Too Perfect Tuesdays - Chap 7 - The Lure of Worry and Rumination

This post continues with The Lure of Worry and Rumination from Chapter Seven.

This series looks at a small snippet of The book on the Perfectionist Personality, aka The Obsessive Compulsive disordered Personality, aka OCPD, each week. Please follow along, leave your comments, engage more on the FaceBook website... whatever your heart calls you to do.

Too Perfect, When Being in Control Gets Out of Control by Allan E. Mallinger, M.D. and Jeanette DeWyze was published by Random House in 1992.  If   you believe you are dealing with OCPD or someone who is "Too Perfect," whether that's you or a loved one, please buy a copy of the book and read it for additional insights that will not all be covered in these excerpts.

The Lure of Worry and Rumination

<snip>For one thing, the tendency to worry is likely to be a central component of his self-image, and closely linked to other "good" qualities.  Many obsessives associate worrying with being a serious, conscientious person, and on some level they view happy-go-lucky non-worriers as irresponsible.

Second, they probably feel that worry gives them some control over the object of their concern, somehow preparing them better for an upcoming event, for example.  Maybe it will help them discover some protective action they can take (to prevent a party from being a failure, say, or to safeguard their family from violent crime).  Worrying may be a form of "bracing oneself" to better withstand anything from romantic rejection to the Greenhouse Effect.

As well-educated and intelligent as they often are, many obsessives also are superstitious about worry.  If they worry about their spouse's plane crashing (so this twisted "reasoning" goes), maybe that will somehow keep it from happening.  Worrying actively demonstrates their lack of presumptuousness, because they're not arrogantly assuming everything will go their way, the Cosmic Scorekeeper doesn't need to "teach them a lesson." Like all superstitions, this is an attempt to feel a sense of control over people and events that are essentially uncontrollable.

Similarly, most rumination carries with it a sense of retroactive control.  By chastising themselves for some pitfall they should have foreseen (even if there's no way they really could have), they are denying the frightening reality that mistakes are inevitable.

Often, people who ruminate feel that if they dwell enough on their errors, or on bad things (done by them or to them) - if they can somehow sear these things into memory - then they can be sure not to let them happen again.  A patient comes to mind who couldn't stop dwelling on his wife's infidelity, even years afterward.  He tortured himself with painful fantasies of her sexual relationship with the other man, insisting that she tell him all the details, though this knowledge was almost unbearable to him.  He remained in the marriage, but held fiercely to his anger for several essentially self-protective reasons.  First, the angry feelings helped thwart any temptation to be close to his wife - and therefore vulnerable - again.  Second, his clinging to the graphic mental pictures ensured that he wouldn't be as unprepared (and as devastated) if his wife ever betrayed him again.  Finally, by refusing to put the past to rest, he kept his wife's infidelity fresh in her mind.  He believed that her guilt feelings both punished her betrayal and made it more unlikely she would do it again.

***

My ex would get very upset because I did not live up to his standard of worrying.  I'm more one of those happy-go-lucky irresponsible types.  I guess he was hooked on the quantity vs. quality argument - 10 hours spent unproductively churning over something obviously means you care more than 1 hour spent productively problem-solving, right?  Except I didn't think this was so obvious, or even true.

Obviously, obviously.  If I had a dollar for every time my ex said, "Obviously," to me in a sarcastic way to point out that I was Not Thinking The Right Way, I'd be... well, I'd have some credit cards paid off, anyway.

And as I've blogged before, yes, he would rerun someone''s "greatest faults" over and over again, like playing a favorite CD, until every grievance was red hot and causing him to heat up all over again.  It was like having a filling fall out, the tongue keeps going back to it and going back to it.

I wonder if the tendency to get stuck in worry/rumination loops is a combination of brain wiring plus formed habit, or if it's more one or the other.  Or avoidance, even.  Sometimes I think that my ex chose to futz over the tomato plants, for example, because that way he didn't have to address the issue I wanted him to address, getting rid of his hoard.  Because if you're busy thinking about/working on something else, how can you possibly be expected to take on X?

What's your experience with worry and rumination?
Do you believe that if you worry about something "enough," 
then it can't happen?
Your thoughts?

Faux-pology, Anyone? More Like A Three-Pronged Attack

photo from Tactical Awareness & Combat Techniques

Ranted at, screamed at, even; called names and ridiculed in every way possible, and then, later, getting a feeble apology laced with excuses, and then, the day after that, a long list of justifications as to why it really wasn't the abuser's fault in the first place.  We made them do it; in fact, they're the real victim here.

This dynamic has been all over the news lately, because of the egregious and very public bad behavior of radio commentator Rush Limbaugh.  But it's something those of us who've lived with or loved somebody with a personality disorder have experienced, over and over again.  And sometimes, when we've been in the fog long enough, we actually blamed ourselves, because we couldn't forgive and forget.

Didn't they say they were sorry?  Isn't an apology good enough for us?

Let's use this whole incident to examine the cycle, from offense to faux-pology to backpedaling.

Part 1 - The Attack

Sandra Fluke, a 30-year old law student from Georgetown, appeared at a Congressional hearing to testify about how the lack of insurance coverage for birth control harms fellow students, including those who desperately need hormonal contraceptives for medical conditions.

Via Wikimedia

Regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees with Ms. Fluke (pronounced fluk), according to Georgetown University President, John J. DeGioia, someone who does not agree with her opinion:

“She was respectful, sincere, and spoke with conviction. She provided a model of civil discourse.”

Fluke did not verbally attack anyone.  She did not name any names, except in reference to those sponsoring a particular bill. She did not ask "the government" to give her anything for free, and she did not mention her own or anyone else's sex life, except obliquely. (That one friend was married, that another was gay.)

Wealthy radio commentator and drug abuser Rush Limbaugh went on a three day tirade against this young woman.  As shown in the linked video, his tone of voice, his body language, and the lewd suggestions he made (you owe us a sex tape) are particularly vile and disgusting.  He attacked her for things she never said.  For her (alleged) need for condoms in elementary school.   He accused her of "having so much sex it's a wonder she can walk." (Sick imagination? Deliberate slander?)   There's transcripts of her testimony available, so if he had watched or even listened to it, and forgotten the specifics, he could have referred to it, if he wished to respectfully voice his opinion on anything she actually said. But spewing slander and spittle, judging by the video clips, is more his style.


Part 2- The Consequences and Faux-Apology

Many Americans, be they supporters of Ms. Fluke's position, or simply women who don't appreciate being called sluts because they use birth control - and the men who love them - took offense to this extreme bullying of a private citizen via public airwaves.  They began contacting sponsors of Mr. Limbaugh's radio program.  Said sponsors begin jumping ship, one after another after another.

After many (at least nine, possibly twelve) advertisers had ended or suspended their advertising with the program, Limbaugh releases the following written press release as an "apology."

Yep, it was not really a personal attack.  The problem was with the "word choices," not with the deliberate distortion of Ms. Fluke's testimony.  Coming, as it did, only after the program began hemorrhaging sponsors, the timing is entirely suspect.

Part 3 - The Backpedaling; The Aggressor as "Victim"

Additional verbal "apologies" begin on Limbaugh's radio program the following Monday that basically retract what little apology was given.  “I acted too much like the leftists who despise me.” Limbaugh claimed, “In fighting them on this issue last week, I became like them....I descended to their level....I became like the people we oppose.”

He whines about the sponsors (the meanies!) abandoning not him, but his listeners.  You see, he's really the victim here. Betrayed. He's not responsible for the vitriol that pours from his mouth; it's those other people, they made him do it.  They set him up.  Everyone should be sorry for him.  Then he continues attacking Fluke - albeit without the "two words" that he apologized for.

***

I don't know if Rush Limbaugh is actually, diagnosably mentally ill with a Personality Disorder (though I suspect he is).  But I do know that, as far as it comes to dealing with someone with untreated OCPD or another Personality Disorder - this whole scenario is waaaaay too familiar.

First prong of the attack: The fight. It's not a fair fight, where you and your partner are trying to understand one another's point of view, come to a compromise you can both live with. Where perhaps you passionately disagree, but still are using respectful words and language and giving one another plenty of opportunity to be heard. On the other side, your partner is hurling everything but the kitchen sink at you.  Regardless of whether you're left emotionally crushed, in a virtual puddle on the floor, they're going to win the fight.

Next, while you are emotionally bruised and bleeding and hurt, comes either no apology at all, or a faux-pology.  The lips might say, "I'm sorry," but the body language, tone, vocal inflection, and word choices indicate, "I'm still furious."

There's a cliche in movies, "You're not sorry, you're sorry you got caught."  If your partner had not felt compelled by circumstances to issue an apology, they wouldn't be doing it. And they resent you for it.

So now, you have the bitter choice to accept an apology that does not feel genuine in any sense whatsoever, or refuse to accept it, and "become the bad guy."  This is the second prong of the attack. No matter what, it's a lose-lose scenario for you.

Third prong of the attack: Even if you do accept the apology, the spin begins.  Within a week your partner is making you pay with the Stomping but Silent Treatment, snide remarks, and other insinuations because you made him/her feel bad.  You provoked a fight.  If you didn't accept the apology right away, you were holding a grudge.  If you did accept it verbally, but your tone and body language betrayed that you still felt hurt, well, you were just trying to make your partner feel bad.  You were being manipulative.

If you have been in a verbally or emotionally abusive relationship for long enough, you might even believe it.  Feel guilty because you can't simply forgive and forget, and move on. If you are a [Christian, Buddhist, Pagan, fill  in the blank] you might have it thrown in your face that you're certainly not being a very good one.

No. We are not obligated to face personal attack after personal attack with a gracious smile.  Not when it comes from a partner - who we should be able to trust - nor when it comes from somebody bigger and more powerful than us.  That is bullying, plain and simple.

When and if we accept an apology, it is totally up to us.  We are not bad people if we refuse to accept some mumbled words, or even a press release, that screams out "I'm saying sorry because I feel I have to, but it's not like I'm really sorry."  We are not obligated to accept an apology that drips with sincerity, until we are emotionally ready to do so.

We get it. The offender wants to be let off the hook, as quickly as possible.  Not. Our. Problem.  We get to set the timeline on this, not the offender.

And whether an apology is accepted or not, it is not ever, ever acceptable for the attacker to come around with another salvo, when we haven't yet healed from the first attack.  That simply demonstrates how phony the supposed apology was in the first place.

As a P.S. on this - it is not up to Ralph Reed, Mitt Romney, Bill Maher, or any other man (or woman), to accept RL's apology.  It is up to not only Sandra Fluke, but every woman offended by slut-shaming and personal attacks, to accept or reject it, in such time as we choose, if we choose. To discuss it until we are ready to let it go, and not before.  Shame on the Good Ol' Boys' Club for trying to play the game of "Okay, we don't want to discuss this any more, so the conversation is over."

The conversation's just getting started.

Have you ever been through a three-stage fight cycle like this?

Been put in the position of being pressed to accept a faux-pology?

Related articles

• Rush Limbaugh Advertisers' Exodus Hits 29 (newser.com)
• She Said Contraceptives; He Said Slut (writinginflow.blogspot.com)
• WATCH: Colbert Calls Rush Limbaugh A 'Poster Boy For Contraception' (huffingtonpost.com)
• How Not To Apologize (slate.com)
• What Is A Real Apology (hubpages.com)

Too Perfect Tuesdays - Chap 7 - Preoccupation and Doubt

 
This post continues with Preoccupation and Doubt from Chapter Seven.

This series looks at a small snippet of The book on the Perfectionist Personality, aka The Obsessive Compulsive disordered Personality, aka OCPD, each week. Please follow along, leave your comments, engage more on the FaceBook website... whatever your heart calls you to do.

Too Perfect, When Being in Control Gets Out of Control by Allan E. Mallinger, M.D. and Jeanette DeWyze was published by Random House in 1992.  If   you believe you are dealing with OCPD or someone who is "Too Perfect," whether that's you or a loved one, please buy a copy of the book and read it for additional insights that will not all be covered in these excerpts.

Preoccupation and Doubt

<snip>Preoccupation simply means the inability to give one's full attention to the matter at hand, due to another matter being foremost in one's mind.  Worry and rumination are forms of preoccupation, but they are not the only forms; the intruding thoughts need not be about a "problem," past of present.  Consider, for example, the woman whose thoughts keep straying to her next day's schedule while she and her husband are making love.  She may not be worrying about the upcoming events - merely thinking about them at an inappropriate time.  But when those thoughts distract her, she obviously can't give her best to what she's doing, be that lovemaking, interacting with her professional colleagues, or reading to her child.

Doubting - not allowing yourself to feel certain about something - can darken your view of life.  Many obsessives doubt their own judgment of performance, as well as the honesty, ability, or conscientiousness of others.  Some are chronically pessimistic about nearly everything - they try to beware constantly of the possibility of failure or disappointment.  As I've explained, this may also give them an illusion of control, since forecasting a negative outcome makes them feel they assessed the situation accurately. <snip>

***

I have a sneaking sympathy for the woman planning out her day while her husband is making love to her; maybe his skillz were lacking, know what I'm saying?  Not that that ever happened to me. *rolling my eyes*

I admit, the preoccupation thing is one of my personal weak spots.  I tend to let my mind wander to my schedule when I'm doing yoga; to creative projects when I'm at work; to work when I'm drifting off to sleep or in the shower.  Whereas if I were more centered and present, I would be more involved in the activities I'm doing.

On the doubt issue though, not me.  Seems a bittersweet victory, really, to be "right."  To doubt something is going to work out well, and then, guess what, it doesn't.  You get to experience that pain twice, first by living the doubt instead of focusing on something more pleasant, and then getting to experience the actual disappointment.

I believe, too, it is a self-fulfilling prophecy; if you're headed to a family party, say, and you doubt that you're going to enjoy yourself, it's more than likely you won't.  Or, even if you do enjoy yourself, you can afterwards tear the experience to shreds as some have described.

Is doubt and preoccupation part of your daily burden?
Your thoughts?