"What's This Button Do?" Or How To Abort the Explosive Mission

Perhaps you're one of those people who has been granted a social circle----co-workers, friends and family, whose conversations proceed within acceptable decibel ranges, and disagreements and differing points of view are discussed calmly and rationally.  Maybe you've grown up in an environment where you rarely heard raised voices----if ever.   If you are not such a person, I'll lay odds that the escalating, explosive conversations that you have experienced, were in all probability, with a member or members of your own family.

I recently had such an experience with a member of my family, in which the two of us were reacting at higher and higher volumes, punctuated by the loud slams of a door.  (Note: I did not say 'communicating', because in any interaction which escalates to this level, communication ceases to exist).

I like to think of myself as fair-minded, rational and well-spoken. I can freely state though, that in the scenario mentioned above, I was not any of those things.  And here's the thing----I was cognitively aware that I had lost control-----even in the midst of losing control!   How and why did this happen?

At what point do we allow our 'button(s) to be pushed' that leads to total emotional-explosion?

I pondered this question for awhile. On the surface, it may initially seem like it is the issue of the "wrongness" with which one ascribes to the point of view being espoused by our "button-pusher".  I don't think "wrongness" is the issue though; because when it's a matter of "wrongness" to our way of thinking, it's just a simple matter of explaining what we believe to be the obvious 'truth' in our own point of view. We just need to speak a little slower, be a little clearer, present the logic behind our view,

and our own "rightness" will be revealed and made obvious to the one who is 'wrong'. In other words, there is hope that we will be heard.  And THAT's when I became aware of my 'destruction-button'.

My 'destruction-button' was pushed when I felt that I was not being heard.  My 'destruction-button' was pushed when I felt that the other person involved in this interaction didn't want to hear me. My 'destruction-button' was pushed when my actual experience in what was being disputed, was negated and ignored.  And when we feel we're not being heard, there is no hope for revelation of 'truth' or 'rightness' or 'acceptance of difference'. For me, this is what pushes my red, 'DESTRUCT' button.  I have a hunch that it may be at the core of whatever pushes anyone's buttons----but I'll just speak for myself.

The question I had to ask myself was, how can I abort the 'DESTRUCT' mission in the future? One of the things that occurred to me was akin to 'turn the other cheek'.  If you already know that the person with whom you are interacting tends to negate and not hear you, you enter the interaction with knowledge of the playing-field. You can disengage. Infusing drama/humor into the scenario can be helpful----for example, suddenly feigning stomach cramps (accompanied by loud retching noises), and bolting for the bathroom-----can quickly diffuse a situation. The problem with this is, it's a strategy that can only be used a limited number of times, before our 'button-pusher' starts to see a pattern! A less dramatic strategy is to let the other person speak, while we employ the mental discipline needed to not react.  Of course, the danger here is that this can lead to gradual overall emotional disengagement. If the other person is a friend who frequently negates/ dismisses us, it seems logical to me that this person probably won't remain a friend.  If it's a co-worker, and this is a frequent trope in the relationship, it seems logical to me that a change in department or entire venue might be in order.  We can't change family members----although we may have to emotionally disengage.

I'm curious. How do you prevent your buttons from being pushed?

 

How Buying A Sticker Book Made Me want to Burn My Bra

                  MUSINGS FROM THE MOLLUSK

           A Blog About Introversion, Child-Rearing, Education and Other Stuff

Let me explain something about myself: I LOVE visual embellishment; I've always doodled, color-penciled, and  curly-cued my writing, whether in my notebooks, or in letters---(back when I actually wrote them), and even on my students' papers!  Subscribing to the adage, 'a picture is worth a thousand words', my little smiley/snarky-characters would often supplant actual comments on the work of my students---and quite often that was more than enough for them.  My little pictures were all over my calendar book entries, and when a well-known graphic artist came up with her own 'Mom's Planner Calendar', complete with accompanying stickers, I was ALL over that!  I particularly loved the stickers.

Which is why, I happened to find myself in a well-frequented,  book store chain, hunting for stickers for which to embellish my recently purchased calendar book for 2015.  I came upon a sticker book----two, actually. Each of the sticker books promised a life-time supply of stickers within their pages, but one book was designed for boys, and the other one, girls.   Words used on the cover to describe the 'boys' stickers were words like, 'artsy', and 'interesting', while the adjectives used to describe the 'girls' stickers were words such as, 'cutesy' and 'doodly'.  So it had all come down to this.  Boys were, or could aspire to be 'artsy' and 'interesting', while expectations for their female counterparts encompassed

the very shallow depths of 'cutesy' and 'doodly'.  Forty-six years of the Women's Movement, equal pay, the metro-sexual male, househusbands, female CEO's, and here the hell is a sticker book in 2015 telling  girls that there's nothing more to being a girl than being 'cutesy'.

I stood there, looking at the two sticker books in disbelief.  The insidious pages themselves were festooned with the promised-copiousness of stickers.  The 'boys' stickers had the usual sports motifs, along with musical instruments, (guitars, drums, and saxophones, mostly), camping images, flags, pictures of families, balloons, dogs, cats, inner tubes, funny faces, astronauts, etc., all executed in various styles.

The 'girls' stickers were done in pinks, oranges, tropical blues, and other vivid pastels. The images ran the very wide gamut ( just feel the sarcasm oozing), of hearts, flowers, rainbows and ice cream cones. Yup.

Now mind you, I actually like hearts, flowers, rainbows and ice cream cones. And I loved the colors in which these images were shown.  But in a world where we have supposedly been telling our girl children and students that they can be and do anything, and where our girls have grown up with a Sandra Day O'Connor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg  on the Supreme Court, and women astronauts, politicians and clergy, and everything else-----THESE STICKER BOOKS JUST DID NOT MAKE SENSE! 

Perhaps I should have just walked away, and if I had been purchasing the sticker book for a child----I wouldn't have made the purchase, and would have walked---- but I didn't. I actually bought the 'boys' stickers. (They were really cool).  But I will be contacting that publisher----and sharing my views!

                                                         The Mollusk