Cultural Psychoanalysis: Karen Horney Pt. 4

The Neurotic Personality of Our Time

To Karen Horney, neuroses arise not only from personal experiences but are deeply shaped by the cultural environment in which individuals live, as culture determines the very form those experiences take. For example, “it is an individual fate, to have a domineering or a ‘self-sacrificing’ mother, but it is only under definite cultural conditions that we find domineering or self-sacrificing mothers, and it is also only because of these existing conditions that such an experience will have an influence on later life.” This cultural perspective shifts the focus away from Freud’s emphasis on biology and physiology as the roots of neurosis. Karen still called what she did Psychoanalysis, but “if, however, one believes that the essentials of psychoanalysis lie in certain basic trends of thought concerning the role of unconscious processes and the ways in which they find expression, and in a form of therapeutic treatment that brings these processes to awareness, then what I present is psychoanalysis. I believe that a strict adherence to all of Freud’s theoretical interpretations entails the danger of tending to find in neuroses what Freud’s theories lead one to expect to find. It is the danger of stagnation…There are some similarities with certain points that Adler has stressed, but fundamentally my interpretation rests on Freudian ground. Adler is in fact a good example of how even a productive insight into psychological processes can become sterile if pursued one-sidedly and without foundation in the basic discoveries of Freud.” In keeping with free association, Karen warned that “reading about [this] situation will not cure [patients]; in what he reads he may recognize others much more readily than himself.”

A lot of what Karen discovered led to democratic socialist reforms that have tried to counter The Neurotic Personality of Our Time, as she put it. From her point of view, narcissistic neuroses come from upbringings where there are too few experiences of love and respect, which drive people to seek power positions, not for fulfillment but to turn the tables and exact revenge against a rejecting world. Then when they gain power, they exploit people, act as gatekeepers, due to ignorance of any other way to be, while supported by a society that worships the same ego-ideals, and who consent to navigate those same structures of rewards and punishments, following narcissists as role models. This leads to master and slave situations where the goal is to always find economic positions where one is the decision-maker for who gets accepted or who gets rejected. For example, a narcissistic type will rarely want to stay in a front line job, and so they pursue administrative power as quickly as possible. Any abuse of power is covered over with gaslighting and many in the population support the gaslighting because they are eyeing those exact same positions for their career ladder. For example, in a singing competition, one wants to be the judge or record producer, not the talent that will eventually be washed up and discarded. Just extrapolate those dynamics to any other industry you can think of.

Power = consumption, and so love is replaced with leverage, acquisition, addiction, and admiration. Narcissists eventually cannot recognize love in their sphere of influence, but if they do see it elsewhere, it’s considered weakness and something to stomp on or exploit. Their relationships with spouses and children turn into manipulations, like they do with their employees, involving idealization, triangulation, devaluation, and discard, on a spin cycle. Because habits are so wound up with stress reactions towards any threats to status, the ego-ideal becomes an addiction. Any therapies, like those of Horney’s, lead to painful withdrawal symptoms that signal how sick a narcissistic mind has become. They’re basically addicted to daydreaming of ideals and rumination over control. They end up with a lust/hate attitude towards naked reality.

Many European countries who have read all these materials, including continental philosophy, like Heidegger, and understand that humans, or Dasein, are always in a Mood, because the amygdala is constantly monitoring both high and low level threats in three dimensions and measuring events over the fourth dimension of time, one cannot help but care, Sorge, in German, about outcomes. A normal brain cannot be nihilistic.

Many Nordic countries in response adopted programs, like Universal Healthcare, Childcare, Education, Parental Leave, high Unemployment benefits, Social Housing, Progressive Taxation, and setup cultural bulwarks against narcissism, like Janteloven. Of course, there are collective forms of narcissism that can creep in, and social programs are not free, so the misuse of funds and money printing by governments will always lead to artificial scarcity and inflation, but as populations grow up and become disillusioned around the world with toxic cycles, there’s always a clamoring to make these same kinds of changes.

As repression is exerted in power structures, these attitudes filter into family dynamics leading to the related personality disorders that move towards people, against them, or away from them.

Karen Horney was at the beginning of these changes to integrate cultural knowledge from social work with individual psychoanalysis. All those cultural punishments could be seen with anecdotal comparisons with different countries. “One criterion we apply in designating a person as neurotic is whether his mode of living coincides with any of the recognized behavior patterns of our time. If the girl without competitive drives, or at least without apparent competitive drives, lived in some Pueblo Indian culture, she would be considered entirely normal, or if the artist lived in a village in Southern Italy or in Mexico he, too, would be considered normal, because in those environments it is inconceivable that anyone should want to earn more money or to make any greater effort than is absolutely necessary to satisfy immediate needs. Going farther back, in Greece the attitude of wanting to work more than one’s needs required would have been considered positively indecent.”

In the modern world, thanks to influences from Cultural Psychoanalysis, the psychologist’s empathy and countertransference was acknowledged to have been heavily affected by the culture they grew up in. “One can diagnose a broken leg without knowing the cultural background of the patient, but one would run a great risk in calling an Indian boy psychotic because he told us that he had visions in which he believed. In the particular culture of these Indians the experience of visions and hallucinations is regarded as a special gift, a blessing from the spirits, and they are deliberately induced as conferring a certain prestige on the person who has them. With us a person would be neurotic or psychotic who talked by the hour with his deceased grandfather, whereas such communication with ancestors is a recognized pattern in some Indian tribes. A person who felt mortally offended if the name of a deceased relative were mentioned we should consider neurotic indeed, but he would be absolutely normal in the Jicarilla Apache culture. A man mortally frightened by the approach of a menstruating woman we should consider neurotic, while with many primitive tribes fear concerning menstruation is the average attitude…For good reasons every culture clings to the belief that its own feelings and drives are the one normal expression of ‘human nature,’ and psychology has not made an exception to this rule. Our conception of normality is arrived at by the approval of certain standards of behavior and feeling within a certain group which imposes these standards upon its members. But the standards vary with culture, period, class and sex.”

As difficult as it was to separate psychological problems from cultural influences, Karen found “two characteristics, however, which one may discern in all neuroses without having an intimate knowledge of the personality structure: a certain rigidity in reaction and a discrepancy between potentialities and accomplishments…By rigidity in reactions I mean a lack of that flexibility which enables us to react differently to different situations. The normal person, for instance, is suspicious where he senses or sees reasons for being so; a neurotic person may be suspicious, regardless of the situation, all the time, whether he is aware of his state or not. A normal person is able to discriminate between compliments meant sincerely and those of an insincere nature; the neurotic person does not differentiate between the two or may discount them altogether, under all conditions. A normal person will be spiteful if he feels an unwarranted imposition; a neurotic may react with spite to any insinuation, even if he realizes that it is in his own interest. A normal person may be undecided, at times, in a matter important and difficult to decide; a neurotic may be undecided at all times…A discrepancy between the potentialities of a person and his actual achievements in life maybe due only to external factors. But it is indicative of a neurosis if in spite of gifts and favorable external possibilities for their development the person remains unproductive; or if in spite of having all the possibilities for feeling happy he cannot enjoy what he has; or if in spite of being beautiful a woman feels that she cannot attract men. In other words, the neurotic has the impression that he stands in his own way…There is one essential factor common to all neuroses, and that is anxieties and the defenses built up against them. Intricate as the structure of a neurosis may be, this anxiety is the motor which sets the neurotic process going and keeps it in motion.”

Karen listed the neurotic fears:

• External dangers.
• Pathological relationships.
• Cultural fears.

What Karen felt neurotic types should notice was how the same fears that affect the entire culture did not stop normal people from achievement of some of their potentials. There’s a gap in energy levels based on how much is wasted on defense mechanisms. “The normal person is capable of making the best of the possibilities given in his culture. Expressing it negatively, he does not suffer more than is unavoidable in his culture. The neurotic person, on the other hand, suffers invariably more than the average person. He invariably has to pay an exorbitant price for his defenses, consisting in an impairment in vitality and expansiveness, or more specifically in an impairment of his capacities for achievement and enjoyment, resulting in the discrepancy I have mentioned. In fact, the neurotic is invariably a suffering person. The only reason why I did not mention this fact when discussing the characteristics of all neuroses that can be derived from surface observation is that it is not necessarily observable from without. The neurotic himself may not even be aware of the fact that he is suffering…The particular difficulty in the description of a neurosis lies in the fact that a satisfactory answer can be given neither with psychological nor with sociological tools alone, but that they must be taken up alternately, first one and then the other, as in fact we have done…The neurotic person attempts and arrives at compromise solutions—not inopportunely classified as neurotic—and these solutions are less satisfactory than those of the average individual and are achieved at great expense to the whole personality.”

The following are examples of compromised solutions for neurotic types:

• Hysteria – Projection
• Compulsion – Intellectualization
• Narcissism – Fantasy

The biological side of it was downplayed by Karen when she noticed that the majority of the population had to deal with these same environmental and cultural challenges. The outcomes were different. “The fact that in general the majority of individuals in a culture have to face the same problems suggests the conclusion that these problems have been created by the specific life conditions existing in that culture. That they do not represent problems common to ‘human nature’ seems to be warranted by the fact that the motivating forces and conflicts in other cultures are different from ours.” These situations can be measured by attitudes in how they differ from the prevailing culture. “The attitudes thus observable may be loosely classified as follows: first, attitudes concerning giving and getting affections; second, attitudes concerning evaluation of the self; third, attitudes concerning self-assertion; fourth, aggression; fifth, sexuality.”

“As to the first, one of the predominant trends of neurotics of our time is their excessive dependence on the approval or affection of others. We all want to be liked and to feel appreciated, but in neurotic persons the dependence on affection or approval is disproportionate to the real significance which other persons have for their lives. Although we all wish to be liked by persons of whom we are fond, in neurotics there is an indiscriminate hunger for appreciation or affection, regardless of whether they care for the person concerned or whether the judgment of that person has any meaning for them. More often than not they are not aware of this boundless craving, but they betray its existence in their sensitivity when the attention they want is not forthcoming. They may feel hurt, for example, if someone does not accept their invitation, does not telephone for some time, or even only if he disagrees with them in some opinion. This sensitivity may be concealed by a ‘don’t care’ attitude.”

“Furthermore, there is a marked contradiction between their wish for affection and their own capacity for feeling or giving it. Excessive demands concerning consideration for their own wishes may go with just as great a lack of consideration for others. The contradiction does not always appear on the surface. The neurotic may, for example, be overconsiderate and eager to be helpful to everyone, but if this is the case it is noticeable that he acts compulsively, not out of a spontaneously radiating warmth.”

“Feelings of inferiority and inadequacy are characteristics that never fail. They may appear in a number of ways—such as a conviction of incompetence, of stupidity, of unattractiveness—and they may exist without any basis in reality. Notions of their own stupidity may be found in persons who are unusually intelligent, or notions about their own unattractiveness in the most beautiful women. These feelings of inferiority may appear openly on the surface in the form of complaints or worries, or the alleged defects maybe taken for granted as a fact on which it is superfluous to waste any thought. On the other hand, they may be covered up by compensating needs for self-aggrandizement, by a compulsive propensity to show off, to impress others and one’s self with all sorts of attributes that lend prestige in our culture, such as money, possession of old pictures, old furniture, women, social contacts with prominent people, travel, or superior knowledge. One or the other of these tendencies may be entirely in the foreground, but more generally one will feel distinctly the presence of both tendencies.”

“The third set of attitudes, those concerning self-assertion, involve definite inhibitions. By self-assertion I mean the act of asserting one’s self or one’s claims, and I use it without any connotation of undue pushing forward. In this respect neurotics reveal a comprehensive group of inhibitions. They have inhibitions about expressing their wishes or asking for something, about doing something in their own interest, expressing an opinion or warranted criticism, ordering someone, selecting the people they wish to associate with, making contacts with people, and so on. There are inhibitions also in reference to what we might describe as maintaining one’s stand: neurotics often are incapable of defending themselves against attack, or of saying “no” if they do not wish to comply with the wishes of others, as for example to a saleswoman who wants to sell them something they do not want to buy, or to a person who invites them to a party, or to a woman or man who wants to make love. There are finally the inhibitions toward knowing what they want: difficulties in making decisions, forming opinions, daring to express wishes which concern only their own benefit. Such wishes have to be concealed: a friend of mine in her personal accounts puts “movies” under “education” and “liquors” under “health.” Particularly important in this latter group is the incapacity to plan, whether it be a trip or a plan of life: neurotics let themselves drift, even in important decisions such as a profession or marriage, instead of having clear conceptions of what they want in life. They are driven exclusively by certain neurotic fears, as we see in persons who pile up money because they fear impoverishment, or take part in endless love affairs because they fear to enter a constructive piece of work.”

“By the fourth set of difficulties, those concerning aggression, I mean, in contradistinction to the attitudes of self-assertion, acts of going against someone, attacking, disparaging, encroaching, or any form of hostile behavior. Disturbances of this kind show themselves in two entirely different ways. One way is a propensity to be aggressive, domineering, over-exacting, to boss, cheat or find fault. Occasionally persons who have these attitudes are aware of being aggressive; more often they are not in the least aware of it and are convinced subjectively that they are just being honest or merely expressing an opinion, or even being modest in their demands; although in reality they are offensive and imposing. In others, however, these disturbances show themselves in the opposite way. One finds on the surface an attitude of easily feeling cheated, dominated, scolded, imposed on or humiliated. These persons, too, are frequently not aware that this is only their own attitude, but believe sadly that the whole world is down on them, imposing on them.”

“Peculiarities of the fifth kind, those in the sexual sphere, maybe classified roughly as either a compulsive need for sexual activities or inhibitions toward such activities. Inhibitions may appear at any step leading to sexual satisfaction. They may set in at the approach of persons of the other sex, in wooing, in the sexual functions themselves or in the enjoyment. All the peculiarities described in the preceding groups will appear also in the sexual attitudes.”

Anxiety

When it comes to anxiety, Karen distinguished it from fear as being more abnormal. There’s a need to uncover the hidden beliefs and challenge them. “…Fear is a reaction that is proportionate to the danger one has to face, whereas anxiety is a disproportionate reaction to danger, or even a reaction to imaginary danger…Even if that knowledge proclaims a certain attitude to be unfounded, a neurotic will find no difficulty in giving his action a rational foundation…Fear and anxiety are both proportionate reactions to danger, but in the case of fear the danger is a transparent, objective one and in the case of anxiety it is hidden and subjective. That is, the intensity of the anxiety is proportionate to the meaning the situation has for the person concerned, and the reasons why he is thus anxious are essentially unknown to him…The practical implication of the distinction between fear and anxiety is that the attempt to argue a neurotic out of his anxiety—the method of persuasion—is useless…The therapeutic task, therefore, can be only that of finding out the meaning certain situations have for him…Others realize that they have anxiety now and then, with or without knowing the conditions that provoke it, but they do not attribute any importance to it…In analyzing these persons one invariably finds just as much anxiety beneath the surface as in the first group, if not more. The analysis makes these neurotic persons conscious of their previous anxiety and they may recall anxiety dreams or situations in which they felt apprehensive. Yet the extent of anxiety acknowledged by them usually does not surpass the normal. This suggests that we may have anxiety without knowing it.”

Because emotions can be so unconscious, or barely conscious, our actions may still be influenced in existential ways and sabotage the conscious ego. “We have feelings of affection, anger, suspicion, so fleeting that they scarcely invade awareness, and so transitory that we forget them. These feelings may really be irrelevant and transitory; but they may just as well have behind them a great dynamic force. The degree of awareness of a feeling does not indicate anything of its strength or importance. Concerning anxiety this means not only that we may have anxiety without knowing it, but that anxiety may be the determining factor in our lives without our being conscious of it.”

Since the mind is trying to avoid pain, the unconscious uncontrolled impulses can fuel avoidances and life can go on autopilot, and the mind can attack itself without recognizing it. “…We seem to go to any length to escape anxiety or to avoid feeling it. Certain elements contained in the affect of anxiety may be particularly unbearable for the individual. One of them is helplessness. One can be active and courageous in the face of a great danger. But in a state of anxiety one feels—in fact, is—helpless. To be rendered helpless is particularly unbearable for those persons for whom power, ascendancy, the idea of being master of any situation, is a prevailing ideal. Impressed by the apparent disproportion of their reaction they resent it, as if it demonstrated a weakness or a cowardice…To allow any irrational factors to control them is for some persons more intolerable than for others. It is particularly hard to endure for those who secretly feel in danger of being swamped by irrational contrasting forces within themselves, and who have automatically trained themselves to exercise a strict intellectual control. Thus they will not consciously tolerate any irrational elements. Besides containing individual motivations this latter reaction involves a cultural factor, inasmuch as our culture places great stress on rational thinking and behavior and regards irrationality, or what may appear as such, as inferior.”

Rigidity takes hold when these unconscious reactions go in the wrong direction, and when pointed out, it becomes a narcissistic wounding to admit something needs to change. “…By its very irrationality anxiety presents an implicit admonition that something within us is out of gear, and therefore it is a challenge to overhaul something within ourselves. Not that we consciously take it as a challenge; but implicitly it is one, whether we choose to acknowledge it or not. None of us likes such a challenge; it may be said that we are opposed to nothing so much as to the realization that we must change some attitude of our own. The more hopelessly, however, a person feels trapped in the intricate network of his fear and defense mechanism, and the more he has to cling to his delusion that he is right and perfect in everything, the more he instinctively rejects any—even if it is only indirect or implicit—insinuation of something wrong in himself and any need to change.”

A good deal of our economics are based on ways of escaping anxiety, and “in our culture there are four main ways: rationalize it; deny it; narcotize it; avoid thoughts, feelings, impulses and situations which might arouse it…The first method—rationalization—is the best explanation for evasion of responsibility. It consists in turning anxiety into a rational fear…The second way of escaping anxiety is to deny its existence. In fact, nothing is done about anxiety in such cases except denying it, that is, excluding it from consciousness…The third way of finding release from anxiety is to narcotize it. This may be done consciously and literally by taking to alcohol or drugs. There are, however, many ways of doing it…The fourth way of escaping anxiety is the most radical: it consists in avoiding all situations, thoughts or feelings which might arouse anxiety. This may be a conscious process, as when the person who fears diving or mountain climbing avoids doing these things. More accurately speaking, a person may be aware of the existence of anxiety and aware of avoiding it. He may also, however, be only dimly or not at all aware of having anxiety, and dimly or not at all aware of avoiding activities…Of course [neurotics have] to pay the price for these momentary advantages by never getting rid of [their] worries. But [they do] not realize that, and in the last analysis [they do] not want to realize it, because deep down [they cling] to the delusion that [they] can change nothing within [themselves] and yet manage to have all the benefits that would ensue from a change.”

Defense – Panda Bear: https://youtu.be/vXz4lEwglkg?si=Hf0Y3Ps0XBFFOZ1V

Wishes create tensions that need release, but they often conflict with reaction formations, where people try to do opposite behavior in order to prevent social sanction. Those wishes can be so repressed and inhibited and they are eventually expelled from consciousness. When inhibition becomes deep enough to suppress even the awareness of a wish or impulse, the psychic energy that would normally seek expression through wish fulfillment, creativity, or self-assertion gets blocked, distorted, or trapped. When repression is strong enough, you lose not only the awareness of your wish—but the capacity to feel its energy. “It is possible to make a conscious denial of anxiety, a conscious attempt to overcome it. The most familiar example on the normal level is the soldier who, driven by the impulse to overcome a fear, performs heroic deeds…The process of ruthlessly marching over an anxiety plays a great role in many neuroses and is not always recognized for what it is. The aggressiveness, for instance, which many neurotics display in certain situations is often taken as a direct expression of an actual hostility, while it may be primarily such a reckless marching over an existing timidity, under the pressure of feeling attacked. While some hostility is usually present, the neurotic may greatly overdo the aggression he really feels, his anxiety provoking him to overcome his timidity. If this is overlooked there is danger of mistaking recklessness for veritable aggression…Let us consider, for example, a person listening to a paper and having critical thoughts about it. A minor inhibition would consist in a timidity about expressing the criticism; a stronger inhibition would prevent him from organizing his thoughts, with the result that they would occur to him only after the discussion was over, or the next morning. But the inhibition may go s0 far as not to permit the critical thoughts to come up at all, and in this case, assuming that he really feels critical, he will be inclined to accept blindly what has been said or even to admire it; and he will be quite unaware of having any inhibitions. In other words, if an inhibition goes so far as to check wishes or impulses there can be no awareness of its existence.”

We have to remember that defenses do provide a saving of negative feelings but the damage to our potential is severe, where it can be preferable to the short-term pain that one has to face to make a positive change. “A second factor that may prevent awareness occurs when an inhibition has such an important function in a person’s life that he prefers to insist that it is an unchangeable fact. If, for instance, there is an overpowering anxiety of some kind connected with any sort of competitive work, resulting in an intense fatigue after every attempt to work, the person may insist that he is not strong enough to do any work; that belief protects him, but if he admitted an inhibition he might have to return to work and thereby expose himself to the dreaded anxiety…A third possibility brings us back to the cultural factors. It may be impossible ever to become aware of personal inhibitions if they coincide with culturally approved forms of inhibitions or with existing ideologies.”

Procrastination can also slip in unawares and be a normal mode of being, because the underlying fear of developing skills and facing rejection is buried. “He may, for instance, procrastinate in matters which, without his knowledge, are connected with anxiety, such as making decisions, going to the doctor or writing a letter. Or he may ‘pretend,’ that is, subjectively believe that certain activities he contemplates—such as taking part in a discussion, giving orders to employees, separating himself from another person are unimportant. Or he may ‘pretend’ not to like doing certain things and discard them on that basis. Thus a girl to whom going to parties involves fears of being neglected may avoid going altogether by making herself believe that she does not like social gatherings…An inhibition consists in an inability to do, feel or think certain things, and its function is to avoid the anxiety which would arise if the person attempted to do, feel or think those things. There is no anxiety present in awareness, and no capacity for overcoming the inhibition by conscious effort. Inhibitions are present in their most spectacular form in the hysterical losses of functioning: hysterical blindness, speechlessness or paralysis of a limb. In the sexual sphere frigidity and impotence represent such inhibitions, although the structure of these sexual inhibitions may be very complex. In the mental sphere inhibitions in concentration, in forming or expressing opinions, in making contacts with people are well-known phenomena…For instance, we have to be aware of possessing ambitions before we can realize that we have inhibitions on that score. The question may be asked whether we do not always at least know what we want.”

Sometimes people are following moralistic values, but those values literally interfere with basic social skills, and because a culture supports it, the inhibition may fly under the radar. In the modern world, some men, especially if love is unrequited, will feel like a criminal perpetrator if they communicate their interest in a woman, for example. Compliance can hide the fact that some rebelliousness is required in order to learn new things that parents weren’t able to teach, or were skills they did not like and wanted to eradicate in the child, with a lot of success. “A patient who had serious inhibitions against approaching women was not aware of being inhibited because he saw his conduct in the light of the accepted idea of the sacredness of women. An inhibition against making demands is easily put on the basis of the dogma that modesty is a virtue; an inhibition against critical thinking about dogmas dominant in politics or religion or any specific field of interest may escape attention, and we may be entirely unaware of the existence of an anxiety concerning exposure to punishment, criticism or isolation. In order to judge the situation, however, we must of course know the individual factors in great detail. The absence of critical thought does not necessarily imply the existence of inhibitions, but may be due to a general laziness of mind, to stupidity or to conviction that really coincides with the dominant dogma.”

Ego Psychology: Anna Freud Pt. 5: https://rumble.com/v6pzkqo-ego-psychology-anna-freud-pt.-5.html

This is not an easy thing to change. When a long standing desire that has been repressed for decades is now entertained after therapy, there may be a lot of resistance and exhaustion that follows any new attempts to satisfy it. “In the first place, undertaking an activity about which we feel anxiety produces a feeling of strain, fatigue or exhaustion. One patient of mine, for example, who was recovering from a fear of walking on the street but still had a good deal of anxiety on that score, felt completely exhausted when she took a walk on Sundays. That this exhaustion was not due to any physical weakness is shown by the fact that she could perform strenuous housework without the slightest fatigue. It was the anxiety bound up with walking outdoors that caused the exhaustion; the anxiety was diminished enough so that she could walk outdoors, but was still effective enough to exhaust her. Many difficulties commonly ascribed to overwork are in reality caused not by the work itself but by anxiety about the work or about relations with colleagues.”

These anxieties become another form of self-sabotage, because skills that are undeveloped are awkward and open to more attacks from culture as the patient attempts to self-realize. “In the second place, anxiety connected with a certain activity will result in an impairment of that function. If there is, for example, an anxiety connected with giving orders, they will be given in an apologetic, ineffectual manner. Anxiety about riding a horse will result in an inability to master the animal. The degree of awareness varies. A person may be aware that anxiety prevents him from performing tasks in a satisfactory way, or he may only have the feeling that he is unable to do anything well…Thirdly, anxiety connected with an activity will spoil the pleasure that it would otherwise hold. This is not true for minor anxieties; on the contrary, they may produce an added zest. Riding a roller-coaster with some apprehension may make it more thrilling, whereas doing it with strong anxiety will make it a torture. A strong anxiety connected with sexual relations will render them thoroughly unenjoyable, and if one is not aware of the anxiety one will have the feeling that sexual relations do not mean anything…This last point maybe confusing, because I have said above that a feeling of dislike may be used as a means of avoiding an anxiety, and now I am saying that the dislike may be a consequence of the anxiety. Actually, both statements are true. Dislike may be the means of avoiding and the consequence of having anxiety…They are intricate and involved, and unless we makeup our minds that we must consider innumerable, interwoven interactions we shall make no progress in psychological knowledge…The more neurotic a person is, the more is his personality pervaded and determined by such defenses, and the greater the number of things he is unable to do or does not consider doing, although according to his vitality, mental capacities or educational background one would be justified in expecting him to do them. The more severe the neurosis, the more inhibitions are present, both subtle and gross.”

Hostility

Where there’s anxiety, the danger that a person feels also generates hostility toward the threat, but hostility is something very controlled by culture and because it’s so monitored, there’s often a feedback loop between hostility and anxiety. Those in power, because they have such power, are able to inflict their hostility on the powerless and being powerless itself adds to the feedback loop. The target can be then anxious over their own hostility. “It is well known that an acute hostile impulse may be the direct cause of anxiety, if its pursuit would mean defeating the purposes of the self. One example may serve for many. F. goes on a hiking trip through the mountains with a girl, Mary, to whom he is deeply devoted. Nevertheless he feels acutely and savagely infuriated against her because his jealousy has somehow been aroused. When walking with her on a precipitous mountain path he gets a severe attack of anxiety, with heavy breathing and heart-pounding, because of a conscious impulse to push the girl over the edge of the path…The structure of anxieties like these is the same as indicated in anxieties from sexual sources: an imperative impulse which, if yielded to, would mean a catastrophe for the self…As long as one is aware of animosity its expansion is restricted in three ways. First, consideration of the circumstances as they are in a given situation shows him what he can and what he cannot do toward an enemy or alleged enemy. Second, if the anger concerns one whom he otherwise admires or likes or needs, the anger will sooner or later become integrated into the totality of his feelings. Finally, inasmuch as man has developed a certain sense of what is appropriate to do or not to do, personality being as it is, this too will restrict his hostile impulses.”

Creating a mask to cover hostility can eventually become a habit, and even worse, many victims have so little power and support to defend their interests, there is very little they can do about the abuse they suffer. “Repressing a hostility means ‘pretending’ that everything is all right and thus refraining from fighting when we ought to fight, or at least when we wish to fight. Hence the first unavoidable consequence of such a repression is that it generates a feeling of defenselessness, or to be more exact, it reinforces an already given feeling of defenselessness. If hostility is repressed when a person’s interests are factually attacked it becomes possible for others to take advantage of him…The basic anxiety is more or less the same everywhere, varying only in extent and intensity. It may be roughly described as a feeling of being small, insignificant, helpless, deserted, endangered, in a world that is out to abuse, cheat, attack, humiliate, betray, envy.”

Unconscious hostility can be self-sabotaging when there is no constructive action it can exhaust itself on. It rattles around and gets released in places not intended. “By the process of repression the hostility—or to indicate its dynamic character we had better use here the term rage—is removed from conscious awareness but is not abolished. Split off from the context of the individual’s personality, and hence beyond control, it revolves within him as an affect which is highly explosive and eruptive, and therefore tends to be discharged. The explosiveness of the repressed affect is all the greater because by its very isolation it assumes larger and often fantastic dimensions.”

For many people, the out of control rage shows up in fantasy, and when stuck in fantasy, the subject may look like they are fighting a battle in their mind and talking to themselves. It keeps bubbling up until there’s satisfaction, even if only in fantasy. “Another consequence of repressing hostility arises from the fact that a person registers within himself the existence of a highly explosive affect which is beyond control…The more defenseless one is the greater the danger appears.” Anxiety then builds up to control the hostility. “These processes brought about by repressed hostility result in the affect of anxiety. In fact, the repression generates exactly the state which is characteristic of anxiety: a feeling of defenselessness toward what is felt an overpowering danger menacing from outside.” Desires to numb the pain then become tempting. “A person in such a situation may protect himself by such means, for example, as developing an enhanced need for sleep or taking to drink.”

Sublimation – Sigmund Freud: https://rumble.com/v1gv2fr-sublimation-sigmund-freud.html

Karen put together a set of possibilities where the anxiety and hostility could be aimed outward or against oneself:

A: The danger is felt to arise from one’s own impulses.

B: The danger is felt to arise from outside.

Both A and B can be subdivided into two subgroups

I: The danger is felt to be directed against the self.

II: The danger is felt to be directed against others.

A. I: The danger is felt to come from one’s own impulses and to be directed against the self. In this group the hostility is turned secondarily against the self. Example: phobia of having to jump down from high places.

A. II: The danger is felt to come from one’s own impulses and to be directed against others. Example: phobia of having to injure others with knives.

B. I: The danger is felt to come from outside and to concern the self. Example: fear of thunderstorms.

B. II: The danger is felt to come from outside and to concern others. In this group the hostility is projected to the outside world and the original object of hostility is retained. Example: the anxiety of over-solicitous mothers concerning the dangers menacing their children.

The damage that this feedback loop causes can be seen in how potent the effect is in that patients can be impacted even when there is no danger present. Just the remembrance of abuse or the anticipation of it can set off the loop. “This effect of reciprocity between hostility and anxiety, one always generating and reinforcing the other, enables us to understand why we find in neuroses such an enormous amount of relentless hostility. This reciprocal influence is also the basic reason why severe neuroses so often become worse without any apparent difficult conditions from the outside. It does not matter whether anxiety or hostility has been the primary factor; the point that is highly important for the dynamics of a neurosis is that anxiety and hostility are inextricably interwoven.”

Hostilities build over time and because they are so pernicious, there should be ample content available from transference reactions and free association to trace them back as far as possible; back to the day when the child had no recourse to fight back and was totally dependent on parents and cultural authority figures. “An anxiety maybe fully accounted for by the actual conflict situation. If, however, we find an anxiety-creating situation in a character neurosis we always have to reckon with previously existing anxieties in order to explain why in that particular instance hostility arose and was repressed. We shall find then that this previous anxiety was in turn the result of a pre-existing hostility, and so on. In order to understand how the whole development started we have to go back to childhood…The basic evil is invariably a lack of genuine warmth and affection. A child can stand a great deal of what is often regarded as traumatic—such as sudden weaning, occasional beating, sex experiences—as long as inwardly he feels wanted and loved. Needless to say, a child feels keenly whether love is genuine, and cannot be fooled by any faked demonstrations. The main reason why a child does not receive enough warmth and affection lies in the parents’ incapacity to give it on account of their own neuroses. More frequently than not, in my experience, the essential lack of warmth is camouflaged, and the parents claim to have in mind the child’s best interest. Educational theories, [concern-trolling] or the self-sacrificing attitude of an ‘ideal’ mother are the basic factors contributing to an atmosphere that more than anything else lays the cornerstone for future feelings of immense insecurity.”

As children build masks that last into adulthood, the pretend attitude can be a normal mode of engagement with the rest of the world. “A basic distrust toward everyone may be covered up by a superficial conviction that people in general are quite likable, and it may coexist with perfunctorily good relations with others; an existing deep contempt for everyone may be camouflaged by a readiness to admire.” The world view becomes that of “protection against the basic anxiety through power—trying to achieve security by gaining factual power or success, or possession, or admiration, or intellectual superiority. In this attempt at protection the motto is: If I have power, no one can hurt me.” For those more submissive, “…securing affection in any form may serve as a powerful protection against anxiety. The motto is: If you love me you will not hurt me.” For those who dislike either of those strategies, “protection can also be found, however, by withdrawing from the world. This does not mean going into a desert or into complete seclusion; it means achieving independence of others as they affect either one’s external or one’s internal needs. Independence in regard to external needs may be achieved, for example, by piling up possessions. This motivation for possession is entirely different from the motivation for the sake of power or influence, and the use made of the possessions is likewise different. Where possessions are amassed for the sake of independence there is usually too much anxiety to enjoy them, and they are guarded with an attitude of parsimony because the only objective is to be safeguarded against all eventualities…Another means that serves the same purpose of becoming externally independent of others is a restriction of one’s needs to a minimum.”

Karen put together a through line that shows what people look like when they are on autopilot and looking for reassurance, and they use rationalization to justify their behaviors:

Power -> Reassurance against helplessness -> Tendency to domineer

Prestige -> Reassurance against humiliation -> Tendency to humiliate

Possession -> Reassurance against destitution -> Tendency to deprive others

“All these destructive impulses involved in the neurotic striving for power, prestige and possession enter into the competitive struggle. In the general competitive struggle that takes place in our culture even the normal person is likely to show these tendencies, but in the neurotic person such impulses become important in themselves, regardless of any disadvantage or suffering they may bring him. The ability to humiliate or exploit or cheat other people becomes for him a triumph of superiority or, if he fails, a defeat. Much of the rage shown by the neurotic if he is incapable of taking advantage of others is due to such a feeling of defeat…In love relationships the neurotic’s tendencies to defeat, subdue and humiliate the partner play an enormous role. Sexual relations become a means of either subduing and degrading the partner or of being subdued and degraded by him, a character which is certainly entirely alien to their nature.”

People have to keep in mind, that real obstacles that are understandable, do not make one neurotic. Neuroticism comes from cultural impositions or self-imposed restrictions. “The clash between individual desires and social requirements does not necessarily bring about neuroses, but may just as well lead to factual restrictions in life, that is, to the simple suppression or repression of desires or, in most general terms, to factual suffering. A neurosis is brought about only if this conflict generates anxiety and if the attempts to allay anxiety lead in turn to defensive tendencies which, although equally imperative, are nevertheless incompatible with one another.”

The reality is that most people do not want just one form of defense. They may alternate between incompatible aims which creates internal conflict. Therapy can explore the internal contradictions so that the increased clarity naturally leads to decisiveness. The healthy way is to be actually objective about one’s flaws and not project them on others or to belittle oneself. Distortions have to be removed by verification of what’s factually true. “The two which most frequently clash are the striving for affection and the striving for power…The dilemma is practically unsolvable. One cannot step on people and be loved by them at the same time. Yet in the neurotic the pressure is so great that he does try to solve it. In general he attempts a solution in two ways: by justifying his drive for dominance and the grievances resulting from its nonfulfillment; and by checking his ambition. Here as there the justification is important as a strategy: it is attempted to make the demands incontestable so they will not block the way toward being loved. If he disparages others in order to humiliate them or crush them in a competitive fight, he will be deeply convinced that he is being wholly objective. If he wants to exploit others he will believe and try to make them believe that he is in great need of their help…The degree to which self-belittling serves as a check on ambitions is shown also by the fact that the capacities that are belittled are usually the ones in which the individual desires most ardently to excel. If his ambition is of an intellectual character, intelligence is its instrument and hence is belittled. If his ambition is of an erotic character, appearance and charm are its instruments and hence they are belittled. This connection is so usual that one may guess from the focus of the self-belittling tendency where the greatest ambitions lie.”

Because these desires for social connection, like abuse masquerading as leadership, love can mask parasitical behavior. “If a person needs another’s affection for the sake of reassurance against anxiety, the issue will usually be completely blurred in his conscious mind, because in general he does not know that he is full of anxiety and that he therefore reaches out desperately for any kind of affection for the sake of reassurance. All that he feels is that here is a person whom he likes or trusts, or with whom he feels infatuated. But what he feels as spontaneous love may be nothing but a response of gratitude for some kindness shown him or a response of hope or affection aroused by some person or situation. The person who explicitly or implicitly arouses in him expectations of this kind will automatically be invested with importance, and his feeling will manifest itself in the illusion of love. Such expectations may be aroused by the simple fact that he is treated kindly by a person who is powerful and influential, or by one who merely gives the impression of standing more securely on his feet. They may be aroused by erotic or sexual advances, although these may have nothing to do with love. They may feed on existing ties of some sort, which implicitly contain a promise of help or emotional support: family, friends, physicians. Many such relations are carried on under the camouflage of love, that is, under a subjective conviction of attachment, when actually the love is only the person’s clinging to others to satisfy his own needs. That this is no reliable feeling of genuine affection is revealed in the ready revulsion that appears when any wishes are not fulfilled. One of the factors essential to our idea of love—reliability and steadiness of feeling—is absent in these cases.”

“Though love is incompatible with use of the loved one for some gratification, this does not mean that love must be completely and exclusively altruistic and sacrificing. Nor does that feeling alone deserve the name of love which does not demand anything for the self. Persons who express any such convictions betray their own unwillingness to give affection rather than a thoroughly worked out conviction. Of course we want something from the person we are fond of—we want gratification, loyalty, help; we may even want a sacrifice, if necessary. And it is in general an indication of mental health to be able to express such wishes or even fight for them. The difference between love and the neurotic need for affection lies in the fact that in love the feeling of affection is primary, whereas in the case of the neurotic the primary feeling is the need for reassurance, and the illusion of loving is only secondary…[There is] disregard of the other’s personality, peculiarities, limitations, needs, wishes, development. This disregard is in part a result of the anxiety which prompts the neurotic to cling to the other person. One who is drowning and clings to a swimmer does not usually consider the other’s willingness or capacity to carry him along. The disregard is also partly an expression of the basic hostility toward people, the most common contents of which are contempt and envy.”

So much has to do with access to resources, and being barred from access is just another form of rejection. “The fear of rejection, if strongly developed, may lead a person to avoid exposing himself to any possibility of denial. This avoidance may extend from not asking for matches when buying cigarettes to not asking for a job. Persons who fear any possible rejection will avoid making advances to a man or woman whom they like, as long as—they are not absolutely certain of not meeting with a rejection. Men of this type usually resent having to ask girls for a dance, because they are afraid the girl may accept only for the sake of being polite; and they think women are much better off in this regard, because they need not take the initiative…In other words, the fear of rebuff may lead to a series of severe inhibitions falling in the category of timidity. The timidity serves as a defense against exposing one’s self to rebuff. The conviction of being unlovable is used as the same kind of defense. It is as if persons of this type said to themselves, ‘People do not like me any how, so I had better stay in the corner, and thereby protect myself against any possible rejection.’ The fear of rebuff is thus a grave handicap to the wish for affection, because it prevents a person from letting others feel or know that he would like to have some attention. Moreover the hostility provoked by a feeling of being rebuffed contributes a great deal toward keeping the anxiety alert or even reinforcing it. It is an important factor in establishing a ‘vicious circle’ which is difficult to escape from.”

Fear of rejection can then go towards neurotic guilt when a person embraces perfectionism. In a world where people shift blame, to be honest about one’s flaws can make you look worse than you are. Because no one is perfect, any mistakes must be hidden, or their existence is left to fester until an authority figure happens on these flaws. When that occurs, because perfectionism is unyielding and expectations of punishment are draconian, there’s a masochistic craving for punishment to pay the “karmic” debt. “The existence of diffuse guilt feelings is suggested by the neurotic’s haunting fear of being found out or of being disapproved of…Guilt feelings, like inferiority feelings, are not at all unwelcome; the neurotic person is far from eager to get rid of them. In fact he insists on his guilt and vigorously resists every attempt to exonerate him. This attitude alone would suffice to indicate that behind his insistence on feeling guilty there must, as in inferiority feelings, be a tendency which has an important function…Unlike the normal person he not only fears those consequences which are likely to happen, but anticipates consequences utterly disproportionate to reality. The nature of these anticipations depends on the situation. He may have an exaggerated notion of impending punishment, retaliation, desertion, or his fears may be completely vague. But whatever their nature his fears are all kindled at the same point, which may be roughly described as the fear of disapproval, or if the fear of disapproval amounts to a conviction, as a fear of being found out.”

These tendencies may go back to childhood where the parent child dynamic was that of dictator and subject. There wasn’t enough room for a learning mentality to be developed. “When a relationship is based on authority, criticism tends to be forbidden because it would undermine the authority. It may be openly forbidden and the ban be enforced by punishment, or, much more effectively, the prohibition may be more tacit and be enforced on moral grounds. Then the criticism of children is checked not only by the individual sensitivities of the parents, but also by the fact that the latter, pervaded by the cultural attitude that it is a sin to criticize parents, attempt implicitly and explicitly to influence the children to feel the same way. Under such conditions a less intimidated child may express some revolt, but in turn is made to feel guilty. A more intimidated child does not dare to show any resentment and gradually does not even venture to think that the parents may be wrong. He feels, however, that someone must be wrong, and thus comes to the conclusion that, since the parents are always right, it must be he who is at fault. Needless to say, this is usually not an intellectual but an emotional process. It is determined not by thinking but by fear…In this way the child begins to feel guilty, or more accurately, he develops the tendency to seek and find fault within himself, instead of calmly weighing both sides and considering the whole situation objectively. His reproaches may lead him to feel inferior rather than guilty. There are only fluctuating distinctions between the two, depending entirely on the implicit or explicit emphasis on morals which is customary in his surroundings. A girl who is always subordinated to her sister and out of fear submits to the unjust treatment, choking the accusations she really feels, may tell herself that the unequal treatment is warranted because she is inferior to her sister (less beautiful, less brilliant), or she may believe it is justified because she is a bad girl. In both cases, however, she takes the blame on herself instead of realizing that she is being wronged.”

Sexuality Pt 4: Masochism – Sigmund Freud & Beyond: https://rumble.com/v1gtrq1-sexuality-pt-4-masochism-sigmund-freud-and-beyond.html

This looks a lot like Freud’s masochism, but Karen tried to desexualize it, and explain it more related to indirect goal orientation. “Suffering may have a direct defense value for the neurotic, and may often, in fact, be the only way he can protect himself against imminent dangers. By self-recrimination he avoids being accused and accusing others, by appearing ill or ignorant he avoids reproaches, by belittling himself he avoids the danger of competition—but the suffering he thereby brings on himself is at the same time a defense…Suffering is also a means of getting what he wants, of carrying out his demands effectively and of putting his demands on a justified basis. Concerning his wishes toward life the neurotic is in a dilemma. His wishes are, or have become, imperative and unconditional, partly because they are prompted by anxiety, partly because they are not checked by any real consideration of others. But on the other hand his own capacity to assert his demands is greatly impaired, because of his lack of spontaneous self-assertion, in more general terms because of his basic feeling of helplessness. The result of this dilemma is that he expects others to take care of his wishes. He gives the impression that underlying his actions is a conviction that others are responsible for his life and that they are to be blamed if things go wrong. This collides with his conviction that no one grants him anything, and the result is that he feels he has to coerce others to fulfill his wishes. It is here that suffering comes to his assistance. Suffering and helplessness become his outstanding means of obtaining affection, help, control, and at the same time allow him to evade all demands that others might make on him…Suffering has finally the function of expressing accusations against others in a disguised but effective way.”

There’s an incentive for suffering that is perverse, but it could also go even further towards malingering, where both physical and psychological abuse is directly sought after. “Suffering fulfills a variety of needs: it provides reassurance against anxiety, is a means of living out repressed hostility, and serves as a substitute for sexual gratification. Since all these needs are of vital importance for the persons concerned and could not be attained otherwise, it is not improbable that these psychic factors play a role in making them more susceptible to illness.” For example:

1. They have an excessive need for attention and affection. In spite of these yearnings, they usually have no close friends and no satisfactory personal relations. They will, however, attach themselves readily to physicians and nurses and easily become emotionally dependent upon them. They cannot stand being alone.

ASMR Cranial Nerve Exam – Gentle Whispering ASMR: https://youtu.be/OBemGtqkhu0?si=fRlSnp2COODh6QoN

2. Their interpersonal relations are not satisfactory because they always seem to be the ones who are neglected, rejected, or maltreated. They will complain about this in a more or less disguised way. If their relationship with the physician or nurse lasts long enough, the same emotional situation is bound to arise—in other words, they will also feel neglected or offended if an extraordinary amount of care and time is not continually devoted to them.

a. They seem to have an intuitive capacity for picking out persons with a distinct streak of cruelty.

b. They provoke attacks by being overdemanding or by complaining and nagging in a way that insinuates some kind of reproach toward the other party.

c. If they are treated offensively or are injured, they suffer to quite a disproportionate degree.

d. Their sexual life is unsatisfactory, and the manifestations of it may be practically negligible.

These behaviors are so annoying that they beg authority figures to criticize, demean, and mistreat them, which gives them exactly what they want. “[Malingerers] can express it, however, with an increase of their symptoms or with a new illness, which then has the implication: ‘Look at how you have made me suffer.’ This implication, which is expressed quite frankly during analysis, allows them to feel that they are the innocent martyrs and to put all the blame on others. In the analytical situation this reaction can be made conscious and worked out in its various ramifications, but outside analysis these vindictive impulses often are lived out naïvely, for instance against physicians by whom these patients feel mistreated. Finally, they use the alleged injury as an excuse for demanding particular attention and care.”

Hostile feelings are often very repressed and hence the need to move towards people as a solution. “The sources of the guilt feelings may be traced—as in other neuroses—to intense, repressed feelings of hostility. The fear of letting any of these hostile impulses find expression is so great that usually even normal, adequate aggressiveness becomes checked. The patients feel paralyzed in asking for things for themselves, standing up for their rights, defending themselves against unwarranted claims, and fighting where it is necessary to fight.”

Karen then pointed to cultural factors that send women into this realm of masochism. There are of course biological reasons for connecting femininity with masochism, but it’s one that Karen fought against.

(a) Greater average physical strength in men than in women. According to ethnologists this is an acquired sex difference. Nevertheless it exists nowadays. Though weakness is not identical with masochism, the realization of an inferior physical strength they fertilize an emotional conception of a masochistic female role.
(b) The possibility of rape similarly may give rise in women to the fantasy of being attacked, subdued, and injured.
(c) Menstruation, defloration, and childbirth, insofar as they are bloody or even painful processes, may readily serve as outlets for masochistic strivings.
(d) The biologic differences in intercourse also serve for masochistic formulation. Sadism and masochism have fundamentally nothing whatsoever to do with intercourse, but the female role in intercourse (being penetrated) lends itself more readily to a personal misinterpretation (when needed) of masochistic performance; and the male role, to one of sadistic activity.

What makes it culturally more likely that women develop masochism for Karen would be as follows:

(1) Blocking of outlets for expansiveness and sexuality.
(2) Restriction in the number of children, inasmuch as having and rearing children supplies the woman with various gratifying outlets (tenderness, achievement, self-esteem), this becomes all the more important when having and rearing children is the measuring rod of social evaluation.
(3) Estimation of women as beings who are, on the whole, inferior to men (insofar as it leads to a deterioration of female self-confidence).
(4) Economic dependence of women on men or on family, inasmuch as it fosters an emotional adaptation in the way of emotional dependence.
(5) Restriction of women to spheres of life that are built chiefly upon emotional bonds, such as family life, religion, or charity work.
(6) Surplus of marriageable women, particularly when marriage offers the principal opportunity for sexual gratification, children, security, and social recognition. This condition is relevant inasmuch as it favors emotional dependence on men, and generally speaking, a development that is not autonomous but fashioned and molded by existing male ideologies. It is pertinent also insofar as it creates among women a particularly strong competition from which recoil is an important factor in precipitating masochistic phenomena.

The complex changes in the 20th century for women involved technological advances that made having more children less of an imperative, now that people were living longer and infant mortality decreased. The differences between men and women in the modern world for Karen required testing out capacities to see what truly was a limit for women. “Inferiority feelings are the most common evil of our time and our culture. To be sure we do not die of them, but I think they are more inimical to happiness and progress than cancer or tuberculosis. When the subject of inferiority feelings comes up, someone usually remarks, ‘But, men too have inferiority feelings.’ True, but there is an important difference: men do not, as a rule, feel inferior just because they are men, but a woman frequently feels inferior because she is a woman. The restriction of woman to a private emotional sphere leads to inferiority feelings because a sound and secure self-confidence must draw on a broad basis of human qualities—such as initiative, courage, independence, capacity for mastering situations, talents—as well as erotic values. As long as homemaking was a big task with plenty of responsibilities, as long as the number of children was not restricted because children added to the wealth of the nation, woman knew that she was a constructive factor in the economic process. This conviction gave her a sound basis for self-esteem. With the change in social conditions, woman has lost one important foundation for feeling herself valuable…Differences between the two sexes certainly exist, but we shall never be able to discover what they are until we have first developed our potentialities as human beings. Paradoxical as it may sound, we shall find out about these differences only if we forget about them.”