Owning Your Feelings

But heres the kicker . If youre upset by something someone did or said, keep in mind that the advice to talk about it with someone does not mean to locate how what that person said or did was wrong. No. It means that you must trace your feelings to some aspect of your past or present that makes you feel that way. So often when we feel wronged by someone, we deal with the emotion by directing accountability for our feelings to that person. Instead, we need to take responsibility for our emotional responses. The act of attributing blame is something that makes the emotion stick rather than dissolve.

In this case, ˜˜owning an emotion means to claim it as yours, as opposed to placing your attention on its cause. The moments invested in externally attributing responsibility for the feeling are not ˜˜ownership moments. They do not do much toward resolving the feelings. You can blame somebody else for problematic behavior, but for your discomfort you must blame yourself. When I say you must ˜˜claim it as yours, I do not just mean to declare intellectually that you have certain feelings. Rather, you must allow yourself to experience the emotion physically. You must allow the experience of it into your consciousness.

For example, consider Jerry, a partner in a successful business with Bob. Their partnership is in jeopardy because they have become less trusting of each other. Recently one of Jerrys direct reports secretly told him that Bob spoke about Jerry unfavorably at a meeting. Apparently Bob said, ˜˜It doesnt matter what Jerry thinks is the reason for this. The facts are the facts and we have to deal with the facts. Im tired of pussyfooting around. When Jerry heard that Bob said this publicly , he was livid. He told me the story.

˜˜And why are you so mad, Jerry? I asked. ˜˜Bob should not have done that. It undermines my authority and makes us look like we are not aligned, he answered .

Lets be clear on what is happening here. Jerry is having a strong emotional response and is attributing it to the actions of his partner Bob. Jerry is not saying, ˜˜I have a thing about not being respected, so when Bob said this, it really pushed my buttons . Instead, Jerry is attributing his anger to some other cause. He is saying, ˜˜Bob did it.

One would think that blaming Bob was logical. Bob said something. Jerry was offended. If Bob hadnt said it, Jerry would not be offended.

Simple. Then again, perhaps parents are to blame. By the same logic, if they had not produced this person called Bob, then Jerry would not have been offended on that day by that remark. But thats not the way it works.

Sure, Bobs statement contributed to the problem. But the readiness of Jerrys meta-level to interpret Bobs statement as potentially painful set the stage. If Jerry did not have unfinished business about needing the respect of others, he might not have had his reaction. Bob probably shouldnt have said what he said. It probably was counterproductive for the partnership and for his leadership of the company. But thats not the point. The idea here is that by deflecting responsibility for feelings, we stall our processing of them.

I like to approach interpersonal challenges like this on two distinct levels: the individual level and the relationship level.

At the individual level, as I say to my clients , one is wholly responsible for ones feelings. After all, its your body. If you are having an array of negative emotional experiences inside your body, you own them. Theyre yours. Deflecting the blame for them is a rejection of ownership. It puts their resolution in abeyance and can impede personal growth. So, for me, if Jerry is angry , Jerry has a personal problem. In fact, Jerry is smart to process his feelings before addressing the relationship problems.

At the level of the relationship, these two partners do indeed need to sort out their behaviors. Perhaps Bob should not have said what he did. It would be prudent for both parties to have some basic guidelines established for their relationship. So Bob is not free of culpability. But Jerry needs to own his own anger.

If you were to ask Jerry today how he sees what happened , he would explain that he takes responsibility for his feelings, and together he and Bob are responsible for their relationship. Were Bob to speak disparagingly of his partner, Jerry would say, ˜˜I dont like my anger reaction and I dont like Bobs behavior. To deal with his anger, he would bring it to mind, isolate it as a feelingindependent of causeand say, ˜˜I have anger inside me. It is mine. Insofar as it informs me (about the need for communication with Bob), I am grateful for it. The fact that I am uncomfortable with it is my problem. Then, accepting his anger, or, more precisely, experiencing the anger, holding onto the experience while observing himself do so, he would feel the anger wane. He would be left with his challenges with Bob, but one of his two problems would have been addressed.