Label Things, Not People

I'm a doctor.  I should label a disease, Schizophrenia.  I should not label a person.  A schizophrenic.

We put people into groups, classes, designations.

I try to follow the advice of the Arbinger Institute when they said “Don’t lump the people you’re thinking about into an impersonal mass. Think of individuals…Think of the people.”

It’s a problem I have every day.  I’m a psychiatrist, and every day I am asked to label people.  I am asked to diagnose them and treat them.  Patient #1 has Schizophrenia, #2 has Borderline Personality Disorder, etc…  It’s very easy to change and say Patient #1 IS Schizophrenic, #2 IS Borderline. 

It’s easy to “stop seeing them as people and just see them as a diagnosis.  If I can do that then I can stop worrying about them, and their lives, and their feelings.  I can treat their stated symptoms and go home.  I don’t have to worry about their visitors, their comfort, their real needs or anything. This way is easier.  It’s simpler.  I could just slap a label on them and go home.

Some therapists would tell me to never use the word “patient” but rather “client.”

I still use the term patient because I think mental illness is an illness.  I don’t think my patients are illnesses, I think they have illnesses,

I once read a book called “Crucial Conversations”

The author said “Labeling is putting a label on people or ideas so we can dismiss them under a general stereotype or category… By employing a handy label, we are now dealing not with a complex human being, but with a bonehead.”

I still make this mistake with people every day.  I am a conservative independent, which means I usually agree with the republicans and disagree with the democrats – I’m just sick of political parties so I refuse to be a republican.

When one of my facebook friends wrote a post about “Plan B” for birth control, my autopilot conservative mind kicked – yep, that’s abortion, that’s murder, that’s wrong.  The friend posting must be a bleeding heart liberal.  She probably has never stopped to consider any opinion other than her own.  She must be blinded by her partisan and left wing ideation.  To quote the book – she must be “a bonehead.”

I labeled her.  I discounted her as a “liberal” and that meant I no longer had to consider anything she said as “valid.”  She was part of an “extreme” group, and everything about her must be wrong, tainted, misled, etc…  Forget the fact that she is one of the smartest people I knew in High school, she is now an OB/GYN, she is well read and stays current, and one of the most caring people I know. Luckily she did not instantly label me as a bonehead conservative.  She took time, assumed I was an intelligent human being, and she explained her views, and the reasoning behind it.  My viewpoint changed.  Not only did my view of the subject change, but my view of her changed.  She was once again a person, not a “bonehead liberal.”

It goes beyond politics.  This labeling and dismissing happens everywhere

In the book The Anatomy of Peace, the authors state:  "Lumping everyone of a particular race or culture or faith into a single stereotype is a way of failing to see them as people…we have a propensity to demonize others.  One way we do this is by lumping others into lifeless categories – bigoted whites, lazy blacks, crass Americans, arrogant Europeans, violent Arabs, manipulative Jews, and so on.  When we do this we make masses of unknown people into objects and many of them into our enemies."

Do those labels sound like presidential politics to anyone else?  I hear labels like: Socialist, Rich snob, Flip-Flopper, Baby-killer, Flaming Liberal, fascist, Tax-evader, Communist, Right Wing Hack, etc…

"Let's tell people he's not American."  "Let's tell people she's not Christian." -  It seems all the political parties want to do is find a label that scares people, then make it stick to the other side’s candidate.

Labels and stereotypes are killing us.   They allow us to ignore people, to write them off.  They allow us to dehumanize everyone who doesn’t agree with us.

We must see people as people, anything less is just plain wrong.

Start with language.  Stop defining people by some small aspect of their life.

I was born male, I was born white, and 75 years after I was born, I’ll be Old.

Suddenly, by being born, I just became the enemy of some of my democratic friends: and Old White Man.  The evil overlord of politics and business and religion, an old white male.

It is true that I will be an old white man.  But I will not JUST be an old white man.  I will be so much more, in every possible way.  You cannot know who I am by knowing my race, my religion, my birthplace, or even my diagnosis.

Ever heard people say “She’s so Bipolar, He’s ADD, She’s Borderline, He’s Schizophrenic, She’s Anorexic, He’s OCD, she’s an addict?

That doesn’t sound like labeling problems to be fixed.  That sounds like labeling people, because they ARE the problem, so we can dismiss them.

What did President Obama see when campaigning across the country 8 years ago?
He said: “Spend time actually talking to Americans, and you discover that most evangelicals are more tolerant than the media would have us believe, most secularists are more spiritual. Most rich people want the poor to succeed, and most of the poor are both more self-critical and hold higher aspirations than the popular culture allows.”

So that’s Step One: Label Things, Not People. That’s our job.  To notice how many times we label people, even if it’s only in our heads.  Then work to see them as a complex individuals, not a stereotype.

We Are Not Single Issue Voters!

Why do people think that any of us are single issue voters?  With all the topics, policies, and the utter complexity of our everyday lives - how could it be possible to have your vote come down to one issue?

I'm a doctor in Residency.  I'm a mormon, married with kids.  I usually vote Republican.  I don't own a gun, but I enjoy skeet shooting and I'll probably own a shotgun someday.  I think everyone should pay their fair share of taxes, from the top to the bottom.  I believe we have a duty to help the poor, but no one is entitled to take what I've earned without my consent.  I want to retire someday, I want my kids to go to college.

I've only written 4 lines about myself (without touching foreign policy) - but I challenge anyone to explain to me why one of those issues should define me completely - and have absolute control over my vote.
Tonight I was reading a CNN story about the Democratic National Convention.  One comment said this:

"If you have a mother, daughter, sister, aunt, niece, grandmother, cousin, then make sure you stand up against the party of No who has a mission to take women's wombs away from them. The GOP platform is to make abortion illegal, by going around the way of creating personhood amendments, that a person is made at conception. There will be no exceptions in any situation."

First, it's wrong, that's not Romney's stance - but let's not debate that here.  Even if it were true. Is the right to have an abortion the most important issue when picking a president?

A 60 year old woman who is getting ready to retire - is that her first priority?  It's not health care, or social security, or anything like that - it's her right to have an abortion???

How about Gun Control?  I like shooting a gun once in a while for sport.  I've never shot a living thing, but sure, I'd go hunting if someone invited me.  Does that define me?  Does that mean I must vote Republican so I have the right to a military grade assault rifle?  That's insane.

How about issues closer to home - Taxes, Health Care, Religion.  

 I'm a flat tax guy.  Does that mean I must vote for Ron Paul, or a flat tax supporter?  Is that the end all, beat all issue?

I'm a Mormon living in Nevada.  Does that mean I must vote for Harry Reid because he's a mormon too?  Must I vote for Romney?  

Health care is huge in my life.  First - I care that my family and I are healthy - and it's also how I get paid.  I serve mostly the indigent population - so government programs pay pretty much my entire salary.  If Medicaid and Medicare don't exist - how do those patients get health care?  How do their doctors get paid?  So must I vote democrat to support the full funding of those programs?

I have many homosexual friends.  Some are Republicans, some are Democrats.  Why are homosexuals treated like their sexual orientation defines them?  They can't have an opinion on foreign policy, the environment, employment, or any other issue?

Why are women treated like their uterus is their entire being?

Why are gun owners treated like that is their only joy in life?

Why, why, why?

Is it because it's easy?  We want people to fit into boxes?  We want to make elections about one issue, and then pick sides and duke it out?

Let's just tell people right now who they are voting for:

Women - Obama
Wealthy - Romney
Gays - Obama
Business Owners - Romney
Blacks/Latinos - Obama
Mormons - Romney
Youth - Obama
Unemployed - Romney

Do you disagree with this list? OF COURSE YOU DO!  It's wrong!

This is how we start ignoring people - we treat them like a demographic.

This is how stereotypes start - which leads to labeling, dismissing, hating, and eventually killing.

To the Republicans, the Democrats, The Libertarians, the Pundits, the Candidates, the Super-PACs and everybody else trying to influence us.  Stop treating us like stereotypical morons who have one track minds.

Thank you.

What’s in a name? Absolute disregard.

Leadership and Self Deception called it: “Being inside the box”

 Crucial Conversations called it: “Labeling”

The Anatomy of Peace called it: “Lumping into a stereotype”

They are all talking about seeing people as anything less than a complete and complex human being.

Here are a few quotes from the first book: Leadership and Self Deception

1. “Either I’m seeing others straightforwardly as they are - as people like me who have needs and desires as legitimate as my own – or I’m not.
2. “Smart people are smarter, skilled people are more skilled, and hardworking people work harder “when they see, and are seen, straightforwardly – as people.
3. “If I’m not interested in knowing a person’s name, I’m probably not really interested in the person as a person.”
4. “Don’t lump the people you’re thinking about into an impersonal mass. Think of individuals…Think of the people.”

It’s very true.  I do it every day.  I’m a psychiatrist in training, and everyday I am asked to label people.  I am asked to diagnose them and treat them.  Patient #1 is a Schizophrenic, #2 is a Borderline, etc…  It’s very easy to stop seeing them as people and just see them as a diagnosis.  If I can do that then I can stop worrying about them, and their lives, and their feelings.  I can treat their stated symptoms and go home.  I don’t have to worry about their visitors, their comfort, their real needs or anything. This way is easier.  It’s simpler.  I just slap a label on them and go home.

My realization of my struggle and our apparent propensity to categorize or label people was brought out again in Crucial Conversations:

1.“Labeling is putting a label on people or ideas so we can dismiss them under a general stereotype or category.”

2. “Lord, help me forgive those who sin differently than I.”

3. “By employing a handy label, we are now dealing not with a complex human being, but with a bonehead.”

I do this with people every day.  I am a conservative independent, which means I usually agree with the republicans and disagree with the democrats – I’m just sick of political parties so I refuse to be a republican.

        When one of my facebook friends wrote a post about “Plan B” for birth control, I agreed with the sentiment of the other conservatives responding.  I thought – yep, that’s abortion, that’s murder, that’s wrong.  The friend posting must be a bleeding heart liberal.  She probably has never stopped to consider any opinion other than her own.  She must be blinded by her partisan and left wing ideation.  To quote the book – she must be “a bonehead.”

         I labeled her.  I discounted her as a “liberal” and that meant I no longer had to consider anything she said as “valid.”  She was part of an “extreme” group, and everything about her must be wrong, tainted, misled, etc…  Forget the fact that she is one of the smartest people I knew in High school, she is in her 4^th year of medical school, and she is well read and stays current.  Luckily she took a little time and convinced me to research how plan B actually works.  When I found it has many of the same mechanisms as an IUD for preventing pregnancy, suddenly my viewpoint changed.  Not only did my view of the subject change, but my view of her changed.  She was once again a person, not a “bonehead liberal.”

The last part of my realization was from The Anatomy of Peace:

 

1. "Lumping everyone of a particular race or culture or faith into a single stereotype is a way of failing to see them as people."

2. "When we start seeing others as objects we begin provoking them to make our lives difficult.  We actually start inviting others to make us miserable."

3. "Another characteristic of conflicts…is the propensity to demonize others.  One way we do this is by lumping others into lifeless categories – bigoted whites, lazy blacks, crass Americans, arrogant Europeans, violent Arabs, manipulative Jews, and so on.  When we do this we make masses of unknown people into objects and many of them into our enemies."

Does that last paragraph sound like presidential politics to anyone else?  I hear labels like: Socialist, Rich snob, Flip-Flopper, Baby-killer, Tax-evader, Communist, Cult member, etc…
     "Let's tell people he's not American."  "Let's tell people he's not Christian." -  It seems all the political parties want to do is find a label that scares people, then make it stick to the other side’s candidate.  

Labels and stereotypes are killing us.   They allow us to ignore people, to write them off.  They allow us to dehumanize everyone who doesn’t agree with us.

We must see people as people, anything less is just plain wrong.

Book Review: The Anatomy of Peace

        I read...a lot.  Yes I have a busy life – but much of my leisure time is spent reading books because I love them.  I try not to recommend books very often.  When I recommend a book, I want it to be something special, something worthwhile.  I want people to trust me and think my recommendation is worth something.

        I whole-heartedly recommend The Anatomy of Peace.  It is the best book I have read this year.

        The Arbinger Institute has now written two books.  The first was quite good.  When I started this book I was afraid it was just going to be a re-hashing of that book: “Leadership and Self-Deception.”  What I found fascinating is that IT IS the same material; they cover the same topics and teach the same lessons.  But they do it so well, and teach it with such REAL LIFE examples, that I couldn’t stop reading the book.  I was only supposed to read 65 pages before our book club meeting – I read all 224.  It really is that good, that helpful.

        The book starts with a bunch of parents all arriving at a “reformation camp” for wayward kids.  This is for those parents who have already tried everything else because their kid is on drugs, in jail, failing school, violent, belligerent, etc…
        The parents are asked not only to bring their children to the camp, but stay themselves for a few days.  The parents have to spend two days being taught by the two men who run the camp: Yusuf al-Falah, an Arab; and Avi Rozen, a Jew.  The book covers the two days with the parents, hearing their stories, and being taught by two men who should be the most bitter of enemies, but have found a way to make peace.

I know it might sound cheesy, and yes the story is kind of a lecture – but trust me, it’s worth it.

Here are a few Reviews of the book by people more well known.

Here are my favorite quotations from the book:

Lumping everyone of a particular race or culture or faith into a single stereotype is a way of failing to see them as people. – p. 29

When we start seeing others as objects we begin provoking them to make our lives difficult.  We actually  start inviting others to make us miserable. – p. 43

We provoke in others the very comments and behaviors we are accusing them of. – p. 49

Another characteristic of conflicts…is the propensity to demonize others.  One way we do this is by lumping others into lifeless categories – bigoted whites, lazy blacks, crass Americans, arrogant Europeans, violent Arabs, manipulative Jews, and so on.  When we do this we make masses of unknown people into objects and many of them into our enemies. – p. 54

The deepest way in which we are right or wrong is in our way of being toward others. – p. 57

If we can’t put an end to the violence within us, there is no hope of putting an end to the violence without. – p. 64

Sometimes we might be forced to defend ourselves…but that is different than saying that we are forced to despise, to rage, to denigrate, to belittle. – p. 80

Self Betrayal. It is a betrayal of my own sense of the right way to act in a given moment in time – not someone else’s sense or standard, but what I myself feel is right in the moment. – p. 90

A choice to betray myself is a choice to go to war. – p. 91

I needed to be justified for violating the truth I knew in that moment. – p. 94

What need would I have to be justified if I wasn’t somehow crooked? – p. 95

If I am worried that others are getting a pass, am I also worried about whether I am giving myself one? – p. 95

Whenever we need to be justified, anything that will give us justification will immediately take on exaggerated importance in our life. – p. 106

I can notice people’s relative strengths and weaknesses when I’m seeing them as people.  What’s different when I’m in the box however, is that I feel superior to or better than others because of these strengths or weaknesses…I’m doing more than simply noticing differences; I’m making judgments about peoples’ worth based on those differences. – p. 108

If I need to be seen as smart...I will get anxious whenever I think my intelligence might be at issue. – p. 132

Think of the privileges we may retain for ourselves while we apply other standards to those who work for is – privileges regarding vacation time, for example, the choice parking spot, the special perks, the public spotlight, the differences between what we have to do to get something to happen and what everyone else in our organization has to do.  Which of these are necessary or unavoidable, and which of them do we retain because we think we are better than others, more vital, and deserve special treatment? – p. 158

What’s more important to you now – flaunting your well-earned important status or building a team and organization that will outlive you, surpass you, grow beyond you, and ultimately thank and revere you? – p. 160

Try thinking about the people who have had the greatest influence for good in your life and why? – p. 175

 Simply the memory of those people can take you to a different vantage point. – p. 175

 Or maybe there is a particular book or book passage that has a powerful effect on you. – p. 175

You need only to identify the relationships, places, memories, activities, book passages, and so on, that have that kind of power for you, and then remember to search them out when you feel war rising within you. – p. 177

Most people who are trying to put an end to injustice only think of the injustices they themselves have suffered.  Which means they are not really concerned with injustice but with themselves.  They hide their focus on themselves behind the righteousness of their outward cause. – p. 186

  

·What are this person’s or people’s challenges, trials, burdens, and pains?

·How am I, or some group of which I am a part, adding to these challenges, trials, burdens, and pains?

·In what other ways have I or my group neglected or mistreated this person or group?

·In what are my better-than, I-deserve, worse-than, and must-be-seen-as boxes obscuring the truth about others and myself and interfering with potential solutions?

·What am I feeling I should do for this person or group?  What could I do to help?

We need to honor the senses we have rather than betray them. – p. 196

It is no good trying to teach if I myself am not listening and learning. – p. 205

We want to spend most of our time actively helping things go right. – p. 214

When our teaching is going poorly, we often try to rescue it by talking more and insisting more…If I am correcting and correcting but problems remain, that is a clue that the solution to the problem I am facing will not be found in further correction. – p. 215