(April 2, 2019 at 6:26 am)Thena323 Wrote: Unimportant details, no.

But you damn well know why your wife was so concerned about you leaving the house at the moment...And you've been up here pretending that she was just following you around nagging you over mundane couple stuff.

You've revealed yourself to be quite the liar and master manipulator here, benny, despite your claims of being unable to control your anger. I can only imagine the level of bullshit your family to put up with IRL. What a depressing, bleak, and stressful existence it must be for them.

I feel sorry for your kids.

That's quite the indictment-- you are expressing quite a lot of hatred toward me. I'm assuming that you've been on the other side of this equation, and that in projecting me onto someone you know, you are also projecting your feelings about him onto me. If so, I'm sorry that whatever happened to you happened-- I doubt it will bring you any peace, but I can guarantee you that whatever that guy actually said, inside he already hated himself more than you ever will.

As for my family-- it's not a closed book yet. My kids are fine, my wife is occupied with a job that she enjoys. I'd imagine she wishes we could relate better, but she knows why I'm keeping my distance for now.

I think the most likely scenario is that we just wait for the kids to move on, and then run offices on different continents. We'll see.

---

(April 2, 2019 at 2:50 am)Mathilda Wrote: So the next question, are the defence mechanisms that you have developed still useful? Or are they hampering you now? If it is the latter then it's better to come to terms with why you had to learn those defence mechanisms and feel confident enough to not let them control you. That doesn't mean to say that it will now make you a weak victim again. You can still stand up for yourself. You won't ever forget how. It's about taking back control of your life so you don't get triggered to do something that harms you.

I can't really answer your questions.  Right now, I'd say my sense of self is so fragmented that it's hard even to establish goals.  My wife once asked me what she could do to help.  I told her that I'd had a moment of crisis that brought a lot of things full circle for me, and that I didn't know if I could be helped.

As I have new experiences that are disappointing or disillusioning, and then I look back at my childhood and teen experiences, they are co-supporting-- they seem to validate each other, to kind of draw the net in tighter.  I'm not sure if that makes sense or not-- but it feels like the clearer I see, the more grim things appear.

If I have any defense mechanisms, they are probably a defense against Mr. Hyde ever stepping fully into the light of day.  I don't think Thena has me right in terms of circumstances at the moment, or my effect on my family-- they seem pretty happy, and I think they have lots to be happy about.  I've done a good job sheltering them from both the world and from myself, I think.  But there's always the fear that not very deep under the skin, I'm what people like her think I am.


But enough sob stories about me-- I don't think I'm unusual, except for my willingness to talk about this stuff. I sense that there are a LOT. . . like a tremendous amount. . . of men who feel like trapped animals, and who (whether they actually do it or not) feel they're on the edge of lashing out in ways those around them might find surprising.

(March 31, 2019 at 5:15 am)bennyboy Wrote: I'm going to be coming with a couple unpopular lines here:

1) rage is natural, and is not dysfunctional
2) the social norms which are anti-rage are unfair


All expressions of emotion are instinctive, and most of them are not really within conscious control.  When a child cries, the child doesn't really want to cry-- it just cries.  We understand this, and while it's annoying, we recognize that we have to put up with it.  When a fat person compulsively eats, he doesn't really want to get fat-- but the fat person is sometimes unable to subject his instinctive drive to rational truth.  When a woman is needlessly unpleasant due to PMS, we don't like it, and we might even complain about it-- but it's accepted that this is just part of the way some people are.

Men who get angry get none of this consideration.  We have a million years of ruthless savagery ingrained in us.  Most men who anger easily don't like that fact.  They fight against it, are ashamed by it, and when their instincts subject their rational minds in a moment of loss of control, they have about as much control over it as they would an epileptic seizure.

In general, while an aggressive man is clearly a menace, and the behavior is not to be encouraged, I'd also say that demonizing people who have a problem controlling ANY instinct is unfair, and unlikely to produce good results.  Quite the contrary-- using humiliation to moderate a man's behavior is likely to make him feel deeply troubled and insecure, and increase the behavior overall.


I'm not sure what can be done about it.  Probably, really aggressive guys need some vehicle for their aggression-- maybe war, maybe manual labor and lots of it.  But treating aggressive men like they want to feel that way, like they are doing it very much on purpose-- I just don't think that's the way things are.

Things like anger, and rage need moderation and self-control. We shouldn't say it okay that you don't have self-control, just like you shouldn't say it's okay for children to throw tantrums. You shouldn't reward bad behavior, or just be permissive towards it either.

Society, family and friends, telling you it's not okay when you rage out, or lash out on them, is part of what helps us gain self-control. I have to learn moderate my rage and anger, or I'll risk destroying my marriage, my friendship and family. It may be hard work, but because I love them, it's worth it. It's that constant voice, that reminds me when I feel like raging out, "hey man it's not worth it, you'll end up making things worse not better. "

If you are angry to the point of frightening another person and making them fear for their personal safety, you probably need some sort of professional intervention.

What I read/hear from a lot of very "angry men" is their goals are to protect, and hide, parts of their lives from other parts. That's classic cognitive dissonance. Lots of them have very poor introspective abilities and very toxic negative reinforcing loops in their lives.That coupled with the fact birds of a feather flocking together they tend to have a ton more people around them in the same boat, melting any potential support system. It leads to a very rapid downward spiral.

Here's the thing, you can't choose what you feel, but you can choose how you heal. If you can create positive feedback loops to encourage things and take baby steps to repair, it'll get exponentially easier.

(April 2, 2019 at 8:57 am)tackattack Wrote: Here's the thing, you can't choose what you feel, but you can choose how you heal. If you can create positive feedback loops to encourage things and take baby steps to repair, it'll get exponentially easier.

I don't know tack. I tend to scoff a little bit at the 'healing' thing because it is so over used and abused. Not everything is  wound that needs to heal. Experiencing a negative emotion doesn't mean that we are broken. If you can't choose what you feel, then why assume that you're broken?

People feel rage sometimes. It doesn't mean they are broken. It doesn't mean that they need to heal. It just means that they need to use appropriate coping mechanisms. Going for a walk to cool down is one the best coping mechanisms. And it is the coping mechanism that Benny tried to use that time that he experienced an episode of rage, ten years ago.

ok perhaps healing is the wrong word, would resolving be better. I don't think coping is enough. Crying yourself in bed doesn't resolve issues, it just helps to to express those emotions. Once you express you can cope. Neither of those goes to solving the source problem or resolving it. You can be a rage-aholic and not be broken, but it's pretty obvious to most that you have some unresolved issues or powerful chemicals preventing your repeated control of those emotions publicly. Repeated lack of self-control publicly is part of the definition for broken for me and that's why I used it, if there is a better word, I'm down.

(April 2, 2019 at 9:20 am)tackattack Wrote: ok perhaps healing is the wrong word, would resolving be better. I don't think coping is enough. Crying yourself in bed doesn't resolve issues, it just helps to to express those emotions. Once you express you can cope. Neither of those goes to solving the source problem or resolving it. You can be a rage-aholic and not be broken, but it's pretty obvious to most that you have some unresolved issues or powerful chemicals preventing your repeated control of those emotions publicly. Repeated lack of self-control publicly is part of the definition for broken for me and that's why I used it, if there is a better word, I'm down.

Someone who is a rage-aholic probably is broken. But a person who sometimes cries themselves to sleep isn't necessarily broken. And the source of the hurt frequently can't be resolved. Episodes of rage or crying one's self to sleep are pretty normal steps in the path to acceptance.

I agree that there is a high chance that a person who repeatedly lacks self control in public probably is broken. But this discussion hasn't been about chronic lack of self-control. We have been talking about a guy who tried to cope with growing feelings of rage by taking a walk to cool down, was prevented from doing so, and experienced an episode of rage. 

People have been diagnosing him with rage issues, and one buffoon told him that he was so fragile that he should be in a hospital.  Benny has been gaslighted by society so bad that I think that he's not even connecting the obvious dots between his episode of rage and having been blocked from using the appropriate coping mechanism. He had pressure building up, he tried to open the release valve, and someone else insisted on keeping the release valve closed. That is obviously going to result in an episode of rage. Anyone who argues that this should not have resulted in an episode of rage is completely denying reality.

(April 2, 2019 at 7:41 am)Acrobat Wrote: Things like anger, and rage need moderation and self-control. We shouldn't say it okay that you don't have self-control, just like you shouldn't say it's okay for children to throw tantrums. You shouldn't reward bad behavior, or just be permissive towards it either.

Society, family and friends, telling you it's not okay when you rage out, or lash out on them, is part of what helps us gain self-control. I have to learn moderate my rage and anger, or I'll risk destroying my marriage, my friendship and family. It may be hard work, but because I love them, it's worth it. It's that constant voice, that reminds me when I feel like raging out, "hey man it's not worth it, you'll end up making things worse not better. "

The predominant opinion in this thread seems to be that an adult is expected to have self control, and that a lack of self control, especially if it affects others, is a moral failing. The attitude seems to be that if you can be enraged, you don't care enough about your loved ones or other people in your environment to bother fixing yourself. Is this really how people think the human mind works? It seems pretty Biblical to me: God gave us free will, and those who use it for ill are culpable, because obviously it's their fault for being that way.

In 100% of other cases I can think of, it's understood that however people behave, it's because something about their brain or their learning made them that way. But if a man can't control his temper-- he's a monster.

(April 2, 2019 at 10:10 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(April 2, 2019 at 7:41 am)Acrobat Wrote: Things like anger, and rage need moderation and self-control. We shouldn't say it okay that you don't have self-control, just like you shouldn't say it's okay for children to throw tantrums. You shouldn't reward bad behavior, or just be permissive towards it either.

Society, family and friends, telling you it's not okay when you rage out, or lash out on them, is part of what helps us gain self-control. I have to learn moderate my rage and anger, or I'll risk destroying my marriage, my friendship and family. It may be hard work, but because I love them, it's worth it. It's that constant voice, that reminds me when I feel like raging out, "hey man it's not worth it, you'll end up making things worse not better. "

The predominant opinion in this thread seems to be that an adult is expected to have self control, and that a lack of self control, especially if it affects others, is a moral failing.  The attitude seems to be that if you can be enraged, you don't care enough about your loved ones or other people in your environment to bother fixing yourself.  Is this really how people think the human mind works?  It seems pretty Biblical to me: God gave us free will, and those who use it for ill are culpable, because obviously it's their fault for being that way.

In 100% of other cases I can think of, it's understood that however people behave, it's because something about their brain or their learning made them that way.  But if a man can't control his temper-- he's a monster.

You can control your temper. You knew when to open your release valve. Someone else insisted on keeping your release valve closed. You control your temper. You lost control when someone wouldn't let you use your controls. You were like the driver of a car who knows that he has to swerve, and you have a passenger who holds onto the wheel and won't let you swerve.

I'd say full control means you will never get enraged, under any circumstance at all, even if someone is blocking your path or shouting obscenities at you or saying they feel "sorry for your family." Maybe that would be better. But I don't think it's reasonable to expect all instances of the human animal to be at that place. It's not that it shouldn't be that way-- it's that it quite simply isn't.

This is a problem I have with PC idealism-- it's a poor reflection of reality.