Anger Management

A Thanksgiving Wish

I continue to be distressed by the tenor of what I see and hear, both on the news and on social media. No matter what asinine inanities emanate from his mouth, the perpetually pissed Donald Trump maintains his support among a disturbingly significant percentage of the population by playing on that anger. I would suggest, however, that he has plenty of company in almost all the candidates of both parties, even if they generally appear less bombastic and more soft-spoken (not much of a challenge IMO). 

Anger is also reflected in the many memes culled from Facebook, Twitter, and the myriad of other internet sources encouraging simple, dare I suggest simplistic, expressions of opinions. Even the purported humorous posts are too often predicated on a foundation of anger, political, racial, religious and more.

The thing is, I don’t see anger as being a solution to any problem. In fact, it interferes with the actual problem-solving process because it interferes with communication. Even if it may get your point across, at the same time it essentially attacks, and often insults, those who fail to agree with you.

I admit that in my early (allegedly) adult years I was not just a congregant at Our Lady of Righteous Indignation (OLRI), but also an evangelist, with some modicum of success even. Such an approach managed to work fairly well for the accumulation of power, but it was only after I backed away from that attitude and started working at accommodation and compromise that I actually became part of the solution team instead of a polarizing divider who exacerbated the problem(s).

Finding something to be angry about is not any particular challenge. We need look no further than the current Starbucks kerfuffle. The so-called “War on Christmas” is a fiction created and maintained by those who want to perpetuate anger at a direction of society that frightens them. That “war” is merely one front in the larger, and equally fictitious, “War on Christianity.” Or maybe even “War on Islam.” 

I admit to being naïve, but not so naïve that I deny that there are (too many of) those on the “other” side equally angry about the perceived intolerance of their beliefs, or even non-beliefs. And, of course, there is no shortage of (power hungry) potential leaders, also frequent flyers at OLRI, who can find a slight in almost anything, no matter how innocent an action or remark and then manipulate that slight to their advantage. Beware of such “leaders,” not just for your own sake but out of concern for the future of your country – and the world in which we all must live.

Our ongoing issues with race in this country feature people on both poles. Here's my question for them: “Is this a problem you want to, if not solve, at least ameliorate?” While I freely admit that racial animus has almost never been directed at me, I still maintain that anger is not your friend, or the friend of your cause, whatever cause that may be.

I understand frustration and discontent. I certainly experienced my share of both, back in the day (again, not racial, of course). Nor am I suggesting that those feelings be discounted or ignored by either allies or foes. But it is only human to react defensively when attacked, and anger directed at you or your friends is difficult to interpret as anything but an attack, even a personal one. Almost none of us are Mahatma Gandhi or Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., but I have no doubt that both of them had to work hard to suppress their (righteous and justifiable) anger, perhaps frequently. Nevertheless, they succeeded (slowly and incompletely, because problems of long-standing do not have simple, overnight solutions). How? They kept their anger under control and diverted the energy required to feed that non-productive emotion into building solutions instead of walls (both figurative and literal).

If more of us could find the strength to follow their model, that would truly be something for which to be thankful.

Holiday PSA: Politics and Family

It's not that simple....

    As the holidays come crashing down around us (Do yours sneak up on you? Wow, lucky you.), I am sharing once again this PSA on dealing with your relatives who are less enlightened or politically astute, and who have an apparently innate need to share their misguided opinions with you (with your best interests and edification in mind, of course).

The phrase that I plan to use and strongly recommend that you keep handy (aside from Happy Holidays or Merry Christmas or Happy Kwanzaa or Happy Hanukkah or whatever works in your family’s culture wars): “I don’t think it’s that simple.” Because, really, nothing is. You get to retain your claim to your beliefs without engaging in a no-win argument. “Agree to disagree” sounds dismissive, but most importantly, doesn’t work very well. At least it doesn’t in my family; that phrase tends only to inspire only additional louder voices and increasingly tedious arguments as the evening gets longer and the wine and beer supplies get shorter. Plus I can only go wash the dishes so many times before my absence becomes obvious.

My father used to tell me about a boss he had who was fond of saying, “When you find the answer it will be simple.” Because we seldom agreed on anything, I was always compelled to add, “… and wrong.” My father was a good man, and intelligent, but incapable of seeing any shades of grey. Like (apparently) many of his fellow citizens, he envisioned a world that conformed to his values and saw a straight path to that destination.

I don’t believe that even his world, back 75 or so years ago, was ever really that simple, but even had it been, I think most people would agree that it has become increasingly complicated and at an ever-accelerating rate. To ignore that fact makes you, well, President-elect Donald Trump. Simple solutions, as attractive as they might seem on the surface, ignore the Law of Unintended Consequences. (Of course, complicated solutions, with so many moving parts, generate their own, as well, perhaps on an even larger scale.)

Although I’m not going to convince my brothers any more than they’re going to convince me, “I don’t think it’s that simple” avoids the discussion becoming angry or personal, with the resultant (potential) hurt feelings. As I’ve noted before, talking about politics and religion is, almost by definition, personal because those topics deal with our most deeply held beliefs and world views.

I’ll let you know it works out. I’m hopeful, if not optimistic. But my solution, too, probably isn’t that simple.

Over 60 Workout

Physical fitness is, allegedly, an important component for a productive life. Based on my own experience, I think seniors should get daily life credit for physical fitness simply because staying alive requires most of the activities described below on a daily basis. Feel free to suggest others if I publish this prematurely out of fear that I’ll forget it.

I’ve already noted that I think the time it takes to put on my athletic shoes should count as part of my workout regimen. I’m calling that activity the “Socks Over Feet, Shoes Over Socks” Warm Up. It needs a name because otherwise I might forget the proper order and have to add it to Exercise #3, which carries enough reps on its own.

Let’s see what else is included in the Over 60 Workout. Large print format for obvious reasons.

The Over-60 Workout includes the following, none of which need to be done each and every day, but all of which you can count on repeating with regularity:*

1. Do Overs: 5-10 per day, the number of times you need to start over on something, because you forgot what you were doing, where you were doing it, what you came into the room for, or what you needed to do, wait, what was I working on again?

2. Roll Overs: Usually 3-5 per night, adjusting to the aches, pains, and other bodily functions associated with the Joys of Aging.

3. Start Overs: 1-2 per day, depending on your agenda: You know you did it better before, or you forgot where you started out the first time and now have the same project going simultaneously in more than one location. I’ve come to terms with accepting accomplishing one task has made it a good day.

4. Bend Overs: 5-6 per day, to pick up whatever (frequently keys, in my case) you just dropped.... again. Also used in picking up the pieces of what broke because you dropped it one too many times.

5. Up & Down Overs (Stairs): 3-4 per day, depending on how many things you forgot to get while you were up/down there, or what you forgot to get because you were distracted by something else.

6. Move Overs: Every damn time you try to walk in a straight line next to someone.

7. Trip Overs: Most days offer multiple opportunities to get this one in, even on incredibly flat surfaces.

8. Zip Overs: A small muscle exercise, created by forgetting, well, you know.

9. The ultimate, of course, is the “Keel Over,” but I’d suggest avoiding that one for as long as possible.

* Fortunately, you don’t actually need to count or keep track of exactly how many times you do any of these, which is just as well.

Ask Less, Get More

Kevin Horrigan wrote a great article today in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. It was something I never thought of before.

I know we teachers used to (probably still do) complain loudly and often about how society was dumping all of its problems on our doorstep, that we were expected to be parent, social worker, spiritual advisor (non-sectarian, of course, although I’ve no doubt some strayed outside those lines), sex educator, counselor, etc., etc., as well as teacher. As much as we complained, though, we kind of knew it came with the territory, and we were, more or less, prepared for those aspects of the job. I like to think that the best of us (at least at The Place), for all our griping, embraced and even welcomed those challenges.

Until I read Horrigan’s column this morning, however, I had never even considered the possibility that something similar has been happening to our police officers for many years now. According to Horrigan, and I (obviously) agree, we are expecting police to not just enforce the laws and solve crimes, but to enforce social norms and solve social problems.

With no intended offense to those men and women who are doing a job that I couldn’t handle (I had enough trouble enforcing classroom discipline), I don’t think most of them are suited for the demands of social service in terms of the personality of people attracted to law enforcement vs. those attracted to education or social work. I might be wrong, but I would suggest those who want to do the (important) job of social service are not heading to the police academy but down a different educational path. I do know that when I took the Strong Interest Inventory as a college freshman, my scores for teacher (well, not industrial arts teacher) and police officer were at the opposite ends of the scale.

It is very easy to criticize police officers, but even if, as is true for some teachers, it is deserved, I refrain from doing so because no way could I do that demanding job. Add to the demands the element of risk that cannot be ignored, dumping the thorniest problems of modern society on our police departments is not only unfair but unwise.

Finally, adding a point emanating from my pragmatic bent, it is also economically inefficient. One of the reasons police departments are stretched so thin for money is because we’re asking, no forcing, them to spend their limited resources on tasks that are not, or at least should not be, in their purview.

If we want more, or better, from our law enforcement community, perhaps we should consider asking for less. (I would argue that the same holds true for education, as well.) If you have not read the article, I urge you to do so, and am adding the link again: http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/columns/the-platform/horrigan-in-tribal-america-too-many-problems-are-dropped-on/article_e9e0523d-e6f9-53b8-9e4f-626c86136cbb.html