I have written about the Drama Triangle on this Blog. One of the roles played in the DT is that of a VICTIM. In this very worthwhile article, published in Psychology Today on April 20, 2013 by Robert Firestone, PhD, he identifies this role, why people choose the victim role including how anger figures in it, and how to choose not to play that role. I hope it is beneficial to you.
Many people adopt the victim role, albeit unintentionally, because
they are afraid of their anger, deny its existence in themselves, project it
onto other people, and anticipate aggression or harm from them. With this
expectation and a high sensitivity to anger in others, they may even distort
other people’s facial expressions, imagining that they have malicious
intentions. The anger that they would have experienced in response to
frustration or stress is
transformed into fear and
distrust of others and into feelings of being hurt or wounded.
People who become mired down in feeling victimized tend to view
events in their lives as happening to them and feel ineffective and
overwhelmed. They also operate on the basic assumption that the world should be
fair, which is a child’s way of thinking. They tend to project the
circumstances of their early childhood, where they were indeed helpless,
onto present-day situations and relationships, and fail to recognize that, as
adults, they have far more power than they had as children.
There are ways to shift from the victimized stance, characterized
by passivity and behaviors based on negative power, to a more adult stance characterized
by active coping and personal power.
People can become aware of and identify specific destructive thoughts – critical inner voices that
promote victimized feelings; and they can take steps to develop more
constructive approaches to dealing with their anger.
Identifying Critical Inner Voices that Promote a Victimized
Orientation to Life
To move out of the victimized posture, it is important to
identify critical inner voices that focus on injustices, such as “It’s not fair. This shouldn’t be
happening to you. What did you ever do to deserve such treatment?”
These destructive thoughts encourage passivity and helplessness while
discouraging actions that could change an unhappy or untenable situation.
Low-grade anger and distrust are aroused in people whenever
they are “listening” to voices telling them that others dislike them or do not
care about them or their interests. “They
never take your feelings into consideration. Who do they think they are?”
“People just don’t give a
damn.”
In the work setting, many people have resentful attitudes
based on voices telling them that they are being exploited: “Your boss is a real jerk! Nobody sees
how much you contribute.” “No
one appreciates you.” “Why
do they always get all the breaks?” Similarly,
voices that advise individuals that they are victims of mistreatment by others
contribute to feelings of being disrespected or persecuted, for example, “They’re going to make a fool of you.
They don’t respect you.” The
feelings generated by these ruminations lead to inward brooding, righteous
indignation, and a desire for revenge. Recognizing and challenging negative
voices is the major way to overcome a victimized orientation.
Constructive Approaches for Dealing with Anger
First, it is important to emphasize that anger is a simple,
irrational emotional response to frustration and does not require any
justification; it is O.K to just feel whatever one feels. The degree of anger
is proportional to the degree of frustration rather than to the logic or
rationality of the circumstances. When people attempt to rationalize their
anger and then feel victimized, they get stuck in the angry feelings in a way
that leads to an unpleasant kind of brooding that alienates others and is
dysfunctional.
Therefore, in terms of action, people need to drop certain
words from their vocabulary that they may be using to justify their anger,
words like "fair," "should," "right," and
"wrong." In a relationship, the term “should” often implies
obligation. For example, someone who says, “Because we’re together (married),
my partner ‘should’ love me,
‘should’ take care of me, ‘should’ make love to me” is operating from a
victimized position. When people tie their feelings of frustration to the
expectation that someone is obliged to satisfy them, victimized, paranoid
feelings inevitably arise.
By challenging these habitual ways of speaking, individuals
will discover a different form of communication that involves taking full
responsibility for their feelings and actions and yet leaves them free to
explore alternatives. In an intimate relationship, partners can learn to
talk about their anger in a non-dramatic tone and admit any feelings of being
victimized. This type of communication is less likely to arouse
counter-aggression and enables people to deal with their anger in a way that
causes the least amount of pain to one another.
It would be constructive for people who typically express
their anger in righteous indignation or victimized brooding to relinquish the
basic assumption that they are innocent victims of fate. It would also be
important for them to give up a sense of entitlement and to recognize that they
do not inherently deserve to receive anything in the way of good treatment from
others. It is more adaptive to accept the idea that the world does not owe them
anything—neither a living or happiness or
nice surroundings. Taking the victimized position that one is entitled to
something better contributes to feelings of being cheated that, in turn,
exacerbate a sense of helplessness and impotent rage.
Taking action to change situations with which one is unhappy
directly challenges a victimized orientation. For example, if one feels stuck
in a bad relationship or a seemingly untenable work situation, one can explore
oneself to determine if one’s passivity has had more to do with the situation
than one thought, and then strive to be more proactive and self-assertive. It is also wise to
avoid complaining about these unfavorable situations to others in a style that
"dumps" the problem on the listener. In one’s interactions, it is
crucial to become more aware of the distinction between sympathy and empathy, and to stop asking for or giving
sympathy. Expressing sympathy as well as trying to elicit sympathetic responses
from another person are damaging in that both reinforce victimized thinking.
In accepting angry emotions in oneself, one is less likely
to act them out destructively or to adopt the role of victim. Ideally,
rather than suppress or deny the emotion of anger, one would acknowledge angry
responses while clearly distinguishing between feelings and actions. As
people give up victimized attitudes and acknowledge anger as a basic part of
their nature, they are able to choose how to express
angry feelings in ways that are constructive, ethical, and aligned with their
best interests and goals. The self‑limiting, victimized
perspective no longer controls them or their lives.
"HOW TO STOP PLAYING THE VICTIM GAME by Robert Firestone, PhD
in Psychology Today 4-30-13


No comments:
Post a Comment