I just read the book "The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting Up a Generation for Failure".
About 1/3 of the book is how kids these days are being taught values that are pretty much the exact opposite of what Cognitive Behavioral Therapy teaches and how that leads to more anxiety.
Instead of learning: "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" and to not assume someone's intentions, they are being taught to be on the lookout for microaggressions and to report them.
Instead of being taught to critically question the feelings they have, they are taught that if they feel something, it must be true.
Summarizing about the AUTHOR's views on microaggressions:
Let's say someone comes up to you and says "Where are you really from?"
The motivations for asking this question can be ambiguous.
One way to interpret it is as a subtle racist insult that implies you are an "other". At this point you can be mad at how society is so racist.
An important part of CBT is that you can't read minds. The other way to interpret it is that the speaker is genuinely interested in me and wants to learn more. At this point I can have positive emotions and go about my day.
From a mental health point of view you are less likely to have anxiety if you choose option 2.
Hm... this is some pretty typical Neoliberal misinformation--just the kind I expect to see pedaled on HN. I will read this book, if you think it's important, but it's astonishing how quick you are to desire children's alienation from their feelings. Really, that's an atrocious desire. You should critically question that one. You should also consider reading bell hooks' "The Will to Change," which goes into great depth on the ways men like you and I are emotionally crippled--not coddled, crippled. At any rate, that's what you would do if you'd been "taught to critically question" your beliefs.
There's a few great lines in hooks' book about how we adopt our patriarchal ontologies unquestioningly, never stopping to think what about "being a man" we would have chosen for ourselves.
I will read "The Coddling" because I can't be in every American classroom, and it's possible I am simply unaware of some training as atrocious as "be on the lookout for microaggressions and report them," but I suspect it's a deliberate misinterpretation of the feminist understanding that the common American ideological worldview is an deference and adherence to rape, exploitation, domination, and violence. Standing against these things early on, when they're recapitulated as "mere" schoolyard bullying, is a heroic act, and not the result of "coddling," but of a stable, enriching family life--something you can read about in Deborah MacNamara's "Rest. Play. Grow."
Unfortunately, the American home life often recapitulates endemic American patriarchal violence. As hooks puts it, "the love of a father is an uncommon gem, to be hunted, burnished, and hoarded. The value goes up because of its scarcity." No surprise, then, that that children teach one another to relate in the terms of domination and submission.
Sorry if I was being unclear, the books explains the views much better. The author's want us to avoid the fallacies of emotional reasoning.
Some quotes:
"Sages in many societies have converged on the insight that feelings are always compelling, but not always reliable. Often they distort reality, deprive us of insight, and needlessly damage our relationships. Happiness, maturity, and even enlightenment require rejecting the Untruth of Emotional Reasoning and learning instead to question our feelings. The feelings themselves are real, and sometimes they alert us to truths that our conscious mind has not noticed, but sometimes they lead us astray."
"Beck’s great discovery was that it is possible to break the disempowering feedback cycle between negative beliefs and negative emotions. If you can get people to examine these beliefs and consider counterevidence, it gives them at least some moments of relief from negative emotions, and if you release them from negative emotions, they become more open to questioning their negative beliefs."
The author's of the book don't desire "children's alienation from their feelings.".
Let's take for example a student failing a chemistry test which may lead to anxiety. The student might think, "My life is ruined. I'll never get into college now."
The author's would suggest looking for counter evidence. Is it true everyone who has failed a chemistry test doesn't get into college? No that's ridiculous. Even if you aren't able to get into an Ivy League school, does that mean your life is ruined? No, plenty of people I know have great lives without an Ivy League education.
The book presents mainstream views on cognitive behavioral therapy. Do you think CBT leads to emotionally crippling men?
> CBT doesn't work for everyone. I found it infuriating.
This is where I'm at so far. I don't want to condemn it, even as a match for myself, with a sample size of 1, but I know a lot of people for whom it was successful, but my one therapist that worked with me on it thus far only caused more strife and anguish.
It felt like training in learned helplessness. "ok, so when your coworker lies about doing their work and you have to put out the fire that causes, you get angry. Have you thought about just not getting angry and accepting that this is how it works?" No, thanks for the tip, but the right answer was to quit that job.
Do you really believe that “the American ideological worldview” treats rape and violence with “deference”? I can sort of see the argument for domination and exploitation—though I think you’re on shaky ground there as well—but, really, deference to rape and violence? How in the world does a person come to such a conclusion?
From reading books like "Yes Means Yes!", "Witches, Midwives, and Nurses", or "The Will to Change".
From observing mainstream and right-wing media's treatment of sexual predators—especially the narrative of concern for their reputations, academic careers, etc.
From sitting in on violent men's groups, and realizing that the roots of their violence are common to all supposedly "non-violent" men. It's plain to see that the man who throws his cousin down a staircase, or kicks open his girlfriend's door to make demands of her does so for the same reasons that old men shout at waitresses, call female politicians "whore, "bitch", and "cow", roofie drinks, wear uniforms, hire secretaries, don't hire women engineers, and generally do the complex and pervasive work to substantiate sexist collective ontologies as a "society" of "rape culture."
You’re going to have to do much, much better than that to convince me that the American ideological worldview is supportive or even tolerant of rape. First of all, I haven’t read any of those books and I’m honestly not going to read them, so you’re going to have to summarize the case they’ve made in support of your wildly outlandish claim. Second, you’re clearly begging the question when you claim that the media treats sexual predators with kid gloves: America has a long and noble tradition of treating the accused gently. Besides, the concern over reputation only goes to show how avidly anti-rape our culture is. It’s widely known that if a man acquires a reputation for being accused of rape or sexual assault, he’s pretty much done, both personally and professionally, regardless of whether or not anything was ever proved. These accusations are taken extremely seriously and are capable of destroying a man because America hates rape and sexual assault.
I’m not sure what to make of your last paragraph. You seem to be saying that the difference between a violent male psychopath and a man who doesn’t respect women as much as he respects men is one of degree and not kind. That’s absurd on its face. In addition, the entire phrase that begins with “generally do” and ends with “‘rape culture’” is a fractal of special definitions, hidden assumptions, and ideology that’s completely divorced from reality.
About 1/3 of the book is how kids these days are being taught values that are pretty much the exact opposite of what Cognitive Behavioral Therapy teaches and how that leads to more anxiety.
Instead of learning: "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" and to not assume someone's intentions, they are being taught to be on the lookout for microaggressions and to report them.
Instead of being taught to critically question the feelings they have, they are taught that if they feel something, it must be true.