The Stress Doc Letter
Cybernotes from the Online Psychohumorist ™

JAN 03

Main Essay

An exchange with a reader on the dynamics of Highly Sensitive people leads to this month's main essay, including essays on defusing power struggles and a 5-step model for constructive confrontation.


Highly Sensitive People and the Art of Confrontation

In a message...AdJim@aol.com writes:

Hi Mark:

I discussed the recurring theme of "Anger" that I hear over and over again with HSP (Highly Sensitive People) with A. and she mentioned that she thought the reason was because since Highly Sensitive People process incoming information so deeply, they get hurt very deeply and in turn get very angry because they feel they've been hurt so badly.

Does that sound about right and make sense to you?

The Highly Sensitive People website can be viewed at:
http://www.HighlySensitivePeople.com/index.html
---------------------------

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the kind words.  I think you want to be a bit more differentiated here:  HSPs process info deeply, but not all kinds of info at the same depth, I suspect.  A highly sensitive visual person will not react as quickly to certain auditory info as I would, I believe and v.v.  And certain (early) life experiences will also condition whether an HSP is more sensitive to (and likely to interpret events as) humiliation, abandonment, fear of being abused, etc.  Certain issues I will experience a mild rebuff, other issues profound rejection, and others the reverse.

But I do agree that the depth of hurt influences the intensity of anger.  And surely people become enraged not just when they are so hurt but, also, to scare people away so others won't get close to their HSP vulnerability.  Then again, if anger is a frequent defensive weapon, especially, when effective, through trial and error and reward as well as habituation it can become a rapid response of choice.  The best defense is becoming offensive, that is, the HSP now uses anger either to intimidate or to widen his defensive perimeter, keeping meaningful interaction and dialogue at bay; keeping him momentarily safe but frequently vigilant.

Also, I think HSP often do appreciate or are compelled to deal with a more complex array of info in many facets of life.  I know I get worked up when someone is diminishing my world or the world's more complex, non-black vs. white reality.  Sometimes it may reflect past hurt; other times just a sense of injustice and a need to breathe less dense or factually polluted air.

Actually Salvatore Maddi, a psychologist, formerly of U. Chicago, posed these motivations for creative individuals:

Psychoanalytic:  past conflicts and pain begin to thaw as the artist reaches more adult awareness and is compelled to transform the childhood pain into adult expression and form

Rebellious:  creative individual protests mind and soul numbing bureaucracy; a bureaucracy that impedes his or her more complex reality and a richer way of designing a response

Existential:  When the artist has reached such a point of alienation and sufficient self-definition, he or she must leave normal or traditional reality (e.g., a traditional job or convenient career path) and create his own world.

And, sure, sometimes these are all present.  I guess, some kind of pain, hurt, or profound frustration and anger are always present.  And, surely, other motives for HSPs are to discover/design truth and beauty.  Whatever, the motivation, the challenge is to transform the hurt, the angst, the anger into some pain transcending process, that helps the HSP integrate the hurt and anger and the painful experience into an enlightening and creative outcome.  Pain transcended in art or enlightening acts is its own reward and reaffirms the HSP's capacity for resilience and rejuvenation.  It's good for that sensitive ego and it's fun!  Such a process definitely helps us...Practice Safe Stress!

Mark
-------------------------------------

Hi Mark: Thanks for your reflections on hurt and anger, very interesting thoughts.  And hopefully a good subject for the makings of a good article!  Hope you'll share it if it in deed becomes an article.

It seems with Amy and other HSP I've seen get angry, there is very little calculation (of using it as an offense or defense, etc.) it seems they get hurt and their feelings take over and their feelings becomes their reality, with little or no rationality or logic to it.  That's been my experience anyway.

I will say that they (HSP) do sometimes have really good zingers and comebacks in
situations, because they have thought about it or even sometimes obsessed about
what was said and they really have thought through as to what a really good "cutting"
and maybe hurtful retaliatory comment or "come back" would be.
---------------

Jim,

I think both points are well taken, that is, they may not use rage as an intimidating weapon, instead using a hostile barb.

Here are a few articles you may want to read and/or share with Amy.  Learning how to use better "I" messages is vital for the HS/HR (Hot Reactor) person.  That is, instead of just going into angry -- defensive (self-justifying) or offensive (blaming, "You" messages) mode, it's more effective and less provocative to start off by saying, with feeling:  "I didn't like what you just said" or "I'm angry right now."  Having blown off some steam, a blowup doesn't have to follow.  Then the individual may add (continuing with an "I" message):  "Here's why I'm angry..."  Or, the person can declare:  "I'm too angry or upset or hurt to continue right now.  I need (or "I believe we need a time out, to sort out my thoughts and feelings.  Let's try to talk again in a half hour, after dinner, etc.").  See below articles for using "I" messages to defuse conflict and express healthy anger.

Thanks again for being a catalyst.

Mark

The Stress Doc illustrates how anger can be constructive or destructive depending on whether aggressive energy and motives are acknowledged and channeled or denied and projected.  Role play examples illustrate the difference between Assertive "I" Messages and Blaming "You"s and offer (mostly useful) strategies for disarming dysfunctional power struggles.


Alarming "You"s or Disarming "I"s: 
Power Struggles vs. Powerful Strategies -- Part I

A challenging aspect of the anger skills component of my "Practicing Safe Stress" program is helping participants realize that "Assertion" is one of "The Four Faces of Anger," a model based on whether anger expression is "Constructive" or "Destructive" and "Purposeful" or "Spontaneous."  (If interested, email stressdoc@aol.com for my Four Faces Model.)  The difficulty for many in linking assertion and anger stems from two erroneous beliefs:  a) assertion is too rational or intellectual to convey real anger and b) anger has to be loud, emotional and potentially explosive.  Actually, when people don't genuinely acknowledge the aggressive component of their assertive expression, healthy anger is masked and distorted.  The result is often judgmental criticism, condescending sarcasm or, even, passive-aggressive retaliation.  In other words, an assertive intention regresses into a hostile defense or intimidation.  And I frequently see this reactive transformation with the use of blaming "You"s over self-acknowledging, responsibility shouldering "I" messages. 

Now be honest, under enough stress and frustration, aren't you occasionally a "blameaholic"?  What are some of the more common, judgmental "You" messages or "acc-you-sations?  How about, "It's your fault,"  "You make me sick,"  "You made me do it," "You drive me crazy,"  "You screwed up" (only one time, of course not…"You always screw up" or "You never do it right"), "You shouldn't think (or feel) that way," "You're too sensitive, too moody."  And my all time obnoxious "You" message…"You really disappointed me!," with the guilt toxin just dripping from self-righteous lips as it surreptitiously seeps deep into the target's psyche.   And the consistent use of abrasive "You" attacks has predictable consequences:  such provocative communication invariably triggers an overt or covert defensive reaction, withdrawal, intimidation and/or interpersonal power struggles.

Power Struggle Exercise

In my workshops, I bring out this provocative "you" dynamic through a playful yet powerful exercise called, "You Can't Make Me!"  People pair off, decide who's Person A, who's Person B.  (It has nothing to do with being Type A or Type B.)  I then ask participants to try to imagine one person with whom there is or there recently has been some interpersonal tension or conflict; someone who has you clenching your jaws at night or plotting strategy at 3 am.  (Of course, a frequent rejoinder is, "You mean I have to choose just one person!")  I encourage participants to think of the conflict as a power struggle issue.  And when asked to eyeball their opposite number (actually, opposite letter) a tension in the air begins to build.  People get seriously focused or start to squirm.  Then come the instructions:  Person A declares, "You Can't Make Me!"  Person B counters with, "Oh Yes I Can (make you)."  Clearly it's a clash of polar "You" messages.  The antagonists are to verbal volley for about ten seconds.  They can be loud and abrasive, hostile, whiny or passive-aggressive.  The only limit:  "You can't get out of your chair."

Body language is encouraged.  And then, after a few back and forths, they can reach closure, by saying whatever they'd really like to say to their imagined foe.  (X-rated language is discouraged.)  However, the x-rated warning may not be sufficient.  Alas, this exercise does pose a risk, especially with the wrong audience.  Let me illustrate.

Unbeknownst to me, just before show time, I received word that my West Virginia mountain health spa audience was in their third day of a smoking cessation program.  (Talk about, "The Hills Are Alive with the Sound of Manic.")  To harness some of the off the mountain wall energy, I quickly had participants pair off for the above-mentioned "You Can't Make Me" role-play.  Perhaps this was not my most scintillating leadership moment.  You see, with one particular male-female dyad, provocative tensions were escalating rapidly.  Miss A apparently perceived a little too much sexual intonation into Mr. B's, "Oh, yes I can! (make you)"  Before I could intervene Miss A picks up a glass of ice water and pours it into Mr. B's lap.  Ouch.  That's one way of going cold turkey (if not being one).  Trust me, this guy was smoke free for the rest of the week.

This role interaction while intense is usually not so dramatic.  A few participants just laugh - some feel the exercise artificial or absurd.  Others laugh nervously at the prospect of projecting or receiving raw aggression.  The decibel level rise in the room (usually to an ambiance of barely controlled chaos) speaks volumes about the group's involvement with the exercise.  Considering the fabricated nature of the role play, why do so many fairly quickly put on their game face and register power struggle emotions and expressions?  I've come up with three "C" factors:

1)  Who is in "Control"? This relates to the parent-child, authority dynamic; who sets the physical and emotional boundaries, for example, regarding acceptable and unacceptable behavior,
2)  The second "C"-word is also a family relationship dynamic -- sibling rivalry.  The key word is "Competition" - who's better, who is the favorite and, finally,
3)  The dynamic of "Culture" - varying role prescriptions and expectations, differences and misunderstandings of verbal and non-verbal meaning and social protocol.

While all three "C"s can fuel intense conflict and power clashes, I suspect the most universal trigger is the issue of "Control."  Why?  Wrestle with this question:  When do profound issues of control first surface in families?...Certainly by toilet training.  The reality is we all have a history of personal and interpersonal control issues along with autonomy-intimacy boundary struggles no matter how nice or civilized, rebellious or intimidated, mature or repressed we have become.

Stress Doc's Disarming Demonstration

So how does one resist the invitation to the power dance, especially a dysfunctional struggle; how does one transcend a potential vicious cycle of interaction?  By way of illustration, let's return to the "You Can't Make Me" scenario.  As part of the post-role play, group reflection on the exercise segment, I select a sturdy looking audience member and ask him or her to take my offering of an invisible rope.  (I learned a not soon to be forgotten lesson:  if you select a female, don't ever refer to her as "a big woman."  Believe me, "Never again!")  As the participant gazes at me quizzically, holding the other end of the imaginary rope, I challenge my opposite to, "Pull hard; come on, give it a good pull"  The public nature of the challenge invariably has my unwitting antagonist grimacing, straining and pulling intently.  And just as it seems they are about to overpower me, to win this virtual-physical contest of wills and won'ts…I pose the unexpected:  "What happens if I decide to 'drop the rope'?"  The tension is over.  My partner in conceptual crime usually grins sheepishly or mimes falling over.  The audience breaks out in "aha" smiles if not "ha-ha" laughter.  Instead of proving who can pull harder in some dysfunctional, ego-driven contest, one party purposefully lets go of the self-defeating game, steps outside the predictable boundary lines by dropping the rope.  It's a sign of maturity, not of wimpiness.

To clinch the strategic concept another question follows:  "How do you drop the rope in the "You Can't Make Me/Oh Yes I Can (make you)" Exercise?  Now it's time to integrate the art and skill of letting go and employing "I" message communication.  But first, let me acknowledge that using "I" messages effectively require some doing.  I recall a supervisor in a team building workshop asking:  "Is this an example of an "I" message?…'I think you're wrong!'"  No, Ms. P that's not an "I" message; that's a sneaky, blaming "You" message.  An "I" message response might be:  "I disagree," "Here's what I know or what I believe," "Here's how I see it" or, even "My data says otherwise."

Okay, back to the role-play.  How's this for a reply to the testy, win-lose "You can't make me"?  "Whether I can or can't make you, that's not where I'm coming from.  I need your help.  If I'm bugging you or something's bugging you, let's talk about it.  If we're going to get the project done (meet our goal, the deadline, etc.) we need to be on the same page; we need to pull together, not be pulling apart."

Drop the rope; not right or wrong.  And another Stress Doc immunization-aphormation that protects against or disentangles enmeshed egos and facilitates letting go comes to mind:  Difference and Disagreement =/= Disapproval and Disloyalty!  And, of course, when dealing with an incorrigible dominance-submission egotist, find solace in the words of 20th c. French novelist, Andre Gide:  One must allow others to be right…It consoles them for not being anything else.  Words for…Practicing Safe Stress!

Stay tuned for Part II of this power struggle treatise.