[brains]

[wispfox]

It's... odd to be told, after one has spent 10-15 minutes whining about reasons to be frustrated with things (nothing new, y'all), that one doesn't get frustrated.

Apparently, the fact that I said things like that I can cope, and then gave reasons why, was the reason for that statement.

But, well... if I _can't_ cope, I don't stay in situations that frustrate me. It's not healthy for me to stay, in that case.

So I guess it was not that I don't get frustrated, but that I don't stay with sources of frustration which are not worth the frustration.

I'm somewhat baffled by the idea of staying around sources of frustration, unless one's available opportunities truly don't allow any other behavior. But then, there's an awful lot of people who seem to think they just have no opportunities, where the truth is simply that they refuse to take them. (note that I am _not_ ignoring the fact that some people really _don't_ have other options, because they don't have the time/energy/money/etc in their life) So perhaps it's just that my idea of what is and is not an option, and what is and is not something I can cope with, is an unusual one. Not sure.

But fascinated!

Comments

[dancingwolfgrrl.livejournal.com]

Yeah. There's a psychological distinction between people who believe that they are the major causative factor of things in their lives (internal locus of control) and people who believe that things outside of them are the major causative factors (external locus of control). I'm definitely an internal-locus person, and you seem to be too, which leads us to think of most things as results of choices and subject to our choices, albeit sometimes in complex and unanticipated ways!

[wispfox.livejournal.com]

Well...

the person with whom I was having the conversation is also someone for whom they have an internal locus of control. But, because of various things in their life, there's a _LOT_ of external stuff making it more likely they'll stay longer with things that are hurting them when they can see how it'll get them to a point of being much better off. (vs not doing the things which are a few years of additional difficulty and rough on them physically and mentally, but without which they'll stay in a very stressful place)

And their sweetie is worried. And that's where the conversation went next.

So I think they _do_ get where I was coming from, but because I'm simply better off in a lot of ways than they are, my point of cope is _able_ to be lower than theirs.

Of course, I've always been amazed at just how much said person can cope with and do, so I suspect it's partly that they have to, and partly that they _can_.

*shrug* I doubt I could survive in their life.

[trista.livejournal.com]

note that I am _not_ ignoring the fact that some people really _don't_ have other options, because they don't have the time/energy/money/etc in their life

I find it interesting that my level of determination to be out of the frustrating situation influences my ability to see opportunities. My marriage is a good example. I was unhappy for quite a while but couldn't leave because I didn't have the money/support/blah blah to go. Until the final straw, and then I found a way to make it happen. The money/support/blah blah had been there all along, but I didn't or couldn't see it until I reached the breaking point. I wonder how many other frustrating things I've put up with over the years because I was blind for whatever reason to the opportunities to remove myself from those situations?

[wispfox.livejournal.com]

I find it interesting that my level of determination to be out of the frustrating situation influences my ability to see opportunities.

Yep. This is so very often true.

I firmly believe that far more people can actually improve their lives than think they can.

However, I also think that the claim in the US that anyone can improve their lives - such beliefs that lead to ideas of poor people 'deserving' to be poor, because 'obviously' they aren't trying hard enough - is a myth, not a reality.

And that's what sparked my parenthetical. :)

[trista.livejournal.com]

And that's what sparked my parenthetical. :)

That's pretty much what I figured, but as so often happens I went off on a TristaTangent. ;)

I agree wholeheartedly about the idea that anyone can imrove their lives if they just want it hard enough is a myth. It is ridiculous to think that all homeless/poor/un- or under-educated/whatever people are homeless/etc because they're just not trying to be otherwise. There are many, many people who are in situations that they just cannot get out of. I worked for Florida Medicaid for seven years, and I've seen heartbreakingly large numbers of those people. It irritates me more than I can say to hear people carelessly say that poor people deserve it or should "just change the way they are if they want their lives to be better." That's right up there with the idea that the poor people of New Orleans deserved death, disease, misery, etc for not leaving when Katrina hit, because if they'd wanted to go they could have found a way. Ugh.

[wispfox.livejournal.com]

That's pretty much what I figured, but as so often happens I went off on a TristaTangent. ;)

Figured, but was sufficiently uncertain that my excessive need for clarity took over. ;)

right up there with the idea that the poor people of New Orleans deserved death, disease, misery, etc for not leaving when Katrina hit, because if they'd wanted to go they could have found a way. Ugh.

Yep.

It's interesting having simultaneous beliefs of 'many people have far more options than they are willing to see' and 'some people really _are_ in a place where there is not something they are missing that they can do to improve their lives'.

If nothing else, it makes it very hard to talk about one of the two without people thinking that I'm not aware of the other! :)

[trista.livejournal.com]

If nothing else, it makes it very hard to talk about one of the two without people thinking that I'm not aware of the other! :)

I definitely understand that! My thoughts sometimes go in circles around each other about the two and their relationship to each other. I think it all comes down to insight and empathy. We're far enought removed from others' situations that we're sometimes better able to see the whole picture, and therefore see options that those people are blind to because they can't see the forest for the trees. (I cannot believe I actually said "can't see the forest for the trees.") But you're also able to put yourself in the shoes of someone who is poor/all the rest of that stuff I listed, and understand how they can be kept where they are by the circumstances they're in.

[wispfox.livejournal.com]

Tangentially, I'm generally bad at seeing big picture of things (I'm much better with details than with generalities), but I'm _still_ decent at being aware of opportunities.

Makes me wonder how many I've missed, really. ;)

[trista.livejournal.com]

I'm really fantastic at seeing other people's big pictures, but horrible at seeing my own. I sometimes wish I could have a little invisible video camera follow me through my life so when I get to the end I could look back and see other paths that I didn't recognize at the time. Then again, that might be dreadfully depressing.

Thinking out loud, as usual.

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

I don't stay with sources of frustration which are not worth the frustration.

I think this is the heart of it; how you measure worth. How aggravating does a situation have to be before it isn't "worth it"? (How high is up?) How do you figure out the worth of a situation? Can you make that a rational balancing act, rather than just doing what you feel?

Now, I don't know you tremendously well; but in general you seem to me to be, and I use this term slightly oddly, a low-passion person. You get enthusiastic about things, but you don't get swept away by them as much as some other people. Passion, in the non-restrictive sense (i.e. not just sex/love), can be good or bad, but it always interferes with clear reasoning, and alters your perception of the worth of something. Passion sort of removes your ability to cope, and reason.

So, being able to dispassionately determine that a situation which has both good parts and bad parts is overall "good" or "bad" -- say, an imperfect or perhaps even unhealthy relationship -- is very difficult from the inside, and possibly impossible from the outside. I'm not sure what your honest reaction to such a complexly frustrating situations would be. You claim you walk away from them; but what about things that are sometimes frustrating and sometimes wonderful? Those are harder to call. When do you run out of ability to cope? How do you walk away from an entrenched situation? Is the unhappiness of being *out* of that situation worth the release of the unhappiness of being *in* that situation?

There's more to say here but (a) I don't want to be overbearing and (b) I should be doing work...

Re: Thinking out loud, as usual.

[wispfox.livejournal.com]

Passion sort of removes your ability to cope, and reason.

Yep. It's most of (all of?) why I dislike NRE.

You claim you walk away from them; but what about things that are sometimes frustrating and sometimes wonderful? Those are harder to call.

Well... duh. :)

When do you run out of ability to cope? How do you walk away from an entrenched situation? Is the unhappiness of being *out* of that situation worth the release of the unhappiness of being *in* that situation?

I have been known to stay far beyond the point when I should have left; I am prone to this if I'm stuck in a state of severe confusion. I have been known to leave as soon as I realize that something is actively unhealthy for me, because I'm unhappy more often than I am happy. I think that this is more healthy for me, and is what I hope I will do in the future.

As for the latter question, yes. I have never ever been in a situation where I was unhappy to the point of thinking I should leave - or doing so - such that the loneliness of being out of the relationship was worse than being in it.

Ditto with jobs I was actively unhappy with.

Interestingly, though, the majority of the topic - in the referenced conversation - was not relationships, but jobs. My friend is doing too damn much, is stressing out, and is watching health declining (having no health insurance is _NOT HELPING_). But because this is known, and because potential for improvement is visible in the future, my friend is sticking with it, even though said friend's sweetie is very worried and not really comprehending the whole 'stick with it in order to get to the improvements later on' idea.

Re: Thinking out loud, as usual.

[metahacker.livejournal.com]

Job-relationships are really a lot like love-relationships in that way...