Saturday, October 8, 2011

Misdirected (Dis)Respect

I recently had a client tell me about a guy with whom he was maybe, sort of, kind of, possibly beginning to start a relationship. And the client shared with me that one of his hesitations about starting the relationship was that “the guy deserved better.” The statement stopped me.

The idea that someone deserves better than oneself is a notion that has never made sense to me. Unless you know that you are going to do harm to someone or are being duplicitous, then I don’t know from where anyone gets the idea that he or she has the authority to decide whether one is good enough for another. I asked my client on what basis was he making the decision for his potential love interest and my client was unable to produce a coherent, rational argument. It seemed to be more of a feeling. In this case, it was a feeling of personal inadequacy of my client’s.

It strikes me as very presumptive that someone would feel he or she was in a better position to decide what would be rewarding to a (potential) partner than the partner himself or herself. On what basis does one make such a claim? Are you thinking of dating someone with poor judgment?—if that is the case, then the person probably does not deserve better than you. The assertion strikes me as rather self-centered actually.

I think the statement is made out of respect for the (potential) partner, but is actually an act of disrespect. It is grounded on the person either not being able to make good decisions or not knowing what would be good for himself or herself or that the person cannot adequately assess others. Those aren’t very respectful claims to make about another. In fact, they pretty well disregard the other person’s ability to decide or determine what he or she would most enjoy or benefit from in a partner. It pretty much is the same as saying “I know what would be good for you better than you do.”

But the aspect that I think makes it the most self-centered is that it is really about the person making the statement’s self-image than the person about whom the statement is being made. As with my client, it is more often a statement of one’s own sense of inadequacy. It seems it would a healthier and more productive approach to acknowledge and explore how the qualities you see in yours love interest make you feel, rather than write off the compatibility. Heck, you may even want to be honest with your partner. But I would strongly encourage you to be open to what your partner might see in you of value that you do not recognize in yourself.

I really don’t think we are in a position to decide if we are worthy of or good enough for another. I think we are not the best judges of that. I think that we grant a (potential) partner more autonomy and more respect by being honest about who we are (with our concerns about compatibility and being open to his or her perspective). Respect for your (potential) partner’s ability to make a good decision as much as you respect the qualities that make you feel unworthy.

Saturday, October 1, 2011

Put Your Oxygen mask on First before Assisting Others

This piece of advice from flight attendants is a useful metaphor for the rest of one’s life. Many people end up putting others before themselves, end up assisting others before taking care of themselves. And, in a sense, the same consequence occurs as might if you waited to put your oxygen mask on until all those around you had been taken care of—they spiritually or emotionally pass out. Perhaps more accurately, they end up being less functional because they have averted too many of their resources towards others. This is perhaps a particular concern for the submissive members of the BDSM community.

When I was in graduate school the faculty emphasized the importance of taking care of oneself in order to be available to give one’s best in taking care of another. Being in a profession that is highly susceptible to “compassion fatigue,” this was frequently repeated in all of my training experiences. However, for people for whom compassion and service toward others is their nature but are not in a “compassion profession” they are rarely taught the importance of self-care.

One of the barriers to awareness about self-care is the blurring of self-preservation or even self-interest and selfishness. I addressed this previously on this blog, but it is common enough of a phenomenon that it is worth repeating. Self-care is more akin to being responsible, than being selfish. Self-care (or equally self-preservation or self-interest) can as reasonably be seen as maintenance. The best service is offered by the best maintained machines. This is also true of people; we operate best when we take care of ourselves (first).

When we haven’t taken care of ourselves first, then we are prone to the effects of stress. We are more likely to get distracted, more likely to forget things, more likely to make bad decisions, and more likely to become irritable, rather than act in a loving manner. Taking care of others can actually increase one’s happiness. However, this is much less likely if the care feels like a burden rather than an act of kindness. If one is worn out or unfulfilled in his or her own life, then the care that is given—to a child, parent, partner, or friend—is more likely to generate feelings of resentment. This will in turn undermine both the relationship and the reward of the relationship. Subsequently, the quality of the care provided will suffer.

I do not want to promote selfishness under the guise of self-care, but I too often see people neglect themselves under the guise of caring for others. This actually seems more insidious than selfishness to me. I suppose what I would truly advocate is greater awareness in taking care of oneself, rather than putting others first. I would even suggest that to my sub (slave/boy) friends and clients—a good Dom/Master/Daddy needs to be aware of when his/her sub needs to care for himself/herself as well. So, if you find yourself providing a lot of service or care to another or others, check with yourself to make sure that your needs are being met too. You will be able to provide better care and service if you do.

Saturday, September 24, 2011

Friendship is Not an a la Carte Option

I recently received an email from a client that asked “why should I continue to try to be friends with people, when people will invariably disappoint me?”

Generally, from what I see with my clients, isolation and loneliness are more damaging and more painful than disappointment. One of our core needs is the need to be accepted, to belong. When we isolate ourselves from others because we find it difficult to tolerate disappointment, then we deny ourselves getting this need met. Without this need we are not whole. Belongingness and acceptance are not things we can provide for ourselves, and are only truly available from others. In fact, former head of the American Psychological Association Abraham Maslow argued that our self-acceptance is grounded on feeling a sense of acceptance by others.

If we refuse to allow others to occasionally disappoint us (because of earlier experiences in which disappointment was associated with real needs—like food, shelter, affection), then we insure that some of our needs will go unmet. We may become so starved for belongingness and acceptance that we perceive the disappointment as rejection—being valued is seen in rather all-or-nothing terms. Sometimes our friends really do care about us but do not know how to show it in a way that we can perceive. Sometimes we have to lovingly invite a conversation about it how feels when we are disappointed.

Sometimes our friends seem unable to change the behavior that disappoints us. Then we have a choice. We have to decide if the behavior that offends weighs more than the value that the friendship offers. Often times a big part of what makes the behavior offensive is that we cannot understand it. Developing compassion for why our friends are unable to change their behavior (right now)—or at least what motivates the behavior—may make the offending behavior easier to tolerate. It may also be worth recognizing that the behavior does not mean the same thing to the friend as it does to you. Sometimes the behavior is just a quirk. It might also be worth remembering that we disappoint our friends too—hey, nobody’s perfect.

There are also times when we experience a friend’s behavior as genuinely intolerable. Sometimes our friends’ behavior is damaging or exploitive to us. Even if their friendship offers us something good, we may need to sever the friendship. It is important to balance self-preservation and growing to be more compassionate of others. There is no simple answer here.

The psychological reward from friendships is in the sense of companionship and having a confidant. Friendships should make us feel better about ourselves. Friendships have been shown to improve one’s mental health, physical health, and longevity. If what you have a is a real friendship, then the disappointing parts are probably worth finding a way to not be bothered by them, but if the “friendship” does not build you up and make you feel more sure of yourself, then it might be time to move on. Either way, we cannot get the good without the bad.

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Self–Esteem vs. self-esteem


"I'm good enough. I'm smart enough. And doggone it,
people like me."
Stuart Smalley

In the last few decades there has been a movement toward an “everyone is great” attitude. This idea was (not so?) subtly addressed in the move The Incredibles. Syndrome points out the problem with this position when he says that “when everyone is super, no one will be.” This idea is repeated when Dash is graduating from the 4th to 5th grade and Mr. Incredible says “It's psychotic! They keep creating new ways to celebrate mediocrity.” After a while Self-Esteem becomes grounded in nothing, and consequently also becomes meaningless.

The claim that one is special becomes as empty as Stuart Smalley’s affirmations. Affirmations have been shown to be an effective tool to change one’s thinking—BUT ONLY when the person can actually believe the affirmation. Otherwise, affirmations are as likely to reinforce the idea that one falls short of the very thing he or she is trying to believe or achieve. This is what happens when we build up Self-Esteem in the absence of any foundation for it. In fact, telling people that they great in the absence of a basis (e.g., actual achievement) has been shown to be detrimental to both performance and emotional wellbeing. Martin Seligman, one of the leading researchers on happiness, has claimed that the increased interest on Self-Esteem has actually led to increased occurrence of depression. However, high Self-Esteem has been correlated with better performance, initiative, and happiness. People with high Self-Esteem tend to be more comfortable in social interactions. Consequently, Self-Esteem as a psychological phenomenon has become rather controversial.

When I talk about self-esteem with clients I talk about it terms of what do they actually value about themselves, or what do they feel that they have that they can contribute or that will draw people toward them. Self-esteem gives one a sense that he or she will be accepted (or is acceptable); this is essential to one of our fundamental needs—belongingness. It allows us to take risks, both a good and bad thing, because we less fear rejection. In my experience, valuing something specific about oneself makes a difference. Few of us believe claims (especially about ourselves) in the absence of evidence.

I see many clients who are anxious or depressed because they lack initiative or confidence and socially isolate themselves specifically because they do not recognize what they have to offer. I try to get them to list the traits they perceive in themselves and then help them recognize how some of those traits may be valuable to others. I ask them what they like about themselves. Sometimes I have them ask important others in their lives what those people like about them. This sometimes helps the client see that a trait he or she did not recognize as valuable is in fact valuable to others—and will consequently promote acceptance and belongingness.

This is a technique that many of us could benefit from. Make a list of what about you is valuable and keep it around for those times when you become less certain about how likable you might be. Just make sure these are traits that you believe (a) are valuable to others, and (b) that you actually have. It can be good to proud of oneself, as long as one is proud of something about oneself. That makes for healthy, beneficial self-esteem.

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Lessons on Love from Country Music

And now I'm glad I didn't know
The way it all would end the way it all would go
Our lives are better left to chance I could have missed the pain
But I'd of had to miss the dance
“The Dance” by Garth Brooks

Had I known my heart would break
I would've loved you anyway
“I Would’ve Loved You Anyway” by Trisha Yearwood

Many of my clients laugh at me because I tend to quote country music songs to help them see the ways in which they are getting in their own way. A kinky, well-educated, gay man from the Northeast looking to redneck music for wisdom? Regardless of what one thinks about country music, there is wisdom in those lyrics. Both of these songs are about the pain of having lost love and embracing the idea that to have avoided the pain, they also would have had to avoid the joy. I fully believe that in order to be available for love, we must also be available for pain.

Around the time that I went back to college I met a really wonderful man, Frederick. We tricked and I fell for him, hard. He had a T-cell count of 17. This was before protease inhibitors, and I realized that most likely if we started dating I might fall in love with a man and then watch him die. I thought as seriously about on what I might miss out by not being in a relationship with him. We ended up dating for about 5 years, really wonderful years. We grew in different directions and we are now both with different boyfriends. I am so glad that I took the risk of loving a “dying man” and had the wisdom to see that the potential joy outweighed the potential pain.

A few years later I was faced with a similar situation. I met a wonderful man, Dwayne, who was HIV+ and had a T-cell count of 4—and this was after protease inhibitors were released. I again thought as much about what I might miss out on by passing up on this “dying man.” I made the same decision and we began dating. He died about 8 months later from opportunistic infections. It was excruciating for me. It was the right choice nonetheless. I sure wish we had gotten more time together, but I am grateful for the time we did get.

I like to explain to my clients that the “hole” in our walls through which love passes is the same “hole” through which pain passes. We don’t get to choose the level of intensity of our individual emotional experiences. We either experienced life with muted emotions—usually longing for greater joy, or we experience life with full-contact emotions—good and bad. I always recommend to treat life as full contact. From what I have seen with clients and friends, the stunted emotional life is usually more damaging than the fully experienced pain of life—though I recognize this can be rough too. Love is risky business; potentially wonderfully rewarding risky business.

To quote another country song: “when you get the choice to sit it out or dance, I hope you dance.”

Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Dual and Dueling identities

I have recently experienced my 15 minutes of fame with a New York Times Magazine article. The issue that this exposure has concerned is my recognition that someone may experience his or her religious identity as strongly as his or her sexual orientation identity and that it might be necessary to help a client embrace his or her religious identity, and bracket (set aside) his or her sexual orientation identity. As you can imagine, this is a controversial idea.

Many GLB people undergo an extremely difficult struggle to accept their sexual orientation. Often this struggle involves dismissing a set of religious beliefs, and frequently accepting an alternative set of religious beliefs (and occasionally an outright rejection of religious beliefs). The people that make a successful acceptance of their sexuality and modify their religious beliefs experience their sexuality as unchangeable and their religious beliefs as changeable. They are able to establish dual identities for their sexuality and their religion. For most of us this seems logical.

I identify as a gay white man. This is at the core of who I understand myself to be. It feels unchangeable. It is at the essence of who I am. It is upon which much of the rest of my identity (e.g., socialist, activist, and atheist) is hung. I experience the parts of my identity that hang upon the core as changeable —I don’t expect them to change, but I can at least imagine them doing so. I suspect that many GLB people that have accepted their sexuality (and particularly those that have adopted a new religious belief system) relate to this understanding of myself.

However, what if the core of my identity was as a Christian white man? What if I felt that my particular version of my Christianity felt like my core? What if I felt that this was unchangeable, that it was at the essence of who I am, and upon which all the rest of my identity was hung? Most GLB people have had to teach others that their sexuality was at their core and unchangeable—this is an experience that I bring in dealing with clients for whom their religious belief feels as unchangeable and essential to one’s personhood as my sexuality does for me.

Though I identify as an atheist, I sincerely respect people’s right to their religious beliefs. I am aware of the empirical research that shows that having certain religious aspects in one’s life improves both quality of life and longevity. It seems that for me to encourage someone to reject, rather than embrace, one’s religion would be inappropriate and perhaps even irresponsible as a mental health professional.

When I work with a client who experiences religious-sexuality conflict, I first try to identify the importance of the client’s specific religious beliefs or how flexible he or she might be about his or her religious beliefs. If I can help a client find balance in his or her religion and sexuality—and there are many religious traditions today that are compatible with a GLB identification—that is the direction in which I will try to point the client. But when a client has an inflexible belief in the fundamental nature of his or her religious convictions my pushing an alternative understanding of scripture is only going to further alienate the client or add to the internal conflict. Neither of these are healthy pursuits in counseling.

I do not believe that in assisting a client bracket his or her sexuality I am helping a client on a path toward genuine happiness, satisfaction, or fulfillment. But I do hope to help the client reduce the active tension and conflict in his or her life. I hope to help the client achieve more (if not absolute) peace. I value personal authenticity as a mental health goal, but I would rather have a client in inauthentic resolution and alive and functioning, than forced between a choice of suicide or what feels like an impossible authenticity, stuck in a state of dueling identities.

Monday, June 27, 2011

Gay Pride

This weekend was Gay Pride in Houston. I did not participate. Not because I am not proud of myself for standing up to homophobia and living as an out gay man. Not because I am not proud of the accomplishments of GLBT people. Not because I am not proud of my GLBT culture. In fact, I very much am proud of all that. But in Houston—I have found—Gay Pride is grounded in how mainstream we are. This actually feels more like shame to me than pride.

The parade here consists more of church and employee groups than independent gay organizations. The so-called “fringe” of the gay community does not seem to be particularly welcome as part of Gay Pride in Houston. In the 6 years I have been in Houston there has only once been a leather organization in the parade. The organization that was invited is primarily heterosexual. In order for leather to be in our parade, it too had to be mainstreamed by being largely straight-identified.


I am a gay leatherman. A large part of my gay identity is tied into the fact that I embrace an alternative sexuality, that I am specifically not mainstream. I intentionally sexualize my gay identity. I am proud to push the boundaries of what is acceptable sexuality—not just for GLBT people, but for all people.

In the 1970s when Gay Pride began, we were proud to be sexual outlaws. We were proud to be challenging the gender and sexual norms. I am still proud to be challenging social norms to be more flexible and more inclusive. In 1990 Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen published After the Ball, a book about how the GLBT community could gain acceptance through presenting a mainstream persona. In this After the Ball era, Gay Pride has taken on a role of trying to make our community look like it fits gender and sexual norms, rather than make a statement that an alternative to this was equally valid.

The GLF (Gay Liberation Front), the organization that formed the first Gay Pride celebrations, was adamantly opposed to gay marriage. They viewed gay marriage as the GLB community forsaking what made our culture great—our alternative views of sexuality and gender. As gays gain the right to marry today, I do not expect us to conform to the traditionally-defined monogamous version of marriage. I expect us to redefine what marriage means. Marriage is about commitment, but commitment as defined as an intention to be there for another—nothing about sexual exclusivity or sexual normalcy.

We are a community that has been oppressed based on our sexuality—an adult theme. The celebration of our community, culture, and accomplishments should not have to be “family-friendly.” The celebration of our sexuality should be radical to honor the radical nature of our sexuality and gender. Our community is unified by being sexual and gender outlaws, regardless of how mainstream we might individually live our lives. I have taken as my daily mission to teach the world that my radical sexuality—as non-family friendly as it might be—is as right (morally, psychologically, biologically, etc.) as mainstream or traditional sexuality. I hope more members of the GLBT community remember our roots and that if we are going to truly celebrate Gay Pride, then we need to celebrate the breadth of the community, not just the so-called “acceptable” parts of it.

Monday, June 20, 2011

Honor Thy Father

Being the day after Father’s Day I figured this might be a timely topic. A phenomenon that I see over and over again with my clients, primarily—but not exclusively—male clients, is living one’s life or making decisions based on what would make one’s father happy or proud. There is nobility in this quest, but I more often see the damage from the pursuit.

Whether we are Christian or not, the Commandment of “honor thy father” is pervasive (and unavoidable?) in American culture. It is incorporated into the cultural norm and ethos of American life and the definition of family. Frequently “honor” is translated in terms of “obey,” or even please, one’s father. Biblical scholars differ on the true interpretation of the commandment. Some have argued honor is simply to express gratitude.

I can see where all of these approaches to honoring one’s father are valid and worthy, though I am most inclined toward a gratitude approach. But I think there is an inherent assumption in the directive (whether Christian or American cultural) that gets tragically ignored, which is: if your father warrants honor. It is utterly nonsensical to honor a father that does not warrant honor (or even respect). Yet, these are frequently the very fathers that I see clients damaging themselves by trying to honor by trying to make them proud or happy. Sometimes the clients no longer even have contact with their fathers and still have an orientation toward trying to please them.

I have great dad. He is flawed, but he is actually a truly loving, caring and respectful man. We have had our differences—I severed all contact with my parents for three years over conflict I had with my parents, but having resolved those conflicts now I sincerely enjoy his company and admire him. My dad has a voracious appetite for historical non-fiction that I downright envy. He has a great sense of humor that I do not have to envy because I he passed that down to me. I feel that he genuinely wants to see me succeed, not just so that he can look at me as his success, but for my own happiness.

That last aspect is noteworthy. It was something that I had to learn about my father. My misunderstanding of this was also at the core of the conflict that drove me away many years ago. Either the misunderstanding of this for many of my clients, or the reality that my clients’ fathers want them to be a success for his vicarious sense of accomplishment is what I see as setting up many of my clients for failure in this pursuit. We cannot accomplish success for our fathers if it means that we are inauthentic—it will never be real and it will never be enough.

If you feel that you are astray, ask yourself to what degree are you making choices that don’t feel right because you are either trying to “honor” your father, or deliberately rejecting the demand to honor him. So much of the substance abuse that I have seen has been due to rejection of the path to a father’s honor that the person felt as impossible or inappropriate for the person himself or herself. The healthiest way to honor one’s father is to succeed at being authentic—living the life YOU can be proud of and experiencing your own happiness. This is a great gratitude-based way to honor your father for what he actually gave you (even if sometimes fathers don’t themselves recognize it).

I am fortunate that my father is proud of MY experience of success and that I have come to recognize that. I wish this for everyone—and if it is not real, live as if it is. Thanks dad!

Saturday, June 4, 2011

The Miss Fizzy Phenomenon

My boyfriend used to have a cat named Miss Fizzy. As I understand the story, Miss Fizzy was a rescue cat and was very thin and starved when she came into the care of my boyfriend. In his household she had ready access to food. This, it seems, was a huge change for Miss Fizzy. In response to the presence of food, following a lifetime of scarcity of food, Miss Fizzy gorged herself on every occasion and became an obese cat.

My boyfriend and I moved to Houston about 6 years ago and struggled to gain an economic foothold. He does small project construction and has spent years slowly developing a steady stream of clients, scraping for work along the way; he was in a constant state of anxiety about from where his next job would come. Similarly, I opened my practice and spent the next 3 months sitting my office waiting for the phone to ring. My practice picked up and after about 3 years I was finally bringing in enough money to pay my bills most months. We spent the first 5½ years in Houston in our own version of starving.

Within the last 4 months my boyfriend has had steady work and is now scheduling clients about a month out. During February and March I started to have record weeks with regard to number of clients I was seeing each week. Suddenly after a Houston lifetime of scarcity of income, we find ourselves with ample opportunity for income. He has been engaging in 50 to 60-hour physical labor weeks and I have been scheduling more clients than was my goal to see in a week. So like Miss Fizzy, we appear to be gorging on income opportunities. In fact, it seems we could work ourselves into our own version of poor health if we are not careful.

The temptation for what has been absent is great. Part of the motivation comes from the fear that the opportunities will not last: How do I know that there will still be some later, so I had better grab all that I can now. A gluttonous period following famine is natural, but it can also be unhealthy—the body needs to gradually adjust to the change. Consequently, I have imposed limits on myself with regard to how many hours a week I will see clients. I know that I may need to even adjust that down once the sense of scarcity has faded in order to protect my health.

The Miss Fizzy Phenomenon can affect people in a number of ways. One of the ways to which my boyfriend and I are particularly sensitive is spending—suddenly having disposable income after 5 years is REALLY tempting. But another common version of this which I see with clients is sexually. When someone leaves a relationship or when someone changes their body (e.g. weight loss or body building) and can screw around, he or she can binge on sex or sexual novelty, which may have felt scarce during the relationship or when one did not find himself or herself attractive. Unfortunately, this type of sexual gorging often leaves someone feeling empty—and frequently increases his or her pursuit of sex. There are, of course, too many other ways in which one can gorge following deprivation to enumerate here.

I think many of us experience sudden access to something that previously felt scarce at some point in our lives. When this happens keep Miss Fizzy in mind. Be mindful of the gorging in which you engage. Attend to the effect on both your body and your mind and pace yourself.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction

Frederick Herzberg proposed that job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction are two different things, rather than just two ends of the same continuum. Roughly, he suggested that job satisfaction is related to the inspirational (one’s sense of mission) and internally rewarding (sense of achievement) aspects of a job and that job dissatisfaction is related to the burden (policies) and externally rewarding (benefits) aspects of a job. In talking with clients about their feelings toward their job, I use his theory in at least an exploratory way to facilitate discussion and thinking. Ideally one wants to experience high job satisfaction and low job dissatisfaction. While evidence suggests that the two ideas are not as independent as Herzberg claimed, there is some support for the differential effects of the factors.

In exploring with a client if his or her job is satisfying, I look at what Herzberg called motivation factors: challenging work, opportunity for growth, recognition, responsibility, and personal sense of achievement. A lot of this is task based—“do you enjoy what you are doing in your job?” or “how do you feel about the work (not the job) specifically?” This can include how one feels about the overall importance of one’s work: doing research on the impact of mining on the environment may be very rewarding in itself, but not feel as good if it is for a mining company that is using the information to skirt or exploit environmental protection laws. Job satisfaction appears to be grounded in life-job values. Job satisfaction appears to be associated with how much one aspires in his or her work.

When helping a client explore what feels bothersome about a job, I try to look at what Herzberg refers to as hygiene factors: work environment/corporate culture, hours, working condition, job security, salary (compensation), and fringe benefits. A lot of this is workplace based—“how do you feel treated by your employer?” or “how much do you enjoy your coworkers?” This relates more to job stress: enjoying a task and feeling that it will make a real difference may be very rewarding in itself, but not feel as good if you are constantly behind schedule or working long hours every day. Job dissatisfaction appears to be grounded in how fairly one feels treated. Job dissatisfaction appears to be associated with much one engages in sabotage, theft, or loafing at work.

In working with clients I have also extrapolated the idea onto overall quality of life, as life satisfaction and life dissatisfaction and have found this useful as well (if not actually scientifically founded). Life satisfaction analogously relates to how inspired one is in his her life, while life dissatisfaction is analogous to how burdened or stressed out one feels.

I help clients explore if they are feeling challenged, experiencing personal growth, feel connected, or feel that they are making a difference in their personal lives. In other words, is one socially and intellectually stimulated and rewarded. Similarly, I inquire if clients feel that their lives are monotonous or they feel that they are laboring at what they do outside of work. Ideally, our interpersonal relationships feel fulfilling and that we have some purpose.

In exploring relative levels of life satisfaction I often ask the question as “are you living or simply waiting to die?” A “simply waiting to die” stance suggests low life satisfaction, but also low life dissatisfaction—it is more like numbness. I then try to work with a client to find a sense of purpose or meaning—something to live for or work toward. If a client expresses enthusiasm for life, but also feeling bogged down, that usually suggests that they have high life satisfaction, but also high life dissatisfaction. With a client like this is often a matter of removing what feels like obstacles—often obstacles with which he or she has become comfortable or has come to depend on. Clients both low in life satisfaction and high in life dissatisfaction frequently experience a sense of helplessness/hopelessness—they feel burdened by being alive and without any reason to be alive. These are, of course, the clients that scare me the most and are most challenging. With them I need to work with them to both develop a sense of purpose and simultaneously develop a sense that improvement in life is possible.

How satisfied and dissatisfied are you in your job and in your life? Looking at these ideas as separate things rather than ends of a singular continuum may help you recognize areas of your job or life that you want to improve or change.

Wednesday, March 9, 2011

My Personal Lent

Today is the beginning of Lent and I have been thinking about Lent a lot recently. I did not grow up in a religious tradition that celebrated Lent, but the town in which I grew up was about 75% Catholic, so I was exposed to the idea as a child. Many of my classmates gave up chocolate for Lent. I am not sure how many of my elementary school classmates knew what the purpose of the “fasting” was. I was raised in a Baptist tradition in which the idea of making a sacrifice for the Lord for only 40 days (depending on how you count) was offensive and that true repentance meant making the sacrifice year round. I think this indoctrination is part of what led me to reject the concept of Lent for so many years.

In the last few years I have come to have a great appreciation for the idea of Lent, within in my own conceptualization of it. In looking at the meaning/purpose of Lent, I see a lot of good that can be applicable to people who do not engage in this religious practice, but perhaps do see themselves as spiritual. In recently discussing with a client a behavior that she feels she needs to give up, we have been talking about the possibility of her giving up the behavior for Lent and taking this period to reflect upon what role she wants this behavior to play in her life. The idea is that the abstinence/fasting will allow her to see more clearly the role that this behavior does play in her life and see what it might be like without it or, at least, with it in much more moderate or appropriate ways.

In talking about this refraining from behavior, we have talked about it in terms of not just being a fresh start, but in terms of repentance and cleansing her spirit, or at least giving her spirit a rest. We have talked about the fasting in terms of something she can do for her soul—to stop dumping toxicity into her body/self through this behavior. We dump toxicity into our bodies/selves when we invite drama into our lives, not just when we put into our bodies substances that hurt our bodies. We have talked about repentance, not in terms of repenting of sins done unto God, but rather sins done unto oneself.

Another common part of the Lent celebration is prayer. The purpose of prayer is to get one closer to the spirit, traditionally God. If prayer is not the way you connect to your spirit, you can engage in a variety of behaviors that helps you get closer in touch with your own spirit as well. Meditation, for example, is often a quieting of the mind in which extraneous or damaging thoughts are chased away and one focuses on one’s self—it is a communing with oneself, as it were—promoting mindfulness. Recitation or affirmation of the goal can also be prayer-substitute behaviors that can be other ways of connecting the mind and body. Within a non-religious approach “prayer” can be an act of deliberate self-reflection.

I have twice decided to give up deserts/sweet baked goods for an extended period (3 months), not so much in repentance for the sin of cake-eating, but to get back into a better relationship with my body. I have engaged in my Lent-like behavior when I discovered that I was eating deserts at a rate that threatened my health (I am diabetic) and experienced this habit as out of synch with my spirit. In other words, I was not living in accordance with how I see myself and was experiencing internal discomfort with this. I have taken the opportunity during my “Lent” to evaluate my relationship with deserts and my body and consider patterns that are more in accordance with how I want to live following my “Lent” period. I am in the midst of such a Lent-based evaluation of my behavior right now as I reconsider with what frequency and under what conditions do I want to allow myself sweets. My “Lent” followed a period of indulgence (my Mardi Gras, of sorts) of desert consumption during the holiday season. While in this fasting, the temptation of desert seems to be ever present, but each opportunity for desert allows me to look at what role desert plays in my life and what role I would like it to play.

Just as I did not begin my “Lent” on Ash Wednesday, you do not have to begin your period of self-reflective fasting at any particular time—the date is rather arbitrary. But if you are feeling that a persistent behavior of yours in causing you distress, then you may want to consider engaging in an extended fast of that behavior in which you observe and reflect upon what role and impact that behavior is having in your life. I do not imagine that I will give up desert forever after my “Lent,” but I expect to establish a behavior that better suits my intentions and relationship with my body. If I lose the path again, as I did after my last “Lent,” you can again engage in a reflective fast, in your own personal “Lent” at anytime.

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Our Dirty Little Secret, So What?

Part 3: Undermining Commitment

I recently wrote about non-monogamy being gay men’s dirty little secret. This is the third and final part of my response to why it matters that it is a dirty little secret. My intent is not to cast a negative light non-monogamy, but rather to encourage that we talk, individually and collectively, about what this means for us. We have forged a working model of the gay male relationship without very good prototypes grounded in the open-mindedness for which the GLBT community is known and which incorporates male sexuality. As we close in on having our relationships recognized on par with heterosexual marriage I would like us to again come out of the shadows about relationships and have open dialogue promoting the development of ways to cope with the particular challenges of these relationships.

Many of us were taught that committing to someone means not having sex with anybody but your single primary love partner. Yet many people in non-monogamous relationships consider themselves in committed relationships. So how do you know if your partner is committed to you in this situation? This question can be especially important during the beginning stages of a relationship or during times of turmoil. This is something that many non-monogamous couples need to figure out that monogamous couples generally do not.

Non-monogamous relationships need to deal with many of the threats that monogamous couples grapple with, but with a twist. Bed-death (the decline or disappearance of sex within a relationship) can happen in both monogamous and non-monogamous relationships. I know of a number of couples in which both partners are having plenty of sex, just not with each other. When sex is so readily available outside the relationship, sex within the relationship sometimes becomes “boring” and may even cease to be a part of the relationship. Few relationships remain strong when the solitary (or even primary) source of sex is from outside the relationship. The emotional bond may remain strong, but is the relationship still a romantic relationship, or is it more like best friends? How do we deal with the draw of sexual variety available in open relationships such that we do not lose the sexual connection with our partners? The sexual element in monogamous relationships is fostered by the availability of sex only within the relationship, non-monogamous relationships are not buoyed by this.

The loss of sex as a bond can also undermine the sense of commitment. This can become especially threatening if one of the partners finds someone with whom he does enjoy having sex with and enjoys spending non-sexual time with. Even non-monogamous relationships can be subject to affairs, and with the open boundaries perhaps even more at risk.

It is not uncommon for someone to act out sexually when there is conflict in the relationship. Conflict is a common driving force in failures of fidelity in monogamous relationships. It also is a rather unhealthy way to deal with relationship conflict. Non-monogamous relationships make this option even easier and more subtle. How can you differentiate between horny play outside the relationship and sex that is venting unresolved relationship conflict—which is likely to foster the conflict, rather than act as a catharsis for the tension?

I have a friend who is a dad and was in a committed relationship of 8 years. He also likes to trick a lot. His relationship with his partner was explained to his son as being equivalent to his mom’s relationship with his step-father. Only his mother and step-father did not have a train of guys coming through for casual sex. So how do we explain or manage our extra-relationship sexual exploits when our children stay with us or our elderly parents move in? The special form and dynamics of non-monogamous relationships can be hard to explain to people outside of the community, whether they be family or colleague. One of the benefits of having our relationships validated in society is that we can look for support from our friends and families. We likely will not be able to fully utilize our support systems if what we seek support about is something that we feel we cannot share.

I firmly believe that non-monogamy is not in itself a threat to gay male relationships, but rather the ways in which we deal with (or ignore) the unique challenges of these relationships is a threat. Unless we open up a dialogue about these issues we will not know how to deal with them or each couple will have to invent their own way to address the concern. Unless we develop healthy ways to deal with the unique challenges of our relationships our dirty little secret will matter.

Monday, February 21, 2011

Our Dirty Little Secret, So What?

Part 2: Jealousy and Feeling Special

I recently wrote about non-monogamy being gay men’s dirty little secret. This is the second part of my response to why it matters that it is a dirty little secret. My overall concern is that by not being open about this aspect of our relationships—beyond simply acknowledging that non-monogamy is the norm among gay male relationships, but not discussing how this affects us—we will not and cannot form healthy ways of dealing with the particular challenges. In my previous response, I focused on the particular challenges of health and physical harm. Here I want to focus on how not talking about how we react to the specific behaviors of non-monogamy can cause hurt, and eventually resentment.

Jealousy, envy, and self-esteem are concerns for just about any relationship. But for non-monogamous relationships they may take on greater intensity. In monogamous relationships there are pretty clear boundaries on acceptable flirting and sexual behavior. In non-monogamous relationships the boundary is less inherently clear. I think all of us have found ourselves in a conversation with friends in which one person claims that oral sex does not count as sex with another person claiming that it does. In traditionally monogamous relationships you pretty much know that you are staying away from everyone else’s genitalia and keeping your genitalia away from everybody else. But in non-monogamous relationships there can be a lot of different facets to negotiate with regard to what is acceptable behavior and what is not. There may not be agreement on what is acceptable, respectful flirting or sexual behavior. How does one know he is going to hurt his partner unless this is discussed in advance?

Whom a partner plays around with can also be a point of tension. It can be a little upsetting if your partner plays with a guy that you are really hot for, but have not been able to land. Or your partner might end up playing with a guy that you don’t like, or even your ex—for many of us this could feel a little annoying. If your partner plays with a lot of guys and you are more selective you might find yourself feeling devalued. Sometimes we end up tricking with someone who mistakes the encounter for more than a trick. If that trick tries to impose himself into your relationship, then that is likely to cause a bit of stress.

I think we all want to feel special, especially to our partner. Many gay guys have had, or will have, over 1,000 partners in their lifetime. If you sleep around a lot, your partner may at times feel like he is nothing more than one in a line of guys for you—the one that it is convenient for you to sleep with regularly. Differences in libido, taste, style, and the type of person one attracts can make the openness of the relationship feel unfair. The difference in attention that each partner gets while you both are out in public can also be a problem. It is not uncommon for someone to find one member of a couple attractive and not the other, which can cause one partner to be the center of attention while his partner feels shoved to the side. In monogamous relationships neither of the partners are prey and this dynamic really doesn’t develop.

There can be additional pressure on the relationship from the secretive aspect of them. One of the great accomplishments for the GLBT community in the last 30 years has been our ability to be open about who we are and who our primary love interest is. This freedom has relieved a great deal of community stress. But for many of us, we still feel the need to keep this characteristic of our relationships secret and would feel uncomfortable if people knew that part of us. Maintaining secrets drains us of psychological energy. Most of us would feel comfortable going to a therapist to discuss the lack of sharing of chores within our relationships, but few of us would feel perfectly comfortable going to a therapist to discuss the fact that differences in tricking behaviors between us and our partners has become a point of conflict. Without talking about this, at least between partners, leaves the couple vulnerable to unintentionally hurting one another, which will eventually develop into resentment.

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

Our Dirty Little Secret, So What?

Part 1: Health and Physical Harm

I recently wrote about non-monogamy being gay men’s dirty little secret. So what? The problem with being unwilling to talk about the nature of our relationships means we do not deal with the particular challenges of non-monogamous relationships. Let me clarify that I do not mean to imply that non-monogamous relationship have more or harder challenges than monogamous relationships, simply that our relationships have unique challenges that are not addressed in all the self-help books on (monogamous) relationships or the couples counseling training that most therapists receive. Without talking about these specific challenges, one cannot address and solve them though. By bringing the truth of our relationships out from the shadow and into the light, we can begin to deal with our relationships in the same healthy ways that people in monogamous relationships do.

Non-monogamous relationships face health and safety concerns that monogamous relationships don’t face. Perhaps the most obvious concern is STDs. Even if both partners are HIV+ there is the risk of re-infection by a different strain of the virus that can compromise the effectiveness of one’s treatment. Syphilis, Herpes, and Chlamydia are all common in the gay community and, despite the availability of medical treatment, these diseases can cause real problems. Even if you know your partner is playing around with other guys, it can still be pretty disturbing for him to bring an STD into the relationship. Monogamous relationships have a much lower risk of this. Fooling around with a bunch of guys can even bring more flu and cold viruses into the relationship as well. As minor as that can be, it can also cause extra stress.

One of the advantages of monogamous relationships is that you no longer have to worry about psycho tricks. Monogamous couples are almost never attacked or killed by strangers they took home for sex. This obviously happens pretty infrequently with non-monogamous couples as well, but it does happen. I like a guy who looks a little edgy. Many of us fantasize about, or even bring home, rough trade. But some of the most respectable looking guys are also the most dangerous (Andrew Cunanan was rather presentable and he killed four gay men before killing Versace). Sometimes when I (or we) have had a trick over I worry about what he might steal. I usually assume that my partner and I could probably take down a stranger we brought home for sex if he physically threatened us—even though I know nothing about the guy’s fighting skills or whether he is armed. By being in non-monogamous relationships we give up some of the safety gained in monogamous relationships.

Another concern can be whether one’s partner is engaging is dangerous sex acts when you are not around to help him, should something go wrong. When my partner and I play with another I always make sure that anyone who fucks him wears a condom and share our rule of “cum on us, not in us” (I am rather old school in my safer-sex practices). Sometimes the reason for the open relationship is because one partner has a fetish that is not shared. Sometimes that fetish (e.g., bondage, flogging, electro-stimulation, fisting) has specific physical risks. In realty, we hear little about scenes with strangers going wrong and causing physical harm. In my field, I probably hear about it a little more—people are more likely to tell an open-minded therapist bound by a confidentiality agreement than their friends.

Though few of us take on these concerns on a daily basis for our partner, the risk itself can sometimes cause stress within the relationship. Ever worry about your partner when he was off playing with someone else? Ever worry about a quirky trick you (or you and your partner) brought home? This type of worrying is part of the human condition—at least in the mild form. The threats we experience are real and there can be a real affect from those threats—even when the threat is never realized. When we are more honest and open about the true nature of our relationships we can better alleviate or manage these threats. We can share ideas about how to best protect ourselves and reduce the threat and the stress.

Monday, February 7, 2011

Non-Monogamy: The Truth about Gay Male Relationships

A few years ago my parents visited the Ripcord with me and my partner where they saw guys, some of whom are in relationships, hug and kiss each other rather freely. After we left my mom asked me why guys did not get jealous and claimed that in the heterosexual community the same behavior would basically lead to fights. My partner and I explained that because it is the cultural norm for the gay community we know that (usually) it is simply an expression of friendly affection and not a romantic or even sexual advance.

Another way in which our cultural norms are different is that the majority of our relationships are not monogamous. A study a few years back found that 66% of couple gay men reported that they had had sex with someone besides their partner within the first year of the relationship. The same study found that within 5 years of a relationship 90% of coupled gay men had had sex with someone other than his partner. Another study found that 50% of the gay male couples who entered into same-sex unions in Vermont did not value sexual fidelity. When I have been in monogamous relationships with another man my friends occasionally ridiculed me, or at least found it strange. Clearly, monogamous coupling is not the norm in the gay male community.

Okay, so what exactly is a non-monogamous relationship? When I talk about non-monogamous relationships I mean a situation in which someone has one (or more) primarily love interest(s) with whom he is not sexually exclusive. So, if you are in a relationship and you and your partner play together with other guys, then you are in a non-monogamous relationship. If you and your partner have sex with other guys when the other is not around, or “have an open relationship,” then you have a non-monogamous relationship. Technically, if you are in a closed relationship with more than one other person (polyamorous), even you all of you are sexually active only with each other, then you are in a non-monogamous relationship.

We do not talk about the non-monogamous aspect of our relationships much though. Sometimes our relationships are non-monogamous and we do not even admit it to each other. We will talk about the tricks that we have had, but rarely do we talk about the impact this feature of our relationship has on our relationship. After a series of relationships that were either monogamous or unspokenly non-monogamous, I am currently in my first openly non-monogamous relationship. Even though it has been a number of years, I am still a little fascinated by the whole idea. But I have only found one friend who will talk to me about how the non-monogamous aspect of his relationship operates and how it affects his relationship. Friends may admit to having a non-monogamous relationship, but they don’t talk about them. There are a number of books that address non-monogamy—especially polyamory—but the majority of these books are geared toward heterosexuals and few tackle the true challenges of open relationships, and even fewer address the gay male experience specifically.

I think, despite the pressure and support from within the culture for non-monogamous relationships, we are still a little embarrassed about our relationships. We have all been raised in a culture that says that monogamy is the correct way to have a relationship. Few of us share the fact that our relationships are non-monogamous with our friends or colleagues outside of our community. I think most of us would be horrified to see a non-monogamous gay male couple on mainstream TV. I feel comfortable bringing my parents to the Ripcord and they know that my partner and I are into leather, but even I am not sure I want them to know that I am in a non-monogamous relationship. After all, as a community, we have spent the last 20 years trying to convince society that our relationships are “just like theirs” in order to receive acceptance. It is like our dirty little secret.

Saturday, January 15, 2011

Selfishness or Self-preservation

I’ve had a lot of clients who struggle to take care of their own needs, instead sacrificing for another. When queried about this tendency they usually use the “selfish defense.” By the selfish defense I mean that they claim that they do not want to be selfish. When did taking care of oneself become “selfish,” instead of self-preservation? Self-preservation is actually a good thing. We all have fundament needs. Normally when we think of fundamental needs, we think of food water, shelter, and perhaps protection or safety. I think that fundamental needs also include the need to be respected, to have fun, to be treated fairly, even the need to be appreciated occasionally.

In Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. He separates human needs into B-needs and D-needs. The D-needs are defined as needs without which our lives are deficient and we will fail to thrive. The D-needs are further separated into four levels, physiological (food, water), safety (protection from the environment and from others), belongingness (being accepted by others), and then esteem (feeling good about oneself), with the lowest level being the most essential. He argued that we must get the lowest level of needs met (at least partially) before we pursue the higher level needs. The B-needs are essential to being human, they are the need for justice, beauty, harmony, truth, etc. These needs define the human experience as different from other animals. Maslow argued that we could thrive without our B-needs being met, but implied that we could not have a full human existence without some of our B-needs being met.

I think that the needs of respect, fun, fair treatment, and being appreciated are D-needs. Without their satiation, our needs for belongingness and esteem are not met. When we sacrifice these we are depriving ourselves of our own ability to thrive. Making sure that we are attended to is not selfish, it is self-preservation. Even in D/s (Dominance-submission) relationships the sub’s needs for are to be met. The service of the sub is given in exchange for having those needs met in other ways, usually through a healthy negotiation. When these fundamental needs are not met—in a D/s or vanilla relationship—then there is exploitation.

Exploitation is the hallmark of being selfish. Selfishness occurs when one is getting their needs (or desires) met at the sake of another, unnecessarily. When someone asks another to make sacrifices he or she is not willing to make himself or herself or that cause undue harm on another, then that person has crossed the line from self-preservation into selfishness. It is important to be cognizant of when one is engaging in self-preservation, selfishness, and self-detriment. The need for “love” (belongingness) will often lead us to sacrificing other aspects of belongingness and we end up with a false sense of belongingness—not acceptance for who we are, but rather what we can offer. You can know that you are truly being appreciated when people try to accommodate you, not when you busy accommodating another.

Esteem is grounded on having a sense of belongingness. A colleague once shared with me that his concept of self-esteem was “being known for who you are.” I would elaborate that self-esteem is being known for who are and recognizing that you are still loved. When we see that others appreciate us it makes it easier for us to appreciate ourselves. When we fail to take care of our fundamental needs, not just the two lowest levels of our needs (food, water, shelter and safety), we will fail to thrive. We are not doing good with this behavior; we are hurting the ones that do truly love us. We deprive them of our fullness, which (unlike self-preservation) is not a good thing.

Saturday, January 8, 2011

Plywood, OSB, MDF, and Masonite

I don’t do construction. In fact, the physical world sometimes baffles me (electricity is magic to me). But I know the difference between plywood, oriented strand board (OSB), medium density fiberboard (MDF), and masonite. I know that this is the order in which these types of boards are the densest and I have a working idea of how that affects the ways in which they need to be handled and can best be used in construction. This is information that in my daily life would be normally fairly useless to me. However, my having this information is actually vitally important to my relationship.

My boyfriend is in construction and these are the basic types of boards he regularly uses. He also likes to tell me about his day and the work that he does. When he tells me that he had to move 6 sheets of MDF that day, I know that he did some heavy lifting. I know what kind of dust he dealt with when he cut the wood. I know that most likely he worked in a space that is going to remain fairly dry (MDF is one of the wood products least noble to water). I know that he will probably be working with paint, instead of stain, soon (there is no wood grain in MDF, so stain really wouldn’t look good). As a consequence of all of this, I also know what type of questions to ask that will allow him to expand upon his day and how what he did today was important.

I often get clients who work in very different occupations than their partners. Many of them cannot explain the facets of their partner’s occupational life, or they have partners that cannot explain the facets of my clients’ occupational lives. They tend not to understand what the likely challenges are and what would qualify as a success in their partner’s field. They end up shut out of an important aspect of each other’s lives. They miss opportunities to understand the struggles that their partner might be experiencing at work and fail to be in a position to offer quality support or counsel.

Frequently, in these relationships I hear of larger communication problems, feelings of not being connected to one’s partner, or feelings of not being appreciated or validated. I also work with a lot of clients who are dealing with infidelity and affairs in their relationships. I do not think this is just a coincidence. I have found that becoming interested in the occupational life of your partner is actually likely to improve your relationship.

By not just listening to your partner when he or she talks about work, but actually learning about your partner’s world of work, you become more connected and you validate as meaningful the work that your partner does. Go beyond “how was your day?” When you receive the answer to that ask a follow up question. You can start by asking simple questions, along the lines of “what is that?” Allow your partner to educate you about what he or she does, who and what he or she does it with, and why what he or she does is important or how it fits into a larger mission. Ideally, your level of interest would become one in which you could ask meaningful questions and interpretations of what specific events mean when your partner shares them with you. What are the plywood, OSB, MDF, and masonite of your partner’s occupational life?

Saturday, January 1, 2011

New Year's Resolutions

This is the time of year when many people decide to make changes in their lives. We frequently resolve to do something differently, whether it is eating better or giving up a habit in which we would prefer not to engage. However, this is also a time of year in which people become frustrated with failing to make the changes in their lives that they want to make. In fact, sustaining the change is so difficult that how quickly a New Year’s resolution is broken has become a source of jokes.

Many people do not know how to make real changes in their behavior. This is not something that we are ever taught. I have frequently had clients tell me that it takes 28 days to form a habit, but none of them have been able to explain the science or reasoning behind that claim. In fact, I have never found that there is good science or reasoning behind the claim. But it suggests a belief that if one can simply change a behavior effortfully for 28 days, then he or she can develop a new habit. Ask an ex-smoker if after 28 days of not smoking they experience a behavioral inclination to smoke when they go to a bar (beyond the actual chemical craving), and see if 28 days is adequate for developing new habits. The truth is that there is no standard for when a behavioral change becomes permanent.

What does exist are well accepted theories of change that can be helpful in planning for and following through in changing behavior. Within in psychology, James Prochaska’s Transtheoretical Model for Change is the most widely used model for behavioral change. His model consists of stages: pre-contemplation, contemplation, planning, action, maintenance, and relapse. People in the pre-contemplation stage are not yet thinking about making a change. The people around them may think they should, but they do not feel that way themselves. People in the contemplation stage are thinking about making a change, but are still undecided if they want to follow through with it. Once someone decides he or she wants to make a behavioral change he or she moves into the planning stage. During this stage the person considers what actions will most likely facilitate a successful change. Once a plan is in place, a person begins making the behavioral change and therefore moves into the action stage.

People often choose the symbolic date of New Year’s Day to transition from the planning stage to the action stage. Unfortunately, many of them fail to actually complete the planning stage before moving into the action stage, and consequently move directly into the relapse stage, rather than move into the stage of maintenance. The maintenance stage is the marked by going through the deliberate actions that will form the new behavior as a habit. Relapse is when one engages in the old behavior after having entered the action stage. The maintenance stage is frequently punctuated by intermittent relapse stages. If a relapse stage lasts long enough, the whole cycle may need to be repeated.

Forming a new habit (which includes shedding an old habit) involves a change in brain anatomy and physiology. Biologically, habits can be thought of as well-established patterns of brain activity. The more one engages in a habit, the more easily the pattern is triggered. The establishment of an alternative habit is the process of establishing and strengthening a competitive pattern of brain activity. In Prochaskan terms, the maintenance stage is the deliberate effort of establishing the competitive pattern and relapse is reverting to the old pattern. The more deliberate practice in which someone engages, the stronger the new pattern gets and the weaker the old pattern becomes.

Both planning and patience are important in forming a new habit. To extinguish an old habit or acquire a new habit more successfully, think about specifically what you want the new habit to be. If trying to get rid of an old habit, think it terms of “instead of X, I will do Y” (not just “I do not want to do X”). Setting step-wise, specific, and measurable goals can help one feel a sense of accomplishment and therefore encouraged and reinforced. Addiction recovery is often thought of in terms of “one day at a time.” Adopting the perspective that your goal is to have the new habit today, instead of “from here on out,” can make the change feel less daunting. And appreciate the number of instances in which you are able to engage in the new habit. Recognize that relapse is a natural part of any behavioral change and allow yourself that. Do not give up when the old neurological pattern wins, instead just keep building the new pattern with deliberate effort.