Covert Depression

obyvatel

The Living Force
Article from psychology today

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200001/depression-the-hidden-epidemic

Depression: The Hidden Epidemic

Why male depression stays hidden.
By Terrence Real

Depression is often considered a "female disease," since affected women reportedly outnumber men by four to one. Yet male depression may be more rampant than we realize.

Many men try to hide their condition, thinking it unmanly to act moody. And it works: National studies suggest that doctors miss the diagnosis in men a full 70% of the time. But male depression also stays hidden because men tend to express depression differently than women do.

Research shows that women usually internalize distress, while men externalize it. Depressed women are more likely to talk about their problem and reach out for help; depressed men often have less tolerance for internal pain and turn to some action or substance for relief. Male depression isn't as obvious as the defenses men use to run from it. I call this "covert depression." It has three major symptoms. First, men attempt to escape pain by overusing alcohol or drugs, working excessively or seeking extramarital affairs. They go into isolation, withdrawing from loved ones. And they may lash out, becoming irritable or violent.


The causes of depression differ in men and women, as well. While depressed women often feel disempowered, depressed men feel disconnected, from their needs and from others. This begins in childhood, as society teaches boys early on to pull away from their mothers, their emotions and their vulnerabilities.

Reconnection is key. Treatment first requires resolving the violent or self-medicating behaviors—the affair, the drinking, the workaholism—so that the underlying condition can be grappled with. But the ultimate cure lies in reestablishing connection. The ideal of male stoicism and the ensuing isolation lie at the root of male depression. Intimacy is its most lasting solution.

Covert depression hides under different masks - addictive behavior like alcoholism, pornography or substance abuse, obsessive behavior, perfectionism, workaholism etc. Depression may not always be about feeling bad either - in men emotional numbness or alexithymia can be an experience of depression. Coping mechanisms of covert depression is designed to keep overt depression at bay.

In close relationships, even non-psychopathic men who are unable to take ownership of their feelings can act them out in the form of psychological or physical violence. The ones who are emotionally numb and disengaged can also have a different effect on their partners who are more sensitive to feelings. In marital relationships, the female partner often becomes the carrier of the disowned feelings of the male partner. She may even act out those emotions and come across as a bitchy or depressed woman while the man remains more "normal". This is projective identification - where one projects one's feelings unconsciously on another; the receiver of the projection then acts out the projection as if it were her own feelings. Such burdens can be passed on to offsprings as well continuing the cycle of covert depression. Childhood wounds create both the injury and the defense mechanism used to hide the injury which become the foundation of depression in later life.
 
obyvatel said:
Covert depression hides under different masks - addictive behavior ... perfectionism, workaholism etc. Depression may not always be about feeling bad either - in men emotional numbness or alexithymia can be an experience of depression. Coping mechanisms of covert depression is designed to keep overt depression at bay.
Thank you obyvatel for this post. As a man, I can relate to those 'masks of addictive behaviour'. Perfectionism in the form of the need to complete before revealing to others, ie, a lack of spontaneity. Workaholism through life, yes, along with emotional numbness - although through Working on myself and undertaking deep tissue body massage, I know that the emotions are there and can be expressed, yet much of the time there is a lack of awareness of them. Disconnected and isolated, too through life, yes.

Just recently I've been wondering if a lack of daily contact with other people exacerbates the problem, in the sense that there is a lack of opportunity for giving and generosity of action. Also, I'm coming to the conclusion that there may be issues of being in control, too. The former, social contact, is alluded to in the quote you provided -
... But the ultimate cure lies in reestablishing connection. The ideal of male stoicism and the ensuing isolation lie at the root of male depression. Intimacy is its most lasting solution.

obyvatel said:
... Such burdens can be passed on to offsprings as well continuing the cycle of covert depression. Childhood wounds create both the injury and the defense mechanism used to hide the injury which become the foundation of depression in later life.
That is an interesting observation too, and scary in its continuing cyclic effect.
 
The avoidance through self medication is a constant that I have to battle. It used to be way worse before EE, but the wounds are still there.
Constant vigilance, and a directed effort to feel, and to be aware of my feelings seems to be the key.

This information ties nicely with the emotional repression discussed in When The Body Says No.
Thanks for that Obyvatel.

If anyone like me was wondering what Alexithymia is, here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry:

[quote author=Wikipedia]

Alexithymia /ˌeɪlɛksəˈθaɪmiə/ is a personality construct characterized by the sub-clinical inability to identify and describe emotions in the self.[1] The core characteristics of alexithymia are marked dysfunction in emotional awareness, social attachment, and interpersonal relating.[2] Furthermore, individuals suffering from alexithymia also have difficulty in distinguishing and appreciating the emotions of others, which is thought to lead to unempathic and ineffective emotional responding.[2] Alexithymia is prevalent in approximately 10% of the general population and is known to be comorbid with a number of psychiatric conditions.[3]

The term "alexithymia" was coined by psychotherapist Peter Sifneos in 1973.[4][5] According to the OED, the word comes from the Greek words λέξις (lexis, "speech") and θυμός (thumos, "soul, as the seat of emotion, feeling, and thought") modified by an alpha privative, literally meaning "no words for emotions".

Description

Typical deficiencies may include problems identifying, describing, and working with one's own feelings, often marked by a lack of understanding of the feelings of others; difficulty distinguishing between feelings and the bodily sensations of emotional arousal;[4] confusion of physical sensations often associated with emotions; few dreams or fantasies due to restricted imagination; and concrete, realistic, logical thinking, often to the exclusion of emotional responses to problems. Those who have alexithymia also report very logical and realistic dreams, such as going to the store or eating a meal.[17] Clinical experience suggests it is the structural features of dreams more than the ability to recall them that best characterizes alexithymia.[4]

Some alexithymic individuals may appear to contradict the above mentioned characteristics because they can experience chronic dysphoria or manifest outbursts of crying or rage.[18][19][20] However, questioning usually reveals that they are quite incapable of describing their feelings or appear confused by questions inquiring about specifics of feelings.[9]

According to Henry Krystal, individuals suffering from alexithymia think in an operative way and may appear to be superadjusted to reality. In psychotherapy, however, a cognitive disturbance becomes apparent as patients tend to recount trivial, chronologically ordered actions, reactions, and events of daily life with monotonous detail.[21][22] In general, these individuals lack imagination, intuition, empathy, and drive-fulfillment fantasy, especially in relation to objects. Instead, they seem oriented toward things and even treat themselves as robots. These problems seriously limit their responsiveness to psychoanalytic psychotherapy; psychosomatic illness or substance abuse is frequently exacerbated should these individuals enter psychotherapy.[9]

A common misconception about alexithymia is that affected individuals are totally unable to express emotions verbally and that they may even fail to acknowledge that they experience emotions. Even before coining the term, Sifneos (1967) noted patients often mentioned things like anxiety or depression. The distinguishing factor was their inability to elaborate beyond a few limited adjectives such as "happy" or "unhappy" when describing these feelings.[23] The core issue is that alexithymics have poorly differentiated emotions limiting their ability to distinguish and describe them to others.[4] This contributes to the sense of emotional detachment from themselves and difficulty connecting with others, making alexithymia negatively associated with life satisfaction even when depression and other confounding factors are controlled for.[24]
[/quote]
 
obyvatel said:
Article from psychology today

http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200001/depression-the-hidden-epidemic

Depression: The Hidden Epidemic

Why male depression stays hidden.
By Terrence Real

Depression is often considered a "female disease," since affected women reportedly outnumber men by four to one. Yet male depression may be more rampant than we realize.

Many men try to hide their condition, thinking it unmanly to act moody. And it works: National studies suggest that doctors miss the diagnosis in men a full 70% of the time. But male depression also stays hidden because men tend to express depression differently than women do.

Research shows that women usually internalize distress, while men externalize it. Depressed women are more likely to talk about their problem and reach out for help; depressed men often have less tolerance for internal pain and turn to some action or substance for relief. Male depression isn't as obvious as the defenses men use to run from it. I call this "covert depression." It has three major symptoms. First, men attempt to escape pain by overusing alcohol or drugs, working excessively or seeking extramarital affairs. They go into isolation, withdrawing from loved ones. And they may lash out, becoming irritable or violent.


The causes of depression differ in men and women, as well. While depressed women often feel disempowered, depressed men feel disconnected, from their needs and from others. This begins in childhood, as society teaches boys early on to pull away from their mothers, their emotions and their vulnerabilities.

Reconnection is key. Treatment first requires resolving the violent or self-medicating behaviors—the affair, the drinking, the workaholism—so that the underlying condition can be grappled with. But the ultimate cure lies in reestablishing connection. The ideal of male stoicism and the ensuing isolation lie at the root of male depression. Intimacy is its most lasting solution.

Covert depression hides under different masks - addictive behavior like alcoholism, pornography or substance abuse, obsessive behavior, perfectionism, workaholism etc. Depression may not always be about feeling bad either - in men emotional numbness or alexithymia can be an experience of depression. Coping mechanisms of covert depression is designed to keep overt depression at bay.

In close relationships, even non-psychopathic men who are unable to take ownership of their feelings can act them out in the form of psychological or physical violence. The ones who are emotionally numb and disengaged can also have a different effect on their partners who are more sensitive to feelings. In marital relationships, the female partner often becomes the carrier of the disowned feelings of the male partner. She may even act out those emotions and come across as a bitchy or depressed woman while the man remains more "normal". This is projective identification - where one projects one's feelings unconsciously on another; the receiver of the projection then acts out the projection as if it were her own feelings. Such burdens can be passed on to offsprings as well continuing the cycle of covert depression. Childhood wounds create both the injury and the defense mechanism used to hide the injury which become the foundation of depression in later life.

Thank you for the post obyvatel -very timely for me except that I'm a women!

Coping mechanisms of covert depression is designed to keep overt depression at bay.

I would say that I displayed the very same behavior of addiction ( escaping into fantasy fiction) and as a consequence of a need to be perfect, hid the fact that I was deeply depressed from everyone. As the caregiver and mother - what good was I if I couldn't take care of my family through a difficult time? So I hid everything I could from anyone who might know that I wasn't strong enough in my role ( my mom, sister and husband) and would literally crawl into my bed to sleep or read when I wasn't needed. I avoided close scrutiny in order to continue and keep up the appearance of functioning but that's all it really was- an appearance.

I don't want to take this away from all of the men out there who identify with this pattern but I don't think you can apply it to one gender either.
 
obyvatel said:
First, men attempt to escape pain by overusing alcohol or drugs, working excessively or seeking extramarital affairs. They go into isolation, withdrawing from loved ones. And they may lash out, becoming irritable or violent.

Thanks for sharing this obyvatel. I find this hard to read because it rings so true with how I've lived my life and offers a reason why I have found it so hard to connect with people. It also offers hope too that there is a way of treating this. Fortunately I've refrained from violence but I've certainly been irritable - I never knew why though. - Thinking of the UK popular culture being 'grumpy old men' is viewed as the norm.

Reconnection is key. Treatment first requires resolving the violent or self-medicating behaviors—the affair, the drinking, the workaholism—so that the underlying condition can be grappled with. But the ultimate cure lies in reestablishing connection. The ideal of male stoicism and the ensuing isolation lie at the root of male depression. Intimacy is its most lasting solution.

That is reassuring to hear. With the help of the group I have resolved much of the self-medicating and am at a stage now where I can feel. Past few days I've seen glimpses of just how much emotion I've been bottling up (quite terrifying the amount of pent up emotion is lurking there) and the way I had been dealing with it was to isolate myself.

Covert depression hides under different masks - addictive behavior like alcoholism, pornography or substance abuse, obsessive behavior, perfectionism, workaholism etc. Depression may not always be about feeling bad either - in men emotional numbness or alexithymia can be an experience of depression. Coping mechanisms of covert depression is designed to keep overt depression at bay.

This is tough reading for me but also offers great comfort. I've only just woken up to the fact that something wasn't right with me. I've always felt so confident and self-assure yet it seems I've been repressing my emotions for as long as I remember. Reading this rings true. I have been emotionally numb, unempathetic and pretty miserable underneath the glossy coping mechanisms I've presented to the world that everything is ok.

I'm still recovering from a stressful few weeks and it is going to take some time processing. This article and your accompanying notes are really helpful. Thankyou :)
 
Thanks Obyvatel, I can certainly relate to this too. Processing and expressing 'negative' emotions in a healthy way seems to be one of the core issues that arisen for me in recent times. I'm only just emerging now from the 'emotionally numb' man described in this piece and for years was a prime example of someone who used everything at his disposal to deny, ignore and suppress immense pain. Of course this only allows the problem to 'metastasize'. I'm currently working on trying to convey ideas around this theme to my son who still has some significant issues with anger/repression.

In close relationships, even non-psychopathic men who are unable to take ownership of their feelings can act them out in the form of psychological or physical violence. The ones who are emotionally numb and disengaged can also have a different effect on their partners who are more sensitive to feelings. In marital relationships, the female partner often becomes the carrier of the disowned feelings of the male partner. She may even act out those emotions and come across as a bitchy or depressed woman while the man remains more "normal". This is projective identification - where one projects one's feelings unconsciously on another; the receiver of the projection then acts out the projection as if it were her own feelings. Such burdens can be passed on to offsprings as well continuing the cycle of covert depression. Childhood wounds create both the injury and the defense mechanism used to hide the injury which become the foundation of depression in later life.

Interesting, I suspect there was something of a template like this going on in my relationship with my ex wife. Of course it creates a negative feedback loop as I'd then blame her for her moods and stress when it seems that she was unconsciously adopting my repressed negative emotion. God, the damage done eh? Very useful info anyway........
 
[quote author=Rx]
I don't want to take this away from all of the men out there who identify with this pattern but I don't think you can apply it to one gender either.
[/quote]

Hi Rx,
Indeed, men do not have exclusive right on covert depression. From clinical observations of therapists like Terrence Real, men appear to occupy a statistically higher percentage of the covert depression spectrum. A possible reason explaining this observation lies in the social and cultural forces shaping the development of men. In his book "I don't Want to Talk About It", Real cites multiple studies to provide evidence for this claim.

[quote author=I don't Want to Talk About It]
Current research makes it clear that a vulnerability to depression is most probably an inherited biological condition. Any boy or girl, given the right mix of chromosomes , will have a susceptibility to this disease. But in the majority of cases, biological vulnerability alone is not enough to bring about the disorder. It is the collision of inherited vulnerability with psychological injury that produces depression. And it is here that issues of gender come into play.

The traditional socialization of boys and girls hurts them both, each in particular, complementary ways. Girls, and later women, tend to internalize pain. They blame themselves and draw distress into themselves. Boys, and later men, tend to externalize pain; they are more likely to feel victimized by others and to discharge distress through action. Hospitalized male psychiatric patients far outnumber female patients in their rate of violent incidents; women outnumber men in self-mutilation. In mild and severe forms, externalizing in men and internalizing in women represent troubling tendencies in both sexes, inhibiting the capacity of each for true relatedness. A depressed woman’s internalization of pain weakens her and hampers her capacity for direct communication. A depressed man’s tendency to extrude pain often does more than simply impede his capacity for intimacy. It may render him psychologically dangerous. Too often, the wounded boy grows up to become a wounding man, inflicting upon those closest to him the very distress he refuses to acknowledge within himself. Depression in men, unless it is dealt with, tends to be passed along.
[/quote]

Some social study results

[quote author=I don't Want to Talk About It]
We begin sending boys the message that they have fewer emotional needs than girls in the very first moments of life. One research team studied parents’ responses to newborns in the first twenty-four hours after delivery. The researchers selected new-borns that matched in weight, length, alertness, and strength, so that there were no significant differences between boys and girls. Nevertheless, both mothers and fathers perceived newborn sons as: “more alert, stronger, larger featured, more coordinated, and firmer.” They saw baby daughters as “less attentive, weaker, finer featured, less coordinated, softer, smaller, more fragile and prettier .”

In a classic study in the field of gender research , John and Sandra Cundry videotaped the reactions of a nine-month-old infant to various stimuli: a teddy bear, a jack-in-the-box, a buzzer, and a doll. They played the ten-minute tape for 204 male and female adults who were asked to interpret what they had seen. Some were told the baby was male, others in the group were told it was female. The adult subjects saw the crying “girl” baby as frightened, but when they thought they were watching a boy , they described “him” as angry. “ If you think your child is angry ,” the authors ask, “would you treat ‘him’ differently than if you think ‘she’ is afraid? … It would seem reasonable to assume that a child who is thought to be afraid is held and cuddled more than a child who is thought to be angry.”

Such research on parental response teaches us that we see what we expect to see— and we react to what we see. Researcher Jeanne Block used extensive cross-cultural data to suggest a number of important differences in the ways parents treat boys and girls. Block found that both mothers and fathers stressed achievement and competition in their sons, encouraged boys to control their emotions, emphasized independence, and developed a tendency to punish boys. Fathers in particular were stricter with boys, and mothers revealed concern that their sons conform to external standards. Both parents characterized their relationship to their daughters as warmer and physically closer than with their sons. They expressed greater confidence in girls’ truthfulness and encouraged girls’ introspection. At the same time, mothers were appreciably more restrictive with girls, monitoring them more closely than their sons.

Researcher Beverly Fagot confirmed many of Block’s observations in a study that examined parents’ responses to stereotypical versus unconventional play in their children. Fagot found that parents gave significantly more favorable responses when their children conformed to “same-sex preferred” behavior and actively discouraged “cross-sex preferred” behavior. Girls, for example , elicited negative responses from their parents when engaged in large motor activities— running, jumping, throwing— and positive responses when they asked for help. Boys were encouraged to play by themselves and discouraged from staying close to the parent. Boys were praised for independent accomplishments and tacitly dissuaded from helping the parents with chores.

One of the most interesting findings is that these parents, all of whom demonstrated significant force in shaping their children’s conformity saw themselves unequivocally as treating their sons and daughters alike. The discrepancy between the parents’ own report of even -handed treatment of both sexes and the parents’ actual behavior was vast. With remarkable understatement, Fagot concludes: “These data suggest that parents are not fully aware of the methods they use to socialize their young children.”
[/quote]

There are more studies like this conducted at other age levels which display similar trends. Real's conclusion from the data

[quote author=I don't Want to Talk About It]
Little boys and little girls start off with similar psychological profiles. They are equally emotional, expressive, and dependent, equally desirous of physical affection. At the youngest ages, both boys and girls are more like a stereotypical girl. If any differences exist, little boys are, in fact, slightly more sensitive and expressive than little girls. They cry more easily , seem more easily frustrated , appear more upset when a caregiver leaves the room.
[/quote]

Gradually both boys and girls grow into their respective socially mandated gender roles.

[quote author=I don't Want to Talk About It]
Until the age of four or five, both boys and girls rest comfortably in what one researcher has called “ the expressive-affiliative mode. ” Studies indicate that girls are permitted to remain in that mode while boys are subtly— or forcibly—pushed out of it.

Australian sociologist Bob Connell argues that bland-sounding sociological terms like “gender role acquisition” do not convey the emotional experience of those who are the ones being pushed. In his yearlong study of elementary-school boys, Connel encountered a profound impetus not referenced in earlier research—violence. The conventional view of socialization portrays boys as only too willing to “learn” the male role. All of the emphasis has been on those unfortunate few who lacked fathers or other “male role models” to mimic. No one thought to question the assumption that boys’ squeeze into manhood was anything but eager. The results of his field study convinced Connel that the usual picture of boys hungrily digesting “the masculine role” only works “by playing down conflict and ignoring violence.” Not all boys march off so willingly into manhood. Whether by active violation or passive nonresponsiveness, the rituals by which boys are taught to conform are often unpleasant.

Connel writes: “‘Agencies of socialization’ cannot produce mechanical effects in a growing person. What they do is invite the child to participate in social practice on given terms. The invitation may be, and often is, coercive— accompanied by heavy pressure to accept and no mention of an alternative.” “Mama’s boy,” “faggot,”“pussy,”“wimp”— no boy I know of has escaped the experience of such ridicule. No man I have treated has fully eluded the taste of the lash one receives if one dares not accept masculinity’s “invitation.”
[/quote]

This leads to the question of self-view - what makes a man .. a "man" or woman a "woman"?

[quote author=I don't Want to Talk About It]

For most boys, the achievement of masculine identity is not an acquisition so much as a disavowal. When researchers asked girls and women to define what it means to be feminine, the girls answered with positive language: to be compassionate, to be connected, to care about others.

Boys and men, on the other hand, when asked to describe masculinity, predominantly responded with double negatives. Boys and men did not talk about being strong so much as about not being weak . They do not list independence so much as not being dependent. They did not speak about being close to their fathers so much as about pulling away from their mothers. In short, being a man generally means not being a woman. As a result, boys’ acquisition of gender is a negative achievement. Their developing sense of their own masculinity is not, as in most other forms of identity development, a steady movement toward something valued so much as a repulsion from something devalued. Masculine identity development turns out to be not a process of development at all but rather a process of elimination, a successive unfolding of loss. Along with whatever genetic proclivities one might inherit, it is this loss that lays the foundation for depression later in men’s lives.
[/quote]
 
Thanks for sharing Obyvatel

This caught my eye:
Their developing sense of their own masculinity is not, as in most other forms of identity development, a steady movement toward something valued so much as a repulsion from something devalued. Masculine identity development turns out to be not a process of development at all but rather a process of elimination, a successive unfolding of loss. Along with whatever genetic proclivities one might inherit, it is this loss that lays the foundation for depression later in men’s lives.

Which reminded me of:

_http://www.deseretnews.com/article/154777/BRAIN-CELLS-FAIL-FASTER-IN-MEN-THAN-WOMEN.html?pg=all
BRAIN CELLS FAIL FASTER IN MEN THAN WOMEN

Men's brains appear to deteriorate faster than women's, with males especially losing brain cells involved in language, reasoning and happiness, researchers reported.

A new study involving high-tech images of the brains of 69 men and women could indicate women are more likely than men to remain mentally sharp as they age, and perhaps explains why men might be more likely to become unhappy, researchers said Sunday."It may predict that men are more likely to get grouchy with age than women," said Ruben Gur of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, who helped conduct the study. "Some stereotypes have basis in reality."

The death of brain cells as people age has been well-known, primarily from examining and measuring the brains of people after they have died.

In the new study, Gur and his colleagues used a process known as magnetic resonance imaging to produce detailed images of the brains of 34 healthy men and 35 women ages 18 to 80.

The researchers found that while both men and women apparently tend to lose brain cells as they age, overall, the rate of brain cell death, called atrophy, was about three times higher in men than in women.

"We found some sex differences that have not been shown before," said Gur, director of the university's brain behavior laboratory and a professor of neuropsychology, psychiatry and neurology.

"We were able to show that the rate of cell loss is significantly faster in men than in women in aging," said Gur, who reported the findings in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Researchers are uncertain why male brains would deteriorate faster than female brains. But if hormones have anything to do with it, perhaps treatments could be developed to help reduce such deterioration, Gur said.

In addition, if the amount of brain loss found in the study is enough to influence ability, the findings indicate women should not have to retire earlier than men, which is the case in some countries, Gur said.

Men also tended to lose more cells from the more highly developed surface of the brain, which is thought to be involved in higher cognitive functions like reasoning, calculation, planning and conceptualization, than the center of the brain, which is believed to be involved in emotional regulation and survival, he said.

While women apparently tend to lose brain cells about equally on both sides of the brain, men in the study lost about twice as much brain on the left side as the right.

The left side of the brain is believed to be involved in language, speech, logical reasoning and analytical thought while the right side is associated with spatial abilities, facial recognition and other non-verbal reasoning.

Given brain development is the process of growing connections and pruning neurons, if you are taught your goal is to be 'not something' then no wonder male brains deteriorate faster.

On the deterioration of the left brain.
Depressed women are more likely to talk about their problem and reach out for help; depressed men often have less tolerance for internal pain and turn to some action or substance for relief. Male depression isn't as obvious as the defenses men use to run from it. I call this "covert depression." It has three major symptoms. First, men attempt to escape pain by overusing alcohol or drugs, working excessively or seeking extramarital affairs. They go into isolation, withdrawing from loved ones.

If being male is 'not being female' then 'emotional communication' would most likely be something that needs to be eliminated - and probably part of why men (or anyone with this depression) feel trapped by it if they feel that 'being a man' doesn't involve being able to talk about feelings.
That being reinforced by:
Connel writes: “‘Agencies of socialization’ cannot produce mechanical effects in a growing person. What they do is invite the child to participate in social practice on given terms. The invitation may be, and often is, coercive— accompanied by heavy pressure to accept and no mention of an alternative.” “Mama’s boy,” “faggot,”“pussy,”“wimp”— no boy I know of has escaped the experience of such ridicule. No man I have treated has fully eluded the taste of the lash one receives if one dares not accept masculinity’s “invitation.”

All of this then shapes the pruning of the brains abilities/cells.

*edit to add* one should not forget neural plasticity and the ability to regrow brain cells through things like exercise though.
 
[quote author=Redfox]
If being male is 'not being female' then 'emotional communication' would most likely be something that needs to be eliminated - and probably part of why men (or anyone with this depression) feel trapped by it if they feel that 'being a man' doesn't involve being able to talk about feelings.
[/quote]

That is an accurate analysis of the general situation. Connecting emotionally with others is viewed as a feminine thing that real men should not indulge in. Research has shown that traditionally women engaged more often in "rapport talk" where the listener is invited in to participate by opening up and talking about what is bothering her. Men in contrast do "report talk". Emotions expressed among men is usually confined to debates about impersonal topics like sports, politics etc. If it gets personal in men's conversations, there is usually a kind of jockeying for the one-up position, highlighting accomplishments, exhibiting skills etc.

This most likely ties in to the performance and achievement based self-esteem pill that socialization ensures boys swallow as they grow up. It is not surprising that actual suicide rates of men - especially in developed western countries - is far higher than that of women.
 
I came across an interesting book that goes into depression in boys in some detail called Raising Cain: Protecting the Emotional Life of Boys. In it, the two authors who are psychologists that work primarily in all boy's schools gives a lot of insights into how boys are treated and develop differently than girls through what they coined, the "Culture of Cruelty."

_http://www.amazon.com/Raising-Cain-Protecting-Emotional-Life/dp/0345434854
In Raising Cain, Dan Kindlon, Ph.D., and Michael Thompson, Ph.D., two of the country's leading child psychologists, share what they have learned in more than thirty-five years of combined experience working with boys and their families. They reveal a nation of boys who are hurting--sad, afraid, angry, and silent. Kindlon and Thompson set out to answer this basic, crucial question: What do boys need that they're not getting? They illuminate the forces that threaten our boys, teaching them to believe that "cool" equals macho strength and stoicism. Cutting through outdated theories of "mother blame," "boy biology," and "testosterone," the authors shed light on the destructive emotional training our boys receive--the emotional miseducation of boys.

Kindlon and Thompson make a compelling case that emotional literacy is the most valuable gift we can offer our sons, urging parents to recognize the price boys pay when we hold them to an impossible standard of manhood. They identify the social and emotional challenges that boys encounter in school and show how parents can help boys cultivate emotional awareness and empathy--giving them the vital connections and support they need to navigate the social pressures of youth.

Here is an excerpt.

Symptoms of depression in boys may be hard to read or be missed because the boys often don't look sad or "depressed." They look edgy or angry, hostile or defiant. A boy's depression is often ignored because he is meeting cultural expectations of masculinity. Stoicism, emotional reserve, or even a withdrawal into his fortress of solitude are accepted and sometimes admired male behaviours. Depressive behaviour in boys often only comes to our attention when it finally costs them performance points in school or on the playing field, or when it gets them into trouble with the law.

Nobody wants to think of boys as depressed or emotionally needy. We feel embarrassed or uncomfortable with the shame it will bring them, and we feel more secure with the idea that these idealized "strong" fathers-in-training can protect us with their strength.

There isn't a parent or teacher who would suggest that clinical depression is character-building for boys, and yet boys are expected to "get over it" on their own. Many boys struggle alone with their distress because they think they have to or because they think they can "fix it" by themselves - even though it is very difficult, if not impossible, to get over clinical depression without help.

If a boy believes that, in order to be manly, he must be "on top" of his feelings, he lives in a psychological conflict all the time because he's trying to control feelings that may be too powerful and complex to be controlled. When the conflict can no longer be suppressed, then depression becomes the psyche's way of surrendering.

The results can be deadly. Combine depression and its shame, emotional illiteracy, and the impulsivity so common among boys; mix in access to weapons and a familiarity with violence, real or through the media - and you have a recipe for suicide. Statistics indicate that, compared with generations past, more boys are committing suicide, and they're doing it at younger ages. Suicide rates for teenagers have more than tripled since 1950. And most of those who die are boys. Boys account for 86 percent of suicides among older adolescents and 80 percent among younger teens.

Not every boy who confronts emotional hardships develops severe depression. But whether depression is biological or situational in origin, the recovery from it is more difficult for a boy who has been trained away from emotional interaction and steered instead toward emotional silence and stoicism.
 
[quote author=Turgon]
Cutting through outdated theories of "mother blame," "boy biology," and "testosterone," the authors shed light on the destructive emotional training our boys receive--the emotional miseducation of boys.
Symptoms of depression in boys may be hard to read or be missed because the boys often don't look sad or "depressed." They look edgy or angry, hostile or defiant. A boy's depression is often ignored because he is meeting cultural expectations of masculinity.
[/quote]

There is the hypothesis that emotional numbness and reduction of the range of "admissible" emotions (ones that are ok to feel) lead to addictions - alcohol, drugs, pornography, violence, or other obsessive pursuit of thrills and hobbies.These activities can act as ways to enliven oneself from the numbness of emotional freeze. For example, addiction to chronic anger as well as thrill seeking activities makes the body high in adrenaline which provides energy as well as endorphins which are body's opioids (endo-morphin). The combination is similar in nature to "sugar rush" obtained from foods. It makes one high for a time - before the crash leaves one in a state worse than where he started from. This may be followed by a cycle of suppressed guilt and shame which prepares the ground for repeating the cycle.

Addiction to rage or violence or other behavior which specifically and directly cause harm to others looks psychopathic from outside. Whatever be the reasons behind such behavior - it is inexcusable. However, the inner state that drives the behavior is what distinguishes a psychopath from a possibly covertly depressed person. The latter suffers from guilt and shame from his actions and medicates against the emotional pain through maladaptive coping patterns. Psychopaths/character disturbed men on the other hand act from a sense of entitlement and do not suffer from guilt or shame. The behavior of psychopaths can be mostly driven by what Dabrowski called psychomotor overexcitability ( link ). Strong levels of anxiety and moments of profound despair also distinguish the covertly depressed from the character disturbed. However, repeated offences involving rage and violence directed at others can make men into secondary psychopaths (the primary ones being born psychopaths).

For the covertly depressed person to enter the path of healing, the addictive self-medicating defenses, whatever form they may take, have to be stopped. One cannot make the excuse that "It is society and my parents who made me like this" if one wishes to heal. When the ability to stop the self-medicating behavior becomes developed and the actual inhibition of the behavior becomes more frequent (the rule rather than the exception), meaningful engagement with the subsequent stages of healing - emotional re-education, acknowledgement of wounds and vulnerability, (re)connection with supporting network etc start to yield more fruitful results. Engaging in deep emotional exploration before making some progress in stopping and changing the maladaptive coping behavior may not be the optimal path towards healing. Brings us back to "fake it until you make it" or "do good - be good". Forming new habits take time and effort. So effort spent in clearly spelling out new desired values to be emulated and acting them out regularly through observable behavior would be the way forward. If the new values are relation-oriented rather than performance oriented, the ground is prepared for emotional reeducation and reconnection needed for healing from covert depression.
 
A while ago I had a long discussion with a friend of mine, who claimed that I had been depressed about a year ago ...

I told him, that no, I was not, as I didn't feel bad. But he maintained that I showed all the signs of it, like withdrawal, lacking optimism, being all "negative" of our future etc. I countered that I wanted to know the truth about our existence, and that many facets of it were not pretty, and that yes, these "nasty" faces would sometimes "wear" me down temporarily, but that I didn't consider that to be depression, as it was a rational choice to do. The point that I could agree with was that I hadn't learned at that stage to take in all these negatives in a detached way - and to live in what the C's call a "happy-go-lucky" attitude.

I think that since I have been doing SRT, this has become a bit better, but my question is - after all the above - can you BE depressed, but not FEELING depressed? I have had periods of "numbness" for sure, where I wasn't much able to "feel" my own internal state, but I do know this feeling, and I think that wasn't what my friend was referring to, because at this particular point in time, I didn't feel this "numbness", more an acute sense of sadness and despair. At least I think that I can distinguish between feelings of numbness and depression. But after all, is there really a difference?

I know that all of the above sounds weird and maybe also contradictory, and maybe this all comes down to semantics? But I have been thinking a lot about it recently after my SRT sessions. Any thoughts ...?
 
I think numbness, as in apathy, doesn't necessarily mean depression, but can lead to it. When you cut out your emotions, all the spectrum goes with it, positive and negative. The reason why one gets numbed is far more insightful and important. Usually it is buffering a whole lot of pain, either from this life or another one.

My 2 cents!
 
[quote author=nicklebleu]
I think that since I have been doing SRT, this has become a bit better, but my question is - after all the above - can you BE depressed, but not FEELING depressed? I have had periods of "numbness" for sure, where I wasn't much able to "feel" my own internal state, but I do know this feeling, and I think that wasn't what my friend was referring to, because at this particular point in time, I didn't feel this "numbness", more an acute sense of sadness and despair. At least I think that I can distinguish between feelings of numbness and depression. But after all, is there really a difference?
[/quote]

Hi Nicklebleu,

Per my current understanding, we need to distinguish between feelings and states. Sadness is a feeling, depression is a state. State is the backdrop of the stage on which the drama of life is being played out - or the general background filter through which experience is being processed.

Covert depression does not "feel" like depression because there are coping mechanisms - mostly addictive in nature - in place. Overt depression is a state where feelings of frustration and sadness as well as physiological symptoms come into clear view. Healing covert depression usually involves moving through a stage of overt depression.

Overt depression tends to engulf us when we understand the "terror of the situation". Such a depression can be a "stepping stone to soul growth" (4th Way Work term) and lead to a "multilevel disintegration of personality" (Dabrowski's term). In such cases, the depression does not become chronic or habitual, but is a transitory state which leads to a higher, more objective view of the world and one's own self. Reading Dabrowski's descriptions (in the thread linked in my previous post) could be of help in this regard.

In terms of development which always involves increasing emotional range as well as the capacity to bear the extended range, emotional numbness is a symptom of obstacles in the path. Numbness exists for good reasons but these reasons have to be circumvented and understood if possible to foster development. Similar considerations apply for other types of habitual coping mechanisms discussed in the context of covert depression.
 
Back
Top Bottom