Personal Empowerment: Let Go of Harmful Misconceptions
Our conceptualizations of the situations we find ourselves in can not only place us at a disadvantage, but can literally do us harm.
I’ve been posting a series of articles on how to empower yourself in relationships, especially with persons of deficient or disordered character. Some of the “tools of personal empowerment” we’ve discussed already include accepting no excuses for inappropriate behavior, avoiding the trap of second-guessing someone’s motives, and being sure not to succumb to the notion that someone else’s problem behavior is your fault:
- “The Secrets of Personal Empowerment”
- “Empowerment Tools: Judge Actions, Not Intentions”
- “Empowerment Tools: Keep the Weight of Responsibility for Change Where it Belongs”
Perhaps no principle of self-empowerment is as critical as ridding yourself of inaccurate or even harmful conceptualizations of why people behave the way they do and what to do about it. Unfortunately, many of these misconceptions originated with theories about human behavior meant to help us understand and deal with one another. Although some of these theories continue to hold some value, some of the most essential tenets of these theories — though widely known and accepted — put us in a position to significantly misjudge situations, especially abusive situations, and end up keeping us in a one-down position when we’re trying to understand and deal with the behavior of a disturbed character.
There are so many notions arising out of traditional psychology paradigms that we now know are without merit, some of which seem patently ludicrous to us when we think about them for a moment. For example, we know that children don’t become autistic because their mothers were “cold” and non-nurturing during their infancy. We also know that mothers who gave “mixed messages” of love and hate to their infants aren’t responsible for the disease of schizophrenia. We know that “bullies” most often aren’t really insecure cowards struggling with low self-esteem. We also know that the symptoms and strange events that some of Freud’s patients reported between themselves and their relatives were more likely red flags that they were actually sexual abuse victims as opposed to persons who simply couldn’t come to terms with their own lustful urges.
Although it seems like we’ve come a long way in our thinking, many folks still hold onto traditional notions about the reasons people do the things they do. This wouldn’t be so bad if we were only dealing with people who are best described as “neurotic” to some degree (see my various posts on neurosis vs. character disturbance, beginning with “Disturbances of Character”). But we now live in the age of character disturbance. And to be empowered in a relationship with a person of deficient or disordered character, you have to know what really makes them tick. So, when they keep making excuses, lie repeatedly about what they’ve done, or try to make you feel guilty for confronting them, you have to stop seeing them as insecure, “in denial,” or “defending” themselves. Instead, you have to recognize their determination to place themselves above the generally accepted rules or to defy them outright. In short, how we perceive what’s going on in an abusive situation will greatly influence how we respond to it. Our conceptualizations of the situations we find ourselves in can not only place us at a disadvantage, but can literally do us harm.
I’ve received hundreds of emails and testimonials over the years from people who have read my book In Sheep’s Clothing [Amazon-US | Amazon-UK], attesting to the fact that the ultimate “light bulb moment” in a one-time abuse victim’s life came when they finally abandoned all the assumptions they had that were rooted in traditional philosophies and for the first time saw the disturbed character they were dealing with from a more accurate perspective. Their comments are always of similar character — e.g., “I see it now,” “I always felt this in my gut but didn’t want to believe it,” “Now I know I’m not crazy after all,” Yeah, his self-esteem is out of whack all right but not in the way I once thought,” etc. Adopting a new framework for understanding the character they’d been dealing with was not only eye-opening but empowering — empowering because they came to really understand the tactics of the disturbed character and how to respond to them, no longer falling into the traps to which they used to succumb.
In summary, one of the most essential tools of empowerment involves understanding the age we live in and the number one by-product of our age: character disturbance. When we stop trying to understand it through paradigms created to describe something else and adopt a more accurate framework, everything changes.
Other articles by Dr George Simon, PhD
This article was last reviewed by Dr Greg Mulhauser, Managing Editor on Wednesday, 10th June 2009. You can leave a reply below.
The URL of this page is:
http://counsellingresource.com/features/2009/06/10/empowerment-tools-let-go-of-harmful-misconceptions/
12th June 2009
I agree with this article. Trying to understand disturbed characters’ behaviors through paradigms created to describe neurotics, for instance, is like trying to use a fork to have your soup (instead of a spoon.)
The same applies, in some cases, to certain psychological tests or evaluations, because some of them have been designed to measure or test certain psychological traits or personality aspects, while others have been designed for other purposes (measure other things.)
I think that in trying to understand the disturbed character’s behavior, people tend to use the wrong “tools” (misconceptual lines of thought, old theories, etc.)
The harmful part I see in this, is the fact that using this “wrong tools” to explain such behaviors, actually end up blurring a person’s thinking – which, in turn, empowers even more the disturbed character’s manipulative actions and purposes.
(Albert Einstein used to say, If you want different results, try doing things in a different way, so let’s try thinking differently, then.)
12th June 2009
Thanks for the comment, Mariana. Very well stated. BTW, I like your soup metaphor even better than my neurosurgery one!
13th June 2009
So, what would be good indicators for when WE are the disordered character as opposed to being the person in relationship with such a person? (I always struggle with, “Is it me or him/her?” because I’m aware that I don’t have the most ordered personality in the world.)
- Marie (Coming Out of the Trees)
13th June 2009
Good question, Marie. One of the main characteristics of the truly disordered character is that she or he is already well-aware of the ways of thinking and patterns of behavior he/she exhibits that are at odds with moral/ethical/social, etc. standards. He knows he lies and manipulates. She knows she defies the “rules.” So there is nothing really to “look out for.” I have several posts that describe the vast differences between “neurotics” and CDs. That said, everyone falls somewhere along a spectrum of being mostly neurotic vs. mostly character disturbed. Those with severe character disturbance know well their characteristics that most others disdain but are more than comfortable with them. For those with mild degrees of character disturbance (i.e. have some neurosis), the awareness level might not be so high. But in such cases, because the person also has some degree of conscience, they’re likely to experience some level of inner distress about their behavior, whether or not the message from their conscience is heeded.
13th June 2009
One more point. In any relationship, it’s always a little bit us, a little bit them. The real question is whether those flaws that apply to us are part of a self-defeating neurotic conflict or part of an antisocial stance arising out of a failure to develop social conscientiousness or an outright antagonism toward the welfare of others.
14th June 2009
So good to be free of the need to figure out my ex’s behavior.
I do remember vacillating from “If I could understand him better, then I will be able to help him see the need to move beyond, suspicions of me and the guys at work and neighbors and depression, hate of others, worship of his abused and stoic mother, spite toward his father, and doubts about my love for him…..”.etc,
and then the other side, “Oh his behavior does not compute. Therefore, I will stick with what does make sense, with people who do respond to love, and what gives me satisfaction, raising my kids, socializing with the neighbors over holidays, and working part time or full time or not at all, etc.”
Devastating to me was to realize that it was true, he would not change so I had to save myself, it was that bad.
Doing much better. Very happy with outcomes, even with the hardships presented since my changes.
15th June 2009
Thanks, Dr. Simon, for your explanation — I had never thought of it that way and I found your explanation very helpful!
- Marie
22nd June 2009
What I have realised with disordered characters (and it probably echoes what you’ve said Dr. Simon) is that they do realise what they’re doing. I’ve been out with a few (I think you can say I’m fairly neurotic) and they’ll consistently tell lies, and I used to give them the benefit of the doubt and think maybe they’re in denial or don’t realise or whatever.
But after a bit I started to think “well even when I’m up to in denial I know when I’m lying” and I used to challenge them. And eventually they’d tell the truth. But this could often take circular arguments/ongoing discussions. Not worth the hassle. I still don’t get why they think it’s okay.
22nd June 2009
Hi, Ellie. Thanks for the comment.
They think it’s okay primarily because it often works in getting them what they want and secondarily because they don’t have any inner apprehension arising out of conscience propelling them to do otherwise. They only give up on the tactics when somebody finally has their number so to speak and they’re no longer able to manipulate successfully. Even then, they don’t really reconsider their preferred way of doing things. And they don’t try their antics on other disordered characters, either. They’re on the lookout for others who are neurotic enough for them to take advantage of.
6th July 2009
I’m getting a lot of good from all these articles. Reminds me also of Lundy Bancroft’s book, “Why Does He Do That”, where he posits that these characters do what they do simply because they get so many rewards from it. Quite simple, really. My task is to practice what Marcus Aurelius said so many eons ago: “Look things in the face and know them for what they are.”