say.”

On the other hand, sometimes the problem is not solved so neatly and a few more steps are needed. At this point, state as clearly as possible what you want to happen next. Next may be something as simple as an agreement to continue talking at another time, or as firm as a request for change. Depending on the circumstances, when you request change it is usually good to also tell what you hope to see, or how you wish the other person to proceed. Others, in turn, can then agree or let you know what they are willing or not willing to do. The point here is that you are engaged in negotiations rather than making demands. Examples of stating what you want to happen next: “If you can’t arrive on time, will you call me and let me know?” “When your voice starts to get louder, I would like to touch your arm or make a signal between us to help you remember to keep it down.” “If you need to walk away when I am talking, would you just say something to let me know how you feel about what I just said?”

At this point it is important to ask for feedback, unless, of course, the other person has already demonstrated that they clearly understand what you are saying. Many times we believe that others understand, only to later discover that they were confused about the message. Asking for feedback is not simply saying, “Do you understand?” or “Do you know what I mean?” Both questions only require a “yes or no.” If you are lucky enough to get a “no,” you can explain further or ask what part wasn’t clear. However, many people answer “yes” because they either think they understand when actually they don’t, or they are too embarrassed, intimidated, or indifferent to go any further with the conversation. The smart thing to do is to ask the person to tell you what he or she thinks you said, or to ask a question that requires a more in-depth answer. Examples of asking for feedback: “So how soon before you come do you think you can let me know you’ll be late?” “Just to be sure, what do you think I meant when I said that your voice tone upsets me?” “I need to know that I haven’t just forced an agreement on both of us. What do you think you just agreed to?”

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if this were the end of the problem? People who have developed the spirit of cooperation often find that from here they are well on their way to not only solving the problem but also favorably changing conditions for future encounters. But sometimes even this is not enough. If your agreements are not met or if reasonable changes do not occur after a reasonable period of time — which is determined by the nature of the particular problem or issue — then you may have to repeat the above steps. There may be lots of reasons for people not following through, such as forgetting, losing track of time, getting confused, or thinking they have actually fulfilled their half of the agreement. Of course, there is also the unsettling possibility that they made an agreement they had no intention of keeping, but you won’t know this until you double check. Example of double-checking: “Remember that talk we had last week? What was your understanding about our agreement?”

By now intimacy is flowing even if nothing else has changed. Sometimes the very thing that was bothering us melts away as the conversation about it starts to flow. But sometimes not. When nothing seems to be changing even after numerous conversations, there is one final step. Ask yourself, what happens now, what will I do next, how will I end up feeling? Then explain the events that probably will follow if the situation continues to remain unchecked. Sometimes people act out of habit and fail to see any harm in doing what they’ve always done. But when the potentially dangerous or negative consequences of things not changing are clearly spelled out, people often get the full picture and work for mutually happier conditions. As long as your statement of possible consequences is not a threat, demand, or ultimatum, it is also a way of educating the other person as to who you are and how you react. Examples of explaining the consequences: “If you haven’t called and you’re late, I’ll figure you’re not coming after 20 minutes and I’ll leave. We can reschedule later.” “It’s not good for us to continue talking when we are yelling, so if either one of us is too upset to calm down, we’ll call a time-out and pick it up again when we are calmer. I’ll check in with you after about half an hour and see if we want to continue our talk.” “If you walk away without giving me a signal that everything is OK, I’ll figure that you are upset. It will be hard to do, but I’ll wait until you tell me you are ready to talk.”

Clarity in Communication

1. Describe the facts of the situation: Not opinions, evaluations, judgements of right or wrong. Keep voice and body neutral, non-judgemental, non-threatening.

2. Explain why this situation is a problem: OK to add your feelings and interpretation of the situation. Be open to hearing alternative interpretations.

3. State what you want to happen next: Listen to the other person’s wishes also.

4. Ask for feedback: Don’t say, “do you understand or do you know what I mean?” Ask the other person to explain what was heard.

5. Repeat previous steps as needed: Look for and honor small increments of change.

6. Explain potential consequences: Avoid threats, demands, ultimatums. Be able and willing to follow through if necessary.

You know those old jokes about good news/bad news? The bad news is there will be problems as we go along in our relationships, except now, believe it or not, the bad news becomes good. Quality, intimacy, and endurance are not built in spite of problems, but because of them. It’s during the bad times that we demonstrate our commitments, find ways to hold each other close, and hopefully grow up together into bigger people than before. So when arguments arise, as they surely will if you are paying attention even a little, you can think of them as windows of opportunity.

Recognizing disagreements or arguments as positive allows you to bring up issues often, before they grow unwieldy and out of control. Freedom to say everything that’s on your mind evolves from two important sources. First, you are free to speak because you trust that the other person is following the same guidelines of cooperation, communication, and a willingness to listen. Second, you are free to speak because you trust you will not confuse your message with blame, meanness, or manipulation. If you have been following these basics so far, then you are well on your way. It is as if together you are watching the hurricane from our window, knowing that the storm will pass over soon enough.

Think of an argument as the fine tuning of a relationship, the maintenance and repairs. The question now becomes how to conduct the argument. You may not have much control over each other’s thoughts, feelings, and churning emotions, however there are some simple and timely things you can control.

For one, don’t attempt a serious talk on an empty stomach. If you are well fed and physically comfortable, you will be much more inclined to carry the good physical feelings into your emotions as well. The same is true for feeling rested. Fatigue, as with hunger, can make everything seem more intense. Also, choose the time of day so that there will be no, or few, interruptions, and no other appointments to call you away. The amount of outside distractions and noise is easily controlled by turning off phones, radios, and TVs. Finally, if the argument splays out over a long or tiring period of time, agree to stop and set a date and time to pick it up again when rested.

Some other tips to remember include keeping your focus on behavioral issues rather than personality and attitudes. Address specific behaviors and let go of trying to read or control other people’s minds. A constructive argument might sound like this: “I need you to stop leaving your clothes wherever you drop them,” and not, “You think I’m your maid. You are so lazy.”

Also, keep your issues current, as much in the present moment as possible. While it may be necessary from time to time to bring in brief examples or points of reference, past issues that already have been settled need to be referred to sparingly and with great caution, and never as an excuse to slip in more than one complaint at a time. Also stay current by keeping things directly related to your own experience. Don’t bring in others’ opinions as back up if those people are not present in the room. But, equally true: Anything that happened in the past but still feels unresolved and bothersome, is current deserving of its own discussion time because your feelings about that issue are still thriving.

Once you have established that you are looking for solutions rather than someone to blame, a fun thing to do is to brainstorm possibilities together. Allow yourselves to be architects of the fantastic as well as the practical. In brainstorming, there are some basic ground rules, and after that anything goes. Rule number one is that no one can ridicule or criticize what anyone else says. Rule number two is that no one is expected to stand by or defend his or her idea — it’s all just play at this point. Number three rule, at the end of the brainstorm, is that everyone agrees before an idea is discarded. The startling revelation here is that people can laugh and have a good time right in the middle of an argument.

But, if anger escalates agree to take formal breaks. Breaks or time-outs are orderly in that they are set up by previous agreement, purposeful rather than just slamming a door on the way out, and brief. Before the discussion ever starts, in some neutral time, develop a code or signal to use during the argument to indicate that you will be taking a time out. Agree during this planning stage that whoever uses the signal will be allowed to leave without resistance or questions asked and will return after a specific cooling off time. At the designated time he or she will return for a check-in to see if more time is needed, if a later appointment should be made, or if it’s OK to continue right now. General rules for taking breaks: Set up previously your definition of what is a time-out and ground rules. Agree on a gesture or verbal signal. Make no resistance about the break. Return at designated time. Resume or make another date.

Most of us have heard warnings about using withdrawal as a method of escape, but there is an important point to remember about the kind of retreat we are talking about here. Withdrawal as outlined above is a fair and reasonable thing to do in the same way you would stop your car if it became overheated. Agreed upon withdrawal is different than withholding. Withholding is impenetrable and secretive. When people practice withholding, they are closing themselves off and expecting others to learn the lock’s combination through guilt and manipulation. Withholding is neither constructive nor loving. Instead, it falls under the category of defensive reacting in that it takes care of one individual at the expense of the relationship.

Really, the best way to learn how to avoid using withholding, is to have it done to you. Once a person experiences how lonely and hurtful it feels, he or she will not want to use it on someone they love. Extricating oneself from this bad habit is not as hard as it might appear when everyone agrees to work on the problem as a team. Withholding is negative, spiteful, and a play for power. Withdrawing is used carefully with the positive purpose to refresh and regain balance.

Finally, put things in writing. By writing down issues and solutions you are creating a clear reminder. You are also creating the spirit of a contract, which solidifies your on-going commitment to a quality relationship. Finally, you are creating a kind of relationship journal that you can refer to from time to time to congratulate yourselves about those areas where you have progressed and to check on those that seem to be going in circles.

In review, here are the steps in constructing arguments with positive outcomes:

1. CREATE POSITIVE PHYSICAL CONDITIONS

Unplug phones, radios, TV, computers.

Choose a time of day with few interruptions.

Make sure you are well fed, physically comfortable, rested.

When fatigue occurs, set a date and resume later.

2. CREATE POSITIVE EMOTIONAL CONDITIONS

Talk about behaviors, not personalities.

Stay current in your feelings.

Only one complaint at a time.

Make personal statements, not blaming ones.

Don’t bring in “others” who are not present.

3. CREATE POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL APPROACHES

Brainstorm without criticism

Take agreed upon breaks as needed

Resume at a designated time

Write Down Issues and Solutions

Some people heal and some never do

Some people die while others survive.

Who is to say what is the natural state of the world?

Life and death are intertwined

A covering blanket woven of many living and dying threads.

Who knows the time allotted?

Who knows the one who allots the time?

We live, we die, sooner, or later.

We do this thing together without ever knowing

Where the empty space will appear.

You are hereby notified that you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, copying, distributing, disseminating, or taking any other action against me with regard to the contents herein, including, but not limited to my photos. The foregoing prohibitions also apply to your employee, agent, student, or any personnel under your direction or control. The contents of this site are private and legally privileged and confidential information, and the violation of my personal privacy is punishable by law. UCC 1-103 1-308 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

It is always difficult to put a label on behavior because it is so individualistic. In one interview in the video Men Talk Sex, a man said that he had to run into a car dealership bathroom to masturbate, after trying to be a good religious person and not masturbate for several days. But, what about those who are not abstinent, and yet still feel compelled to masturbate many times a day?

One thought is that it is possible to have a phobia or intense fear of having an erection in public. A young boy who did not have control yet might be so exposed while, say, giving a speech in class, or talking to a favored girl in the school hall. Even if no one noticed or ridiculed him, it could create a desperate need to make sure it never happened again. In this case, therapy would help uncover the irrational thinking, as well as education as to how things may settle down as the body ages. Medication might also be in order due to a bio-chemical reaction in the brain causing anxiety reactions, but that would have to be figured out by a doctor.

Another possibility is the modern idea of what is loosely termed “sex addiction,” where a person thinks in such a way as to create an erotic mind-set and a continual need for release through orgasm. This is the opposite of phobic because instead of trying to avoid something, this person is trying to get filled up or satisfied. If the person in question wants to break this cycle, besides temporary abstinence and therapy, he or she might also learn about “person-centered sex,” where orgasm is not the goal, but genuine cherishing of the partner is.

(Also, we sometimes see this kind of behavior in lower cognitively functioning people, such as institutionalized developmentally disabled, where masturbation simply is a bodily habit that feels good. Often a program of behavior modification, where rewards for appropriate public behavior are consistently applied, has been successful in institutional settings.)

Even if the person is acting compulsively or out of anxiety, he (or she) may talk as if they are behaving by choice and that there is no problem. Whatever the reason, there may be no problem in present time because the person has figured out a way to organize their day around their habits, and because the end result is so physically pleasurable.

The problem may come when the person attempts to engage in an emotionally intimate relationship. Most likely, no one partner is going to want to continually be available at that physical level. A harem might fit the bill in this case; however there would still be the problem of the person being able to organize a productive workday. More so, the person may find that sex with a partner is often just not as personally satisfying as his or her own style and timing of masturbation. He or she may engage in partner sex for the partner’s sake, or for an occasional diversion from the norm, but the partner in the cases of addictive masturbation very often complains of an impersonal, mechanistic kind of love making rather than a genuine person-to-person deep encounter.

There are twelve step programs called Love and Sex Addicts Anonymous, with varying degrees of help. Without the first-hand experience of physical depth that partnered lovemaking can bring, it would be hard to imagine there is a better way. The person who knows the success of solitary masturbation would have to practice trust, faith, bravery, and self-discipline without any guarantees about the future. What purports to be mentally and sexually healthy becomes a catch-22 in that the goal is unfathomable without some taste of experience, and the instrument of that experience, the partner, can only appear after some even minor semblance of the goal has been reached.

As to why someone gets addicted to porn, one answer is not going to fit all. There could be various reasons mixed with one’s cultural or religious background. Some of the current ideas, in general:

Orgasm is highly rewarding. Internet porn is somewhat taboo and maybe secretive, which adds adrenaline to the system (excitement). The actors on the screen are perfect. They fit the watcher’s ideal, they are willing to, or can be programmed to, act in exactly the ways the person wants. They are already aroused to the ultimate limit, and only care about pleasing. All of these factors make for an extremely intense orgasm.

After that once – or several – times, the person sees a vast difference from his or her real world, and what is available with porn. Couple that with a personality that prefers immediate gratification over behaving with a long-term lifestyle in mind, maybe someone who has few coping skills for stress or crisis, someone who might seek some kind of sedative, prescription or not, rather than living and working through emotional pain, and maybe someone whose particular brain chemistry is slanted more toward compulsion. Everything is in place to create quickly a desire or craving to have more of the quick fix of porn.

Research has found that men fit in the above porn category more than women, although women also have their percentages. However, if you substitute porn for romance, the same process prevails for many otherwise seemingly innocents. Romantic novels, “chick flicks” where true love always wins in the end, etc., become the intense reward. Many women are disappointed in their real world when they had been primed for the ideal relationship. The results look somewhat different, but there is a strong parallel here.

It’s not that a person can be immune to porn (or romance fiction), or should avoid it. Rather, certain people need to recognize that the material is so unrealistic and distracting from any real relationships, they may want to make a conscious decision to not go there, or at least in any potentially addictive way. In the Western culture, at least, we have been raised with taboos and shame, and yet the illicit is dangled before us at every turn. Resistance would be difficult without some conscious thinking and sense of personal power.

Once people fully enter the “addicted” area, they are no longer consciously making decisions. The pull to go in a certain direction is as strong as wanting a cold drink on a hot day. It becomes part of the person’s sense of survival. At that point the addiction is in control, and change comes slowly and thoughtfully. Any partner outside the addiction must understand that the other person’s behavior is unrelated to the partner, not because of the partner.

While alive, Jesus taught an apocalyptic gospel – the world is soon changing, give away your possessions, and follow his example of living day-to-day, hand to mouth. Yet, some Christian churches now teach that abundance on a material level is available for the asking. The article of faith in these often evangelic models is to claim what is rightfully yours, your material inheritance from God. Role models for this in the Catholic pantheon are hard to find – most are already poor or give away any wealth they may have started with. How do the other Christians justify claiming material wealth, or, if not wealth, at least a comfortable lifestyle? Where is the teaching written? The Birds of the Fields metaphor is not about abundance, it’s about trust. The trust is not about receiving everything you want, it’s about receiving everything you need for the day. The words need (meaning basic necessities) and day (meaning today – no hoarding for tomorrow) are key to this parable.

The choices we make and how we go about making them can be a test of our relationships. Sometimes we act too hastily or with little introspection. Other times there simply are no right answers and whatever direction we choose means someone will feel distress. Unfortunately, people make mistakes from time to time. Our hope for on-going relationships lies in seeing the situation from the other person’s point of view as well as our own, reviewing all the possible outcomes before jumping into a decision, and understanding our private inner motives and desires. And finally, ability for relationships to survive lies in giving each other the benefit of the doubt in our decision-making.

A version of the exercise in Part 1, taking four opposing positions and trying to fully understand each argument, was originally developed by a group of Japanese schoolchildren. The “Pillow Method” gets its name from the fact that a problem has four sides and a middle, “just like a pillow” (Adler and Towne. Looking Out/Looking In, 7^th Edition. Pages 113-117.) Yet another version of this exercise comes in handy when you find you have to make a decision that requires choosing one thing over many other things of equal value, such as a career path, for example. In the first seat pick one of the things and think about it as your final choice. Continue to the next possible choice. There will be as many seats as there are choices to make. Next, decide to make no choice at all and then imagine all the ensuing consequences. Finally, as impossible as it may sound, decide to choose everything. If you can hold this position for a while, you may actually discover there is a way to have at least a part of some or all. What is needed is letting go of all your preconceived notions about how things work and having a brainstorming session with yourself.

Keep in mind the rules for brainstorming: Don’t criticize any idea that occurs to you, don’t feel obliged to do something just because you thought of it, and feel free to disregard any idea after careful consideration.

If you still have not reached a conclusion, go to the last seat, that one reserved for special circumstances, and imagine how you will benefit from any choice you make, so that once again, the specific choice really doesn’t matter as much as the act of choosing and moving.

Here is yet another version of the same exercise to try when you are in disagreement with yourself. Perhaps, like many of us, you have experienced times when you feel and say that you want something very much and yet you fail to follow through. Examples could be as simple as getting up on time after sleeping, or as serious as working with addictive behavior, such as gambling or excessive shopping.

What you want may be to change a part of yourself, stop a habit, or acquire something through personal effort. You really want this, but to date you have yet to act in a way that will bring it to you. Many people experience ambivalence in some area of life on some occasions. Being ambivalent pretty much stops decision making so that eventually we feel less and less respect for ourselves. After all, if someone else continued to say one thing and do another, we would lose interest fairly quickly.

This exercise is usually drawn out over a long period of time, due to the length of time your ambivalence has been around. It takes awhile to cautiously uncover unknown parts of oneself. The first seat may seem counter-intuitive, but also possibly the easiest, because in it you list all the things you like about the problematic behavior. If, for example, gambling is the behavior, a person might list things like the thrill of winning, the excitement of anticipation, the sense of camaraderie with other gamblers, a sense of personal power. To develop as complete a list as possible, follow the adage of “sleeping on it,” and make the list over time with several breaks in between. As always, this list must be approached with as little negative judgment and as much impartial objectivity as possible in order to be effective. (And, remember, as with any serious problem, this exercise is just one of many tools for insight. It may be necessary to combine many types of intervention to make a lasting change.)

The next three positions can be approached in any order that works for you, or you may want to move back and forth as ideas occur. One position, again possibly an easier task, will be to look at your ideal, the behavior you have been saying you wish you could do. What do you like about it? What are the short and long-term benefits? In our example of not gambling, for instance, you may have more money to save or spend, less debt, or more peace of mind. Even if you don’t think peace of mind is possible, write it down if the thought occurs to you. Part of what you are doing is giving some freedom to your inner life’s mind, the part of you that has been restricted from getting too widely speculative in what “the good life” might really mean. Conversely, this is also the part of your mind that dares not openly admit what you like about the problem behavior. The point in both cases is to begin breaking through the shoulds so there is more freedom to cultivate your own truly positive nature.

The last two positions are to talk and write about what are the disadvantages with the targeted behavior, and then with the ideal, how each negatively affects you both short and long term. It should be fairly easy to think of some things wrong with gambling, for example, because you most likely have a memorized litany you say to yourself every time you affirm your desire to stop. Ultimately, hopefully, your list will go even more deeply than the spoken problems, and some hidden meaningful link will surface and resonate as truth. As to the ideal goal, there will probably be some easy answers at first, such as, stopping gambling will stop you from having fun, or separate you from certain friends. Keep looking, taking some breaks to let things develop organically, and eventually some thoughts may surface that again seem counter-intuitive, maybe even self-defeating. However, the truth is that you have been in this position all along or there would be no problem behavior. Now you are just trying to get to know it the same way you would want to know other people’s important reasons for doing what they do.

Once you have reached understanding — without judgment — the next position is to state “I both want it and don’t want it because…” Seeing both sides is the beginning of true self-understanding, the best path to freedom of choice. Here is a brief chart of possibilities that will aid in understanding the whole picture, thus aid in making satisfactory choices and decisions. 1) One side on the issues:  What, when, how, why, who, where? 2) The other position on the issues: What, when, how, why, who, where? 3) Both positions in union with each other: How can both sides work together to solve the problem? 4) Both positions in opposition to each other: How can we each meet our separate needs? 5) The overall picture: What is the effect for all sides in the long run?

Finally, the very last position seems especially tricky and one that not everyone will want or need to use. In this case, a person takes the seat that says, “it doesn’t matter which I choose because there is something for me to learn in each case.” One somewhat related story comes to mind in which a man was released after thirty years of imprisonment when modern DNA testing proved him innocent. When asked if he was bitter, he responded that, in his final assessment, he was able to learn what the life of a prisoner was like. In the extreme case of a life-threatening addiction, to simply adopt a “whatever” position may prove dangerous if approached without counsel and a new concrete depth of understanding acquired in the previous exercises.

Unfortunately, we don’t always know what it is that we don’t know. In our rush to gain knowledge and be done with lingering irritations, we sometimes tell ourselves we are further along than our strength or stamina provides, and we eventually slip back into old ways. Thus, one of the adages in the addiction fighting twelve-step program, is to admit powerlessness and to keep everything present tense: “Hello, I’m John, and I am an alcoholic.” In such programs, anyone who stated, “I was an alcoholic, but now I know so much more,” would no doubt receive counsel from his or her peers.

The point of the final position is really this: a problem can lessen or slip away entirely when learning instead of changing becomes the goal. Changing something implies there is something wrong with the thing that you want to change. Living in a world of right and wrong is stressful and usually creates rigidity or rebellion. Learning about something implies objective, non-judgmental interest. Without the pressure of needing to agree or disagree, all sides of the story are in view and a final direction usually becomes clear. As a matter of fact, the learning versus changing stance will help in almost any of life’s situations.

End

The Lovin’ Spoonful song says: “Did you ever have to make up your mind? Pick up on one and leave the other behind? It’s not often easy and not often kind. Did you ever have to make up your mind? Did you ever have to finally decide? Say yes to one and let the other one ride? There’s so many changes and tears you must hide. Did you ever have to finally decide?”

Every now and then we have to make choices that ignore the wishes of someone else. Sometimes this single-minded decision can look selfish and stubborn. A choice has to be made and the decision on which way to turn will benefit only one of the people involved. Any number of examples can come to mind, such as choosing from something expensive and one-of-a-kind like a vacation spot, to everyday kinds of arguments like what movie to see, or what to make for dinner. Perhaps there is a moral dilemma involved, such as choosing a path of questionable ethics, or one that looks desirable but goes against your previous ideas of right and wrong. The overriding issue in the scenario is that someone else, or maybe your own inner voice, holds different values, or has different desires that will be met or not through your decision. You are feeling the weight of making the right choice.

How can we choose for ourselves without feeling guilty and selfish? How can we gracefully let go of our independent wishes, and when should we cling with all our might? How can we make a choice between two or more equally important directions? How can we continue to give service to another without sacrificing our own desires? These are the kinds of questions that many good hearts face on occasion. The decisions and choices you make may vary from time to time and may even seem inconsistent as you try to find balance in each design. The point here is that, depending on your choice, you may have to act in opposition to someone else. When this occurs, a basic guideline is to try to avoid making a snap decision. “That is a good question; let me think about it,” is the most prudent answer when confronted with something momentous. Slow down and look at the scene from every angle. In the end, even if you don’t change your mind or your course of action, you will at least feel more confident knowing that you have mulled over several perspectives. How to do that mulling without getting tangled in a net of cross purposes is a skill that can be practiced and learned.

Here is one skill-building idea* in grappling with choices and decisions that are in opposition to those around you:

Imagine a room that holds the heart of your problem. A scroll, or notebook, or piece of paper sits in the center of the room where you record the problem – briefly and only the problem, such as, vacation in Hawaii or pay down the Visa bill

Next, imagine there are several comfortable chairs or large pillows tossed about the room. Each represents a particular overall position of the argument or debate. The point will be to inspect the problem from each position. You can do the following in your mind, or, even better, physically move from seat to seat as you sit through the following positions. You may even want to take one perspective each day and really immerse yourself in it, writing in a journal and/or drawing your responses in picture or symbol form.

The first seat holds the position that says, “I’m right, you’re wrong.” This is probably the easiest to sit through since most of us take this position, anyway, or there wouldn’t be much of an argument. List all the reasons you believe you are right and the other person is wrong. In some cases, you may feel both sides hold value and you want both but can only choose one, (or don’t want either but must choose one of the two.) When this division occurs, simply pick one side to start. Later you will have the same opportunity to explore the other side. Since this is a private exercise that only you will see, be sure to include even those reasons you may think of as childish or foolish. Don’t leave this position until you are sure you’ve covered every aspect. Recording your ideas will help keep everything organized and is a good way to slow down the process.

The next position is opposite to the first one, in which you are wrong and the other person is right (or in which you have simply stepped to the other side of the argument.) Give it the same depth, which may mean an even longer period of time to adjust to this abhorrent idea. Remember to record even the craziest sounding parts to the argument, or the most selfish sounding, for example, “I deserve this no matter what.” By being willing to state even the most unconventional ideas without criticism or negative judgments – remember this exercise is for your eyes only – you will free your mind to offer up the deeper aspects hidden even from you.

Next, repeat the process as this time you think of all aspects that make both sides right, even if only in part. Finally, spend time with the reverse, those parts that make both sides wrong. You’ve already worked out the rights and wrongs above, so ideas will be at hand for both these seats, however these last two positions are asking for something more. This is the opportunity to ease out of the rigid stance that says there is only one right answer. More so, you can begin here to see that choosing one position does not mean the opposite one is wrong. After a person sits in these two seats, he or she may be able to choose more confidently precisely because he/she will see the value in the other side as well, and be better able to offer compassion and kindness as the decision is made.

Several things may happen in this exercise. The other person’s position may make more sense to you, your own position may become firmer and clearer, or you may see a middle way you had overlooked before. If none of that happens, there is a final seat, reserved for special occasions, a philosophy that ultimately whatever decision you make really doesn’t matter. Granted, some lessons are more humbling than others, but you are bound to learn something no matter where you land. If you get to this stage, you may find that a lot of what previously seemed like a burning issue is really not so great a bonfire after all. Hopefully, you will discover what a solid and meaningful decision feels like.