Showing posts with label narcissism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label narcissism. Show all posts

Sunday, October 20, 2013

Ed Yong - Sexism and Harassment in the Science-Writing World


Ed Yong (photo below) blogs at National Geographic's Phenomena: Not Exactly Rocket Science blog here he does a weekly column of cool science-related articles from around the interwebs (I've got your missing links right here" - this week's is I've got your missing links right here (19 October 2013).


Before I continue, I want to mention that on the sidebar of his blog, Yong has this:

My wife, who makes it all possible  

I share this because Yong's personality and commitment to his wife is relevant to his comments on and coverage of a recent series of disturbing events in science journalism. This lends Yong more weight in his refutation of the behaviors described below.

A very well-known science writer and blogger, the Blogs Editor at Scientific American, and co-founder of ScienceOnline.com - Bora Zivkovic - was accused by first one and then several science writers - all female - of sexual harassment.

The pattern is pretty distinct in each of their stories
[Bora] contacted her, showed interest in her work, met with her, and then proceeded to steer the conversation straight towards sex (such as repeatedly telling her he was a "very sexual person.")
This is all so effing disturbing as a man - I work with women who go through this is much less public ways. Often, as is the case with Kathleen Raven, this kind of harassment devolves into rape.

I am so proud of these women for speaking out and revealing the culture of control and power in which they work. And I applaud Ed Yong for featuring this story on his blog this weekend.

Ladybits have issued a call for submissions on the power of harassment.

So with that, here is the opening to this week's "missing links" column.

Sexism and harassment in the science-writing world

It’s been a bit of a week in the science-writing world. First, Scientific American blogger Danielle Lee wrote about an editor who asked her to write for free and called her a whore when she turned him down. SciAm took down the post with inconsistent explanations, prompting a fierce online response. Maryn McKenna sums up the story and I’d really recommend this post by Kate Clancy. The post is back up; the editor, fired.

In the wake of that, writer Monica Byrne accused Bora Zivkovic, a leading figure in the science blogging community, of harassment. He apologised, but concurrently other women stepped forward, including science writers Hannah Waters and Kathleen Raven. The women are brave; their accounts, devastating. Raven’s is the most gut-wrenching thing I have read in recent memory. Trigger warnings apply.

The event has also prompted a lot of good pieces on gender and power issues in the science community. This is a non-exhaustive list, but: many good pieces on Ladybits; Melanie Tannenbaum on the psychology of impact vs. intent; Alice Bell on the nature of the sci-blogging community; Laura Helmuth with sage advice for people seeking mentorship (and those who can provide it), and more; Martin Robbins on keep-it-quiet-ism.

The whole thing also led to the heartbreaking #ripplesofdoubt hashtag as many people shared their stories of how pervasive harassment and sexism affects them. See Hope Jahren’s piece.

I’m pushing this to the foreground because it’s more important than any of the stuff below. We need to open our eyes. We need to ensure that our colleagues don’t have to go through this, and certainly not alone. We need to speak up about it because doing so will create a culture where people can speak up about it, where they can stand up and be supported. Not this. [emphasis added]

More coverage here, here, here.

Monday, July 11, 2011

Kristin Neff - Why self-compassion is healthier than self-esteem

http://newvaluestreams.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/self-compassion.jpg

For much of the last 30 years or so, we have been working extra hard to instill self-esteem in our kids - nobody loses or fails, everyone gets a ribbon or trophy for simply showing up, there are no winners, only participants, and so on, ad vomitus.

So what have reaped for all our efforts? A generation or two of young adults who have a hyper-developed sense of privilege and who need external validation for themselves because they never developed an internal sense of self-worth.

Frightening.

This post is only slightly related to that rant (although she does mention how the self-esteem movement has created a whole mess of narcissists), so I want to add one more thing. If you are a parent, PLEASE stop saying, "I am so proud of you!" Instead, build your child's internal sense of worth by saying something like, "You must be so proud of yourself! That was outstanding!"

It really does make a difference.

And as I am noticing with clients (and have long noted in my training clients), self-compassion is a skill that is sorely lacking - I know I never learned it until I became a Buddhist and got myself into therapy.

Dr. Neff is the author of Self-Compassion: Stop Beating Yourself Up and Leave Insecurity Behind, which I have not read, but I am a big fan of The Mindful Path to Self-Compassion: Freeing Yourself from Destructive Thoughts and Emotions, by
Why we should stop chasing self-esteem and start developing self-compassion

The great angst of modern life is this: no matter how hard we try, no matter how successful we are, no matter how good a parent, worker, or spouse we are - it's never enough. There is always someone richer, thinner, smarter, or more powerful, someone that makes us feel small in comparison. Failure of any kind, large or small, is unacceptable. The result: therapist's offices, pharmaceutical companies, and the self-help aisles of bookstores are besieged by people who feel they're not okay as they are. What to do?

One response has come in the form of the self-esteem movement. Over the years there have been literally thousands of books and magazine articles promoting self-esteem - how to get it, raise it and keep it. The pursuit of high self-esteem has become a virtual religion, but research indicates this has serious downsides. Our culture has become so competitive we need to feel special and above average to just to feel okay about ourselves (being called "average" is an insult). Most people, therefore, feel compelled to create what psychologists call a "self-enhancement bias" - puffing ourselves up and putting others down so that we can feel superior in comparison. However, this constant need to feel better than our fellow human beings leads to a sense of isolation and separation. And then, once you've gotten high self-esteem, how do you keep it? It's an emotional roller-coaster ride: our sense of self-worth bounces around like a ping-pong ball, rising and falling in lock-step with our latest success or failure.

One of the most insidious consequences of the self-esteem movement over the last couple of decades is the narcissism epidemic. Jean Twenge, author of Generation Me, examined the narcissism levels of over 15,000 U.S. college students between 1987 and 2006. During that 20-year period, narcissism scores went through the roof, with 65 percent of modern-day students scoring higher in narcissism than previous generations. Not coincidentally, students' average self-esteem levels rose by an even greater margin over the same period. Self-esteem has also been linked to aggression, prejudice and anger towards those who threaten our sense of self-worth. For example, some kids build up their egos by beating up other kids in the playground. It's hardly healthy.

Of course we don't want to suffer from low self-esteem either, so what's the alternative? There is another way to feel good about ourselves: self-compassion. Self-compassion involves being kind to ourselves when life goes awry or we notice something about ourselves we don't like, rather than being cold or harshly self-critical. It recognizes that the human condition is imperfect, so that we feel connected to others when we fail or suffer rather than feeling separate or isolated. It also involves mindfulness -- the recognition and non-judgmental acceptance of painful emotions as they arise in the present moment. Rather than suppressing our pain or else making it into an exaggerated personal soap opera, we see ourselves and our situation clearly.

It's important to distinguish self-compassion from self-esteem. Self-esteem refers to the degree to which we evaluate ourselves positively. It represents how much we like or value ourselves, and is often based on comparisons with others. In contrast, self-compassion is not based on positive judgments or evaluations, it is a way of relating to ourselves. People feel self-compassion because they are human beings, not because they are special and above average. It emphasizes interconnection rather than separateness. This means that with self-compassion, you don't have to feel better than others to feel good about yourself. It also offers more emotional stability than self-esteem because it is always there for you - when you're on top of the world and when you fall flat on your face.

Research indicates that self-compassion offers the same benefits as self-esteem (less depression, greater happiness, etc.) without its downsides. In a large survey conducted with over 3000 people from various walks of life, for example, it was found self-compassion was associated with much more stable feelings of self-worth (assessed 12 different times over an 8 month period) than self-esteem. This may be related to the fact that self-compassion was also found to be less contingent on things like physical attractiveness or successful performances than self-esteem. Also, self-esteem had a strong association with narcissism while self-compassion had no association with narcissism.

Another study asked people to recall a previous failure, rejection, or loss that made them feel badly about themselves. One group of participants was asked to think about the event in ways that increased their self-compassion. Another group was asked to think about the situation in ways that protected or bolstered their self-esteem. People who received the self-compassion instruction reported less negative emotions when thinking about the past event than those in the self-esteem condition. Moreover, those in the self-compassion condition took more personal responsibility for the event than those in the self-esteem condition. This suggests that - unlike self-esteem - self-compassion does not lead to blaming others in order to feel good about oneself.

Instead of endlessly chasing self-esteem as if it were the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, therefore, I would argue that we should encourage the development of self-compassion. That way, whether we're on top of the world or at the bottom of the heap, we can embrace ourselves with a sense a kindness, connectedness and emotional balance. We can provide the emotional safety needed to see ourselves clearly and make whatever changes are necessary to address our suffering. We can learn to feel good about ourselves not because we're special and above average, but because we're human beings intrinsically worthy of respect.

To test your own self-compassion level, read more about self-esteem, find videos, guided meditations, and exercises, go to www.self-compassion.org. You can also read more in my new book Self-Compassion: Stop Beating Yourself Up and Leave Insecurity Behind.


Monday, June 6, 2011

The Big Fight - Sugar Ray vs. Ray Leonard

http://i.a.cnn.net/si/multimedia/photo_gallery/0610/gallery.sportsman.sugar.ray.leonard/images/89duran.jpg

It's rare that a superstar athlete writes a book that isn't about his own greatness. In The Big Fight, Ray Leonard - known as Sugar Ray Leonard for most of his adult life - comes clean about sexual abuse he suffered and his own alcoholism and narcissism.

In many ways, it seems to be a book about Sugar Ray vs Ray - the amazing boxer with the killer instinct vs. the wounded man trying to bury the pain. In fact, that is also how he talks about it:
One of the narratives that Mr. Leonard uses to bring his life into focus is this: “There is Sugar Ray and there is Ray.” To listen to him describe it, Sugar Ray was the emperor of masculinity, a very tough customer who did not feel any qualms about pounding opponents, and who was also a bit of a megalomaniac. Then there is Ray, a rather shy and caring individual, “who can’t stand anger and raised voices.”

This kind of psychic split is common amongst fighters. Jack Dempsey, who also had a very troubling childhood, was the embodiment of kindness — and yet downright demonic in the squared circle, even with sparring partners.

While Mr. Leonard has his bones to pick with Sugar Ray, he is grateful to that part of himself not only on account of the material success, but also because Sugar Ray enabled him to vent the potentially toxic fury that made his better angels mute.

Boxing was his refuge - when it was time for a fight (or when he needed an escape, he signed for a fight) he stopped drinking completely. Asked what he does now that boxing is in the past, he did not hesitate in saying, "Therapy and AA."

That comes from a very good interview the Wall Street Journal - there is also a good interview from NPR's Fresh Air.

Sugar Ray Leonard Vs. Himself

By Gordon Marino
June 6, 2011
Wall Street Journal
The interview in the WSJ is very good - here is one part that I wanted to share about his sexual abuse as a teen - and the fact that he never told anyone before now, aside from his first wife, Juanita, about what had happened.
Discussion of the memoir has gone viral, largely because of the former champ’s disclosures about sexual abuse.

“The book,” he said, “was difficult to write. I started on it two years ago but I wasn’t ready.” And it is no wonder — there are many landscapes of pain and destruction in these pages. Unlike most other writers of memoirs, Mr. Leonard does not prink up his vices as peccadillos or virtues. No punches are pulled in describing the inattentive husband and father that he was. And he is remarkably candid about the abject narcissism that can come with celebrity and the ability to write checks in lieu of listening to those whose lives seem to orbit around you.

“I don’t know why,” he sighed, “but I always have these bad memories. Images just come up. Like the time I demanded Juanita’s (his first wife) wedding ring back. I was drunk and didn’t mean to hurt her. I pulled the ring off her finger, reached out, tapped her on the forehead with it, and there she was bleeding in front of me. How could I do that?”

“It was especially hard when I started the audio version of the book. It is one thing to write and then read about the things I went though and did, but it gives you a whole different feeling when the words are in your throat. There were a lot of times when I just had to stop.”

The mad buzz around Mr, Leonard’s book of revelations has been ignited by three pages in which he recounts being sexually abused. In one case, when he was in his late teens, he was sitting in a car with a prominent Olympic boxing coach who was praising him and his prospects and then began making blatant sexual advances. Mr. Leonard gathered himself and bolted.

On another occasion, “It was a white man in a position of authority. He helped me here and there with cash that I really needed. He was telling me how great I was going to be. It really meant something. Then he came around from his desk and put his hands in a sexual way on my shoulders and began moving down. I couldn’t believe it was happening again. I ran out to my car—where I started shaking and crying.”

There are cynics who hint that these stories are simply a marketing ploy. As though he has taken a body blow, Mr. Leonard bristles at the suggestion. “It’s beneath comment…In fact that’s part of the reason why I didn’t tell anyone about it when it happened. Anyone except my wife Juanita. And she didn’t know what to say.”

There are sub-cultures in which even talk of being hit on by another male is strictly taboo. In the same way that he dealt with other painful episodes, the boxer locked the memories in the vault but later when he was drinking, and that was often, the images would seep vividly into consciousness.

Mr. Leonard was prompted to open the curtain on these scenes by AA meetings and then Todd Bridges’ similar disclosures. His decision had more to do with his healing process than anything else, yet Mr. Leonard adds, “Since I came out with this, other guys have come up to me and told me that it happened to them too. They often have a tear in their eye. I tell them it’s all right.”

Mr. Leonard has also shed his share of tears. Even when he was at the pinnacle of his success there would be crying jags. Yet, as he noted, “No one asked why I was crying. No one asked, ‘how are you feeling Ray?’”

It's sad that he was so isolated with so many people around him all the time.

This last bit comes from NPR's Fresh Air - it ran today around thew country. There is also a short excerpt from the book.

Welterweight boxer Sugar Ray Leonard, pictured above in August 1979, laughs as he tapes his hands before a workout in the boxing ring at the community center in Capitol Heights, Md.
Welterweight boxer Sugar Ray Leonard, pictured above in August 1979, laughs as he tapes his hands before a workout in the boxing ring at the community center in Capitol Heights, Md.

Sugar Ray Leonard is considered to be one of the best boxers of all time. The first boxer to win more than $100 million in purses, Leonard won world titles in five weight divisions, received a gold medal at the 1976 Olympics and went on to become a successful motivational speaker, actor and commercial endorser.

But the road to the ring wasn't always easy for Leonard. In a new autobiography, The Big Fight, he details his own struggles with rage, addiction, sexual abuse and depression. Leonard talks with Fresh Air's Dave Davies about how he battled these obstacles and went from a shy kid growing up around Washington, D.C., to a hugely successful boxer.

The Making Of A Champ

It was Leonard's shyness as a child, he says, that prompted his brother Roger to first take him to a boxing gym as a young teenager.

"For some reason, I was drawn towards boxing," he says. "Or maybe boxing drew me towards it — because once I put those gloves on, after about six months, boxing was my life."

The Big Fight: My Life In and Out of the Ring

Yet he was also hiding something: He was the victim of sexual abuse.

"It's like a paradox," said. "I'm a fighter but yet, I'm so fearful. I don't fight back and I don't tell anyone. I don't confront it. So I lived with those periods for 30-some years but I remember too, that when I drank heavily, when my emotions were not as stable, I would cry, sob and the pain — it felt good. I felt embarrassed but it felt good because I released some of those memories or that poison that was in my stomach."

The Big Fight: My Life In and Out of the Ring
By Sugar Ray Leonard and Michael Arkush
Hardcover, 320 pages
Viking Adult
List Price: $26.95

He started competing in amateur matches, eventually winning the 1973 National Golden Gloves Lightweight Championship. The following year, he won the Golden Gloves title again, along with the National AAU Lightweight Championship. Those early victories, he says, helped him break out of his shell.

"I didn't excel too highly in school but I felt that I was moving ahead — and not just in boxing — but in life," he says. "I watched Muhammad Ali, how when he would speak, how it was such a thing of beauty. It sounded so wonderful. And I wanted to be like him."

Leonard advanced through the amateurs, making the Olympic team in 1976. He beat Cuban champ Andres Aldama in a 5-0 decision that earned him the gold medal. At the time, he says, he had no intention of going professional.

"I wanted to win the goal medal and then go home and further my education in college," he says. "I had no intentions whatsoever to become a professional fighter because I had heard horror stories about former boxers who made money but, in the end, ended up with nothing. I didn't want to be one of those guys."

But Leonard soon changed his mind. When he got back to D.C.'s Maryland suburbs, where his family lived, he realized that his father was extremely sick. His mother had her own health issues and the family needed money — right away. "Janks Morton, who eventually became my trainer and mentor, told me: 'You turn pro, you make money. You can pay your father's hospital bills.' ... I turned professional for that reason."

Leonard's Professional Career

There is no sweeter feeling than when you throw the perfect punch ... You get this little tingling sensation that shoots up and down your arm to let you know that you've hit the jackpot.

After deciding to go pro, Leonard enlisted Morton to bring others onto his team. Morton asked several men, including lawyer Mike Trainer and Angelo Dundee, Muhammad Ali's trainer, to work with Leonard. Dundee, Morton and Trainer were responsible for managing Leonard's fights and for selecting sparring partners who were similar in height, speed and power to the opponents Leonard was about to face. These sparring partners worked with Leonard for weeks to prepare him for a match.

"I worked on certain moves that would be a factor in the contest — whether I had to bob and weave or constantly be mobile, all those things," he says. "I choreographed my fights in my head before I faced the opponent."

In 1980, Leonard faced Roberto "Hands of Stone" Duran in Montreal. Duran, the former world lightweight champion, indisputably won the match. It was Leonard's first professional loss.

"By the 14th round, I knew the fight was his," he says. "When they announced the decision, I felt like I had given 100 percent, just for the wrong fight. But the devastation — the emotional devastation that went across the board to my family and friends — was unbelievable. I saw them crying. Everyone was crying but me."

Four months later, the two men organized a rematch in Louisiana. To prepare, Leonard chose a sparring partner who idolized Duran.

"He fought like Roberto Duran — he used his head and dirty tactics and what-have-you," he says. "And it made me more aware, from a defensive standpoint, so when I faced Duran, I was prepared."

Leonard won the rematch, which famously ended when Duran went to the referee in the eight round and allegedly said, "No mas" — no more. A short time later, Duran retired from boxing.

But Leonard stayed, besting Thomas "Hitman" Hearns in "The Showdown" in 1981 and winning a split decision against "Marvelous" Marvin Hagler in 1986. He repeatedly retired and returned to the ring, before hanging up his gloves for the last time in 1997.

"Of all the things I miss in boxing, I miss the preparation of a bout, I miss choreographing tactics and moves and things like that," he says. "I miss all of my guys, my entourage being around me and working out with me, getting in better shape. ... It's a gradual progression of getting better and, as weeks go by, you look into the mirror and you see a different person. It evolves. One minute, you look kind of soft and then, within 6-8 weeks, your muscle and all that definition appears. The mirror doesn't lie. It tells you exactly what you are."


Interview Highlights

On a good corner man

"When you're losing, you really don't want to hear what your trainer has to say. He may tell you the right thing, but you're so exhausted, you're so beat up, that your lungs are burning, your legs are tired. And you've given up. Because 90 percent of guys who go back to the corner in a tough fight, they're about to give up. But there are a few, that have that intestinal fortitude, and they want to win at any cost. That's the guy who's listening to whatever his corner has to say. The key is having someone who's composed, someone who has experience. Someone who wants you to get out there and go at the guy but who doesn't sound so desperate or frustrated. And Angelo Dundee was that guy, who was in my corner, who said the right things at the right time."

On recovering from a hit during a fight

"When you get knocked down, the first thing you do is try to compose yourself and not rush up. Don't jump up because of embarrassment because your equilibrium is still off. And if you jump up too fast, you're going to stumble. You're going to fall back. The key is to hopefully be near a rope which you can use as a brace to help you up. While you're doing that, make eye contact with the referee to give him [the] sense that you're OK. It's just little pointers. It's like golf — making those little adjustments. The same thing occurs in boxing. You make adjustments."

On connecting with a punch

"There is no sweeter feeling than when you throw the perfect punch. You get a signal — you get this little tingling sensation that shoots up and down your arm to let you know that you've hit the jackpot. And you know. You know right away that guy's gone."

On the hardships of making money

"I shared the wealth. And I tried to give [my family] a home. I bought homes for most of my family members. And I bought cars. I bought 10 cars, they were Pintos. They were free [for them.] I just tried to help them because they're my brothers and sisters. But things just got out of control. Things became too frequent. There's no book to tell you how to deal with instant success and all of a sudden, you have this fame. It's powerful. It's crazy. ... My accountants said, 'Ray, you can't continue to do this.'"

On recently coming out about being sexually abused as a teenager

"Some people ask why did I reveal that? I saw an episode of Oprah and [former child TV star] Todd Bridges finally came forth and said that he was sexually abused. I hear people always say that when you surrender and admit these things, it's a sense of freedom too."

Excerpt: 'The Big Fight'

The Big Fight: My Life In and Out of the Ring

The Big Fight: My Life In and Out of the Ring
By Sugar Ray Leonard and Michael Arkush
Hardcover, 320 pages
Viking Adult
List Price: $26.95

My eyes never lie.

They were open wide, staring back at me in the mirror of the dressing room at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas. Those eyes would reveal which of the two dueling personalities would enter the ring as I took on the most intimidating opponent of my career, Marvin Hagler. It was nearly seven o'clock on the night of April 6, 1987, the opening bell only about an hour away.

Would it be Sugar Ray Leonard, the star of numerous conquests in the past, an American hero since capturing the gold medal in Montreal more than a decade earlier, the anointed heir to the throne vacated by Muhammad Ali? Sugar Ray was resilient, fearless, unwilling to accept failure. The smile and innocence of a child, which made him a hit on TV, would be gone, replaced in the ring by a man filled with rage he did not understand, determined to cause great harm to another.

Or would it be Ray Leonard, the part-time boxer at the age of thirty, whose best was well behind him, his days and nights wasted on fights that never made the headlines, fights he lost over and over, to alcohol and cocaine and depression? This was a man full of self-pity, blaming everyone but the person most responsible for his fate — himself.

In the room, with no one around, I kept my eyes glued on the eyes in the mirror. They were alive, probing, big, like flashlights. I looked at the muscles in my shoulders, my arms. They were cut, defined, powerful.

I began to slowly shadowbox, watching my legs, then my eyes, back to my legs, then my eyes again. Pow! Pow! Pow! Pow! I threw a left, a right, another left, another right. Sweat dripped down my forehead, my breathing heavier.

There was a knock at the door to let me know it was time. I didn't say a word. I took one last look at my eyes. I recognized them. They were Sugar Ray's.

I walked out. Surrounded by my trainer, Angelo Dundee, bodyguard James Anderson, brothers Roger and Kenny, and about a dozen others, I started the familiar procession down the aisle, a strange and special ritual unlike any other in sports, cheered on by the hungry masses out for blood, marching toward glory or shame or, worse, death. During the several minutes it took to reach the ropes, I remained unscathed, as did Hagler, our bodies honed from months of sparring and running to be ready for this one momentous night. Soon we would be unscathed no more, both forced to pay the dues for the brutal profession we had chosen, or, as many of us in the Sweet Science prefer to believe, had chosen us.

I proceeded as slowly as possible, savoring the feelings I had not experienced in almost three years, since I defeated Kevin Howard and retired again, this time, I assumed, for good. Howard, nowhere near the fighter I was, knocked me to the canvas in the fourth round. I got up right away, more humiliated than hurt, and summoned enough will to prevail in the ninth. But my heart was not in the fight game anymore, and if one is not committed, disaster is certain to strike. Lacking the motivation wasn't a problem against Hagler. From the moment I decided in the spring of 1986 to take him on, I was sure of one thing: I wanted to tear the man apart.

The odds were heavily against me, and why wouldn't they be? Boxing was filled with proud warriors who came out of retirement only to discover that they should have stayed away forever, their skills never the same after the long layoff, the saddest example being the legendary Joe Louis, the hero to my father and millions of African Americans, beaten eventually by a much younger Rocky Marciano in 1951. I knew I would be assuming the same risk as the others before me, and not only to my body. At stake at Caesars was something just as important — my reputation. When I first retired as a pro in 1982, I prided myself on being the rare exception in my sport, the fighter wise enough to get out before it became too late. If I was whipped by Hagler, a very real possibility — he hadn't lost in eleven years — I would join the long list of disgraced ex-champions, leaving one lasting, pathetic image for the public I worked endlessly to impress.

Over the previous five years, I spent less than twenty-seven minutes in the ring while Hagler took on eight opponents (fifty-seven rounds) during the same period. While I trained more vigorously for Hagler than for any prior opponent — I sparred for well over two hundred rounds — no amount of effort on the speed bag, the heavy bag, jumping rope, and running could compare to an actual fight against a man coming from the opposite corner whose prime objective is to inflict as much damage as is humanly possible. My sparring partners never let up. They had careers they were hoping to build.

In training camp at Hilton Head, South Carolina, I felt in control of myself and my surroundings. There was a plan I stuck to every day. On fight night in Las Vegas, I felt in control again, but didn't know if the plan would work. A fighter never know till the bell rings.

Excerpted from The Big Fight: My Life In and Out of the Ring by Sugar Ray Leonard. Copyright 2011 by Sugar Ray Leonard. Excerpted by permission of Viking Adult. All rights reserved.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

David Wexler, Ph.D. - Men in Therapy in the 21st Century

http://www.finaletally.com/images/gallery/soprano_therapy.jpg

For any therapists out there - or maybe even life coaches - who work with men, this telecourse, from Psychotherapy Networker, with David Wexler seems essential. Dr. Wexler is the author of Men in Therapy: New Approaches for Effective Treatment and When Good Men Behave Badly: Change Your Behavior, Change Your Relationship.

In his writings, Wexler offers some crucial insights into the ways in which men manifest emotional issues differently than women do, and why female therapists need to understand how and why this is true, as well as how to talk to men in a way that will allow them to feel safe expressing themselves.

His discussion of the "Broken Mirror" (from the article Shame-O-Phobia: Why men fear therapy, see below) using a construct from Self Psychology, is immensely useful in understanding men - it definitely helped me understand why my inner critic gets triggered by my relationship partner while perceived criticism from others barely even registers much of the time.
A metaphor from self-psychology, the broken mirror, is particularly helpful in understanding the dynamics of male shame. This sensitivity to shame—to feeling incompetent, not valuable, unloved, unneeded, unimportant—is often governed by the psychological relationships with mirroring-self objects in our lives. It works like this: the response from others serves as a mirror, reflecting an image that governs our sense of well-being. Sensitivity to mirroring-self objects and broken mirrors isn't gender-specific, but men are more vulnerable to experiencing these mirrors as referenda on their performance and personal value. When the mirror image is negative (or is perceived as negative), the reflection can reactivate a man's narcissistic injury and deliver a blow to his feeling of competence. There's no more potent a mirror for a man than the one reflected by his intimate partner. If she (or he, in a gay relationship) is unhappy, he's failed. If she offers even a normal, nonabusive criticism, it's as if she's yelling at him: "You've failed at making me happy." And the shame-o-phobic man, vulnerable to broken mirrors and narcissistic injuries, will hear that message whether it's unintended or not.
I think a lot men can see themselves in this brief passage. Sometimes Jami can say something that is as free from judgment or shaming as humanly possible (and being a therapist, she knows how to do this), and I hear it as though I am the worst partner in the world. This doesn't happen all the time, of course - some days my critic is more reactive than other days - but when it does, I withdraw and she wonders what the hell just happened.

For an extended sample of his writing (and an explanation of the "narcissistic wound," see the article excerpt below.

Anyway, here is the info for the telecourse.

T915 Men in Therapy in the 21st Century

Learn about contemporary models of male psychology and how to engage men in therapy to bring out the best qualities even in “difficult” or “defensive” men.

david_wexlerDavid Wexler, Ph.D.

media-telecourse-tn Dates: Tuesdays, June 8, 15, 29; July 6
Time: 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM EST
CE Credits: 4 hours
Fee: $85; Online Member Discount: $75

ordernow

Course Description

Traditional models of psychotherapy and couples therapy have often fallen short in trying to reach and engage men because they don’t recognize the defenses and strengths that men typically bring with them into relationships. In this course, you’ll learn about creative 21st-century perspectives on male psychology, particularly how to reach men and bring out their best qualities. We’ll discuss the “broken mirror” phenomenon, ways in which men rely on women excessively for validation of the self, and the challenging and rich issues that emerge when women therapists treat men. We’ll explore how to creatively incorporate language and imagery that make sense to men and how to help them achieve authenticity and intimacy in their relationships.

Meet the Instructor

David Wexler, Ph.D, is the executive director of the Relationship Training Institute in San Diego. He's the author of "Men in Therapy: New Approaches for Effective Treatment," "When Good Men Behave Badly: Change Your Behavior, Change Your Relationship," "Is He Depressed or What?" and "STOP Domestic Violence."

Learning Objectives

1. Describe four contemporary insights about male psychology and how to integrate them into your couples work.

2. List three examples of “guy talk” that engages men and helps bring out their best qualities.

3. Explain the concept of the “broken mirror” and how it can be used to reach men more effectively.

Course Contents

Session 1: Understanding “Good Men Behaving Badly” * The shame of masculinity * Masculine gender role stress * The “broken mirror” sequence * The power of women.

Session 2: Rules of Engagement * Typical male counseling-o-phobia * Respecting “relational dread” * Guy talk for engaging men in treatment * Respecting resistance.

Session 3: When women treat men/diversity issues and treating men * Countertransference and challenges * When men “come on” to female therapists * Cultural sensitivity and cultural competence * Therapist/client matching issues * Alpha errors and beta errors.

Session 4: Relationship authenticity and relationship intimacy * The authentic self and the authentic other * The four pillars of intimacy * Intimacy: action steps * Emotional honesty and behavioral honesty * True love.

ordernow

The current issue of Psychotherapy Networker has a special section on men (The Secret World of Men: What therapists need to know). One of the articles - and a very good one in my opinion - is Shame-O-Phobia by David Wexler (I think it is free to read online even for non-subscribers).

Here is a bit of the article:

Men who've experienced toxic doses of shame early in life will do anything to avoid reexperiencing it as they grow older. It can originate from family experiences, from peer experiences, or just from the culture at large. A shamed boy becomes a hypersensitive man, his radar always finely tuned to the possibility of humiliation. His reaction to slights—perceived or real—and his ever-vigilant attempts to ward them off can become a kind of phobia. Tragically, the very men who are most desperate for affection and approval are the ones who usually can't ask for it: instead, they project blame and rejection and perceive the worst in others. Sometimes the smallest signs of withdrawal of affection will trigger old wounds, and they'll suddenly lash out at those they see as slighting them, even as they're unaware of the dark feelings stirring inside them. This is a state of mind that many of us in the field call shame-o-phobia, an endemic condition throughout Guy World.

With their profound fear of appearing weak or—god forbid!—feminine, most men will do whatever it takes to prove their manhood. In one recent study, men were assigned to three different groups and given the task of keeping their hand in painfully icy water for as long as they could. Those who were told that the ability to withstand the discomfort was a measure of male sex hormones and an index of physical fitness showed greater cardiovascular reactivity, reported feeling more performance expectations, and kept their hand in the water the longest. This was in contrast to the group who were told the test was a measure of high levels of female sex hormones and the ability to bond with children, and with the third group, who received no explanation at all.

What does this tell us? The length of time a guy will tough it out with his hand submerged in freezing water depends on whether he thinks his masculinity is in question. For some men, their hand could fall off before they'd risk the shame of not seeming "man enough" to take it.

Women feel shame, too, of course, and much of the emotional experiences for men and women are more similar than not. But there are still some fundamental differences in how men are both hardwired and acculturated that can't be ignored in the therapist's office. Even as infants, boys are more overstimulated by direct eye contact and show less ability to regulate arousal through intimate connection. These infant boys then grow up in a Guy World culture that emphasizes successful performance and deemphasizes reliance on others as a way to self-realize. Furthermore, evolutionary psychology teaches us that men are wired for procuring and performing (while females are wired for tending and befriending)—a trait that may provide a biological backdrop to the modern male focus on success. Without that, he ain't much—or so he feels.

To ignore the powerful effect of shame-o-phobia is to risk not really "getting" men, even if you happen to be a man yourself. An otherwise benign or mildly embarrassing event—like carrying the purse across the plaza, or a daughter who isn't having a good time at a Halloween party—can overactivate a man's fear that he's failing at some central task of being a real man.

The Broken Mirror

A metaphor from self-psychology, the broken mirror, is particularly helpful in understanding the dynamics of male shame. This sensitivity to shame—to feeling incompetent, not valuable, unloved, unneeded, unimportant—is often governed by the psychological relationships with mirroring-self objects in our lives. It works like this: the response from others serves as a mirror, reflecting an image that governs our sense of well-being. Sensitivity to mirroring-self objects and broken mirrors isn't gender-specific, but men are more vulnerable to experiencing these mirrors as referenda on their performance and personal value. When the mirror image is negative (or is perceived as negative), the reflection can reactivate a man's narcissistic injury and deliver a blow to his feeling of competence. There's no more potent a mirror for a man than the one reflected by his intimate partner. If she (or he, in a gay relationship) is unhappy, he's failed. If she offers even a normal, nonabusive criticism, it's as if she's yelling at him: "You've failed at making me happy." And the shame-o-phobic man, vulnerable to broken mirrors and narcissistic injuries, will hear that message whether it's unintended or not.

A few years ago, I was interviewed on a radio show about the psychological concept of the broken mirror. Afterward, the (male) interviewer said to me off-air: "Damn! Now I get what happened to me yesterday! I came out of the bathroom after shaving and I'd nicked myself a little on the cheek. My girlfriend looked up at me and said ÔWhat happened to you? That's the second time you've done that this week?' And I just went off. I started yelling at her, and then I stormed off, and our plans for the day were ruined. And it was all because I had a manhood attack. I know she didn't mean anything like that, but that's what I heard. What the hell's wrong with me?"

This man experienced his girlfriend's comments as a stab at his masculinity. It was as if she'd said, "What kind of loser are you that you can't even shave properly? Any man should be able to pull that off!" To a guy whose self-esteem—particularly his masculine self-image—feels vulnerable (this includes most men), this simple interchange, silly as it sounds, can feel like as an unbearable assault. My radio interviewer, as best as I could tell, didn't suffer from a narcissistic personality disorder, nor was he particularly outside the norm. He experienced the broken mirror and reacted in ways that are typical, in one form or another, for many of us men.

Men and Therapy

The field of counseling and psychotherapy hasn't done a particularly good job of creating a user-friendly environment for male clients. The problem begins with a lack of awareness about the profound impact of shame-o-phobia and the vulnerability to broken mirrors. Furthermore, there's a mismatch between the relational style of many men and the touchy-feely atmosphere of most counseling and psychotherapy.

Think of what we typically ask a man to do in therapy settings: recognize that something is wrong with him, admit that he needs help, openly discuss and express his emotions, get vulnerable, and depend on someone else for guidance and support—all extremely challenging tasks in Guy World.

Too often therapists—both male and female—try to massage men into being more like women in the ways they express themselves and experience their emotions. So it isn't surprising that only one-third of psychotherapy clients are men. Either men have fewer psychological problems (not likely!), or else many are too turned off by the whole therapy enterprise to seek the help they need. In fact, men usually get therapy only because someone else has insisted on it. When I ask men in an initial therapy session, "What are you doing here?" the answer I hear is "My wife told me I needed to be here." Other times, it may be their boss or their grandmother or their doctor, or even a probation officer. They perceive the decision to use the therapeutic services and the process of using them to be not particularly helpful and not particularly masculine—often even downright threatening. It's our job, as counselors and therapists, to adapt our approach to these realities.

Part of what makes treating men challenging is that they generally don't signal their psychic pain as clearly and straightforwardly as women. In the postfeminist turmoil of shifting relationship dynamics, men have been struggling to find a way to relate intelligently, parent sensitively, and manage their emotional needs with more consciousness and depth. Many of us haven't figured out a way to do all these things and still really feel like men. Author William Pollack describes men's anger as their "way of weeping"—an expression of underlying pain that women would more likely display with tears or more direct expressions of sadness and loss. Men also "weep" by drinking, withdrawing, acting defensive, blaming others, getting irritable, being possessive, working excessively, becoming overly competitive, suffering somatic complaints and insomnia, and philandering.

As therapists, we have two choices: shoehorn men into a process that's traditionally been more user-friendly for females, or reshape what we do and how we present it to better reach male clients.

Read the whole article.

One of the concepts he mentions in this brief section of the much longer article is the narcissistic wound. The following is a good explanation of the narcissistic wound, from Linda Marks, which is a very central concept in Psychosynthesis (primal wounding), Self Psychology (see Philip Cushman's Why the self is empty: Toward a historically situated psychology), and many other therapeutic models.
The wound to heart and psyche that gets called narcissism occurs when a child's vulnerable and developing core sense of self is not seen and reflected back by the adults around him/her. Each child is born a unique individual with special gifts and personal challenges, multi-layered and both simple and complex. For any one layer to develop, that part of the child needs to be seen, heard, understood and valued. Parents have to be present to be mirrors—to bear witness and reflect back. Healthy parents help young people build a frame of reference for living.

A child needs a safe context in which to explore and express his/her core sense of self. A child needs adults who are themselves grounded in who they are so they have emotional and psychic space to be receptive to the individual child at any moment, rather than relating to the child from their own unmet needs. Any one adult may be capable of seeing and developing certain aspects of a child, and less equipped to see and develop other ones. In this sense, it does take a village to raise a child, and with the loss of this village and the committed long-term adult relationships the village offers to a child, many levels of the child's developing self will be missed entirely.

When a parent's own woundedness and unmet needs override their ability to be present to a child or a parent's undeveloped parts of self render them unable to respond to a child's vulnerable and authentic needs, the child's core sense of self can be lost, fragmented or undeveloped. The loss, fragmentation and lack of development of the core sense of self is the root of the narcissistic wound. Raw, broken, undeveloped and lost, we enter a cold cruel world ill-equipped to relate, define fulfillment from the inside out and connect with the spirit of life.

A significant part of this process, the "fragmentation and lack of development of the core sense of self," which stems from the narcissistic wound, is the source of our subpersonalities, especially the manager parts - for me it is the inner critic (and the perfectionist), while for others it might be the pleaser (seeking to please everyone to avoid shame or abandonment), or the pusher (seeking recognition to avoid shame or abandonment).

Anyway, I highly recommend this article, and Wexler's books.