If you notice that you are repressing emotions, then STOP and let them loose - as long as it doesn't make you look like a psychopath...
Only you can break the cycle that you're locked into - a long journey begins with but a single step...
So now, I want you to YELL! Yell like hell!!!! Yell at the screen!!!
RRRRAAAAWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!!!
It's not quite that easy, mate. The entire idea of "let it go" and "tell us how you really feel" is nothing but pop psychobabble. The reality is that this is more likely to cause unhealthy regulatory disinhibition, thus leading to a lack of self-regulation. In other words, much better means exist for constructive improvement.
So how does this insecurity arise? By the parents lack of attention to the child? If so, how can you differentiate between insecurity attachments and simply lack of a loving/emotional model to imitate?
Ah, you've asked the million dollar question. I wish I had a concrete, empirically supported answer but I don't. I have theories and ideas but I can't support them well so I'll omit them for now. The test for security in infants (note that measures of security differ throughout development) is the standard Strange Situation developed by Ainsworth. Here, an infant is placed in alternating environments of proximity to the mother figure and a stranger. Reactions to the stranger are recorded. Three classifications are usually used: avoidant, resistant, and secure. There are behaviors for each one. Let me just summarize what they are by stating that insecure attachments usually have trouble adjusting where secure ones don't really give a crap.
that's what the test usually is. In practice, one can tell by the way the child reacts to novel encounters.
Now for the source: Eh, the best I could do is give an overview of recent theories but I will just state what I think instead. The parent is the sole provider of the child's early needs in every respect. When the parent figure is insensitive and that syadic relationship unhealthy, the child will withdraw since the child will want needs met by another source. Some examples: not responding to crying. The child will learn to stop and withdraw. Infrequent interaction, negative facial expressions, negative interaction patters, lack of nutrition. The child will adopt those negative traits, leading to later insecurity. Note that the child is not exactly imitating. THis is not pure modeling and imitating a la social learning. This is cognitive development during the first year of life, which is crucial is the myelinization of neural pathways. So let me sum up by stating that it may be an unhealthy model to imitate, but the cause is most likely the transactions between the child and his/her enviroment. Also, temperament and response to it can have an effect. A difficult child will more likely exasperate the parent, leading to an insecure attachemnt. This does have a solid genetic foundation, although it is not deterministic. We are not doomed to baseness.
Personally, my relationship with my parents are good... athough they're not huggy/weepy good. I can talk to them almost about anything, and often joke around with them as if they were friends, but the only time i ever hugged my dad was the day i was sentenced... which was also the only time i saw my dad cry. I grew up with him being quite attentive to us, with almost EVERY weekend in the summer we would go fishing, and almost every weekend in the winter we would go sledding. And the only way my dad really knew how to expressed his love was by doing/buying stuff for us... so i was EXTREMELY spoiled when i was little. I may not be the most open at showing my emotion, but i'm far from feeling insecure with my parents, and more or less imitate my dad in how i express my emotion and love as well... by doing things, and buying things for the ones i want to show my love.
That is a fairly healthy relationship, it allows for stressors without much imbalance. Not that this has any relevance to your question...
And BTW linuxboy, is there anything you don't know? Mind me asking what kind of academic background you have? Every discussion you enter, you seem to reply with a very educated response.
Why certainly, I am a very ignorant man. Don't let my propensity to use big words and invoke empirical data and recent theories in various fields let you think otherwise. As for my background, use your imagination. Besides, it doesn't really matter. What's a piece of paper worth anyway? If you've seen an episode of Kids in the Hall where they wind up eating their degrees, you'll realize that it really makes no difference. A sad man is he who knows much but wisdom can bring happiness.
Oh yeah, and for my 2 cents on how to help Hoeboy... i would theorize that the reason why you are so reserved in expressing your emotions is because you don't know how to properly express them. You lacked a model growing up, so you haven't had the practice. And you're hesistant in expressing them now because you don't want to look like a fool incase you don't express them correctly. This is your ego holding you back, you're reserved at expressing your emotion because you're afraid you'll do it incorrectly, or that others already have a certain expectation about you, and you're afraid by being incongruent, that you'll look wierd to them (that's probably why you won't say i love you to your mom and dad... i should know, i was like that too). LET GO OF THAT EGO. It's holding you back. Don't be afraid of looking stupid or like a fool, because those feelings are transient, and they only affect you as long as you allow them to affect you. You may look silly, but how long you feel silly is all dependent on you.
I would argue that it's not the ego directly but rather various social control mechanisms in his cognitive faculties. But I do see your point, most problems do eventually wind up as a will to power.
Buddhists monks humble their ego by giving up all material wealth and going door to door begging for food. For you to let go of your ego, to realize they can't truly harm you, is for you to experience humility yourself. So i saw get a pair of speedos, oil yourself up in baby oil, and run down the street. You'll discover humiliation beyond what you've ever experienced, beyond what most humans have ever experienced, and you'll realize that it is transient, and that it's nature is entirely dependent on you.
This would actually work and is the quickest and arguably easiest method of achieving a desired out come as it really does get to the heart of the matter. But you must realize that a blind man needs a dog to cross the street. That is, there are side-effects to your idea and unless this is controlled (like the method I suggested), the consequences may be more deletorious than the previous state.
LOL yeah, the speedo part was just a joke... but the idea is the same. Start out with expressing your emotions in little ways, until you get accustom to it. I would start out with complimenting people, because not only are you expressing your emotions, but also doing it in a way in which you'll get positive feedback (people like to be praise, as long as it's not trying to flatter them). Then work your way to showing concern for people, and eventually work your way up to showing stronger emotions like love. Will you ever work your way up to saying I LOVE YOU MOM AND DAD just out of the blue? Probably not, they might think you're on drugs if you do. But you'll eventually be able to know how to act towards certain people, and this only comes from experience and practice.
I like that
If you find it difficult to begin this, try starting with strangers... people you'll never see again. Maybe a waitress has nice hair, compliment her on that. You walk into a computer store and see something interesting, share your interest with the guy. If you're in line at the grocery store, and the little girl infront of you is staring at you, smile at her. You'll eventually get accustom to it. Or begin by expressing yourself online... these forums are great for experimenting with different persona. If that is still difficult for you because of the person you've become here (i highly doubt it, since you've expressed this concern quite openly), i might even suggesting creating another account online, and then experiment with being expressive towards people. Then when you're accustom to that, revert back to this account.
That again can have side effects in problem of personality identity. Notice I suggested a similar approach in my role-playing idea but that is more separate from reality than an online BBS where Hoeboy spends part of his normal time. The idea of random acts of kindness is very effective, however. I think it goes back to your idea of ego-negation. Through humility, we approach the state where our conditioned relity no longer exists and we get to the core of our experience, beyond the levels of protection. Here, we are both vulnerable and invincible. I think it is a rather good addition to our current solution. I originally thought that touching on more abstract ideas of somewhat religious sigificance would not be helpful in formulating a concrete solution but you proved me wrong. It is helpful.
Nobody is saying anybody is socially inadequate here, it's just some of us were socialize differently. If somebody who was socialize to become really open was to live in more reserve places like China or Japan, they would be the one whose social skills are incompatible with the culture.
I agree with that. I think it really is a method of adaptation ad ideas of relativity and openmindedness do help.
Here's a good book if you want to read up on some proper socialization... despite how corny or manipulative the title is, it's not, it's a great book... infact, Amazon has 45 sample pages that you can preview to see whether it's to your liking or not:
How to Win Friends and Influence People - by Dale Carneige
Argh, not pop psych. I keep hearing from everyone how wonderful this book is and I think its crap. The author tends to place absolute values on relative socialization patterns, thus leading to an increase in a purely relative worldview. Of course, this is my bias as an absolutist. Many people who read the book are obsessed with "self-help" and not any sort of real social science (yes, there is such a thing). Knowledge misused can be a powerful tool for fostering ignorance. Same with that Covey guy, although he is better.
Cheers !
Facebook
Twitter