I loved this concept of the outside observer! Brilliant as a metaphor and possibly very insightful as to the actual evolutionary purpose of the so-called "cold" temperament.
The options in the attachment literature are essentially three (secure, anxious and avoidant), with more and more gradations appearing as the focus of the science shifts from infants to adults. In any case, attachment style isn't and shouldn't be a temperature. The psychologist who wrote the article that triggered all this thinking was unbelievably biased in his terminology. I'm fine with "cool," personally, but "cold" is way too value-laden and insulting.
It has always been the reaction of the majority to determine that anyone who differs (whether from choice or not) is wrong and a threat (why?) and must be attacked. Is that a type of natural selection? You communicate very well through your writing, both in your blog and in your stories, so you'll never be alone.
I've run across interesting theories about the biological/genetic basis for all kinds of human group behavior. In-groups and strangers, us-and-them, kill or be killed, mob mentality. Science keeps solving mysteries of human nature, and it seems like the more we understand, the more we can choose to be better--choose acceptance, non-violence, and inclusiveness.
I've seen the world change amazingly in those dimensions during my life. I'm pretty optimistic, really. But I think I need to write to the jackass who wrote that Psychology Today article and take him to task for his inflammatory language.
From a favorite book of mine, on page 10 of Mabel Robinson's "Bright Island," recently republished, which got me through my teenage years: "She knew how steadily they were trying to make her alike, too, and learned a different kind of dodging."
Bright Island--here I thought I'd read all the Newbery books in my youth, but I missed that one. It sounds wonderful. It certainly has a lot of fans on Goodreads.
I would just like to say that I don't think there's anything wrong with you. I didn't think so when I met you, either.
As you no doubt know, I am of a more actively social orientation myself. However, Gwyd is very much more like you. It's bothered me for years that he thinks this is a personal flaw of his. He'll say he doesn't have a life, things like that. (Less than he once did, but still.) But of course he has his own kind of life, and there's nothing wrong with that. I wish there was a broader understanding that we are simply not all wired to want or need the same things - and what a boring, predictable world it would be if we were.
Well, the single greatest thing about my involvement in fandom is that, on the whole, fannish people are pretty accepting. So thank you.
The meme flying around the internets on How to Care For An Introvert (and the delightfully snotty riposte) would seem to apply to people like Gwyd (and me) and seems to reflect a growing acceptance of a basic difference among people.
Of course, I'm less concerned today about being accepted than I was earlier in life (no further gene expression depends on it, after all), and I think what I'm groping towards here is a stance--one that I can articulate clearly--against some of the less-obvious ways that society still "others" people and tries to homogenize us.
Comments 9
Reply
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
The options in the attachment literature are essentially three (secure, anxious and avoidant), with more and more gradations appearing as the focus of the science shifts from infants to adults. In any case, attachment style isn't and shouldn't be a temperature. The psychologist who wrote the article that triggered all this thinking was unbelievably biased in his terminology. I'm fine with "cool," personally, but "cold" is way too value-laden and insulting.
Reply
Reply
I've seen the world change amazingly in those dimensions during my life. I'm pretty optimistic, really. But I think I need to write to the jackass who wrote that Psychology Today article and take him to task for his inflammatory language.
Thank you for your kind words.
Reply
Reply
Reply
As you no doubt know, I am of a more actively social orientation myself. However, Gwyd is very much more like you. It's bothered me for years that he thinks this is a personal flaw of his. He'll say he doesn't have a life, things like that. (Less than he once did, but still.) But of course he has his own kind of life, and there's nothing wrong with that. I wish there was a broader understanding that we are simply not all wired to want or need the same things - and what a boring, predictable world it would be if we were.
Reply
The meme flying around the internets on How to Care For An Introvert (and the delightfully snotty riposte) would seem to apply to people like Gwyd (and me) and seems to reflect a growing acceptance of a basic difference among people.
Of course, I'm less concerned today about being accepted than I was earlier in life (no further gene expression depends on it, after all), and I think what I'm groping towards here is a stance--one that I can articulate clearly--against some of the less-obvious ways that society still "others" people and tries to homogenize us.
Reply
Leave a comment