I have a tendency to do psychologist quizzes and read checklists of various psychological traits.
Do I have a borderline personality disorder?
Am I selfish?
Am I narcissistic?
Am I depressed?
Am I anxious?
Am I an introvert or extrovert?
Am I autistic?
Do I have an obsessive-compulsive personality disorder?
Do I have a schizotypal personality disorder?
Yeah. All that stuff.
Sometimes I'll be taking the test. I'll answer a yes to the question, but I'm thinking. Wait. That's totally not fair, because....
And you know what, I think usually my protest is actually valid. Because sometimes there are different ways to look at a trait or question.
This morning I started thinking about one of the posts I wrote the other day. I realized I wrote my own easy-to-misinterpret trait while listing ways to be manipulative within an interpersonal conflict.
For #5 I wrote: Don't think about what you have done to hurt the person. Instead think about all the times the person reacted to the pain you caused them. Think of the times they lashed out. Think about the times they backed away from the relationship. Think about the times they spoke up and tried to explain why what you have done has hurt them. Think about all those reactions and then label those actions as abusive. You're good. They're bad. End of story. Repeat that to yourself often.
When I wrote it, I was picturing Person A saying something offensive—either purposely or obnoxiously, ignorantly. Then person B does one, two three, etc. of the things listed below.
1) Explain that they are angry and why;
2) Starts to cry
3) Angrily say something like "You are a fucking asshole";
4) Runs out of the room and slams the door
5) Makes the decision to put some emotional (or physical) distance in the relationship
Now some of those responses are more mature and reasonable than others, but in most cases I wouldn't label them as abusive. It does depend, though, on what person A actually said or did. And with that, there are going to be so many varying opinions. And we'd really need the whole story behind the incident.
For example. Let's say Julie opens a gift from her sister Mary. It's a box of butterscotch candies. In front of everyone she swears at Mary, throws the butterscotches across the room, cries, runs out of the room, and slams the door.
On the surface, it looks like Julie is unhinged...and cruel. Who'd want her in their social circle?
But what we didn't know is that five years ago, Julie's beloved boyfriend died from choking on a butterscotch. MAYBE Mary forgot this, but I'd say it's more likely she's the one who is awful—probably a sadistic psychopath.
The image I had in my mind this morning was a Person A making toast for Person B, and burning it slightly. Person B becomes furious. They throw the toast at Person B. Then they throw the plate. They pick up the toaster, smash it to the ground. They shove Person A against the wall. Then they drag person A into the bedroom and sodomize them.
Could person A read my statement #5 and feel they have been manipulative because they have labeled person B's behavior as abusive?
Unfortunately I imagine they might, because they might have low self-esteem and a warped perception of the situation they are in.
I love writing lists of traits and I love reading lists and taking quizzes. But they are all far from perfect. We really need to read things with an open mind. We need to look at things from different angles.
I have taken depression quizzes when I have felt quite well, and I've been told I'm mildly depressed. That pisses me off. Weeks ago, I took a depression quiz when I was feeling quite depressed and it told me I was only mildly depressed. That pissed me off as well.
I also took a depression test at my annual exam. The first question asked if I ever thought poorly of myself. I said yes. Then the nurse said something like, is this not at all, a lot of the time, or all of the time.
Why is there no some of the time??? I feel there must be some reasoning behind that omission. But from where I'm standing, it doesn't seem helpful.
