Lifestyle Choices

Just as every home has different sets of patterns of what should be expressed and what repressed, so cultures and sub-cultures vary in the unwritten rules of what is, and what is not, permitted. It would be interesting to compare statistics of the incidence of depression in more or less repressed cultures. But this is not possible, firstly because definitions of depression are so variable, and secondly because the more repressive political regimes will not allow the publication of any statistic which might put the management in bad light. Thirdly, repression is qualitative as well as quantitative — what is repressed in one country may be freely expressed in another and vice versa.

Since comparison of cultures tends to be invidious in the stark black and white of print, I will restrict myself to the culture I was raised in, and leave you to think about your own culture. Some of what I shall say, I realized only when I worked in a different culture and country. In England, generally, there is a great deal of freedom of thought. At the same time feelings and bodily movement are usually strongly curbed. If you were deaf, you would know when an Italian was talking and even what he was talking about, but if you looked at an Englishman, you would have to look very carefully to be sure he was talking at all. The famous British stiff upper lip is a physical fact that can be measured electronically with an electro-myograph (an instrument which measures muscle tone by recording the amount of electrical activity over the muscle). The stiff upper lip is also a symbol of a certain style of resilience, which relies on control of feeling and control of movement. The lips can be used to stop facial expression, and expression of words and feelings, just as the thigh can be used to stop a kick. I have witnessed a psychotherapist gently press on the upper lip of an Englishman who was holding back his tears — as he allowed his lip to loosen, he began to cry. Other cultures may be freer in emotional expression or in action, but more restricted in freedom of thought. Whatever the limitation, it is very difficult to see it clearly when you are in the midst of it, since nearly everyone else has the same limitation. (If they don’t, they may seem odd and may be rejected for their differences.)

A woman of 60 talked about her grandmother who had created a cold and hard atmosphere within which nobody dared to speak out of turn or behave incorrectly. Cleanliness and frugality were essential. She remembered that only a certain specific number of towels would be dealt out each week, no matter what the need. But when she thought of her own daughter, she realized with regret that she had had the same attitude — “doing it properly” had been paramount. She described with sadness how she had avoided hugging her daughter because of thoughts about her daughter’s hair being unwashed. She saw how her mother had been much the same and how unfortunately, when she looked at the whole pattern, generations had all been affected. Her life was being affected even now by things her grandmother had learned over a 100 years before, and her grandmother was similarly affected by things learned by her ancestors. It is not easy to break the negative parts of the ancestral chain.

Religion and repression

Dogmatic religion has a sad history of repression of thought, feeling and action. There are endless examples from all religions which insist their way is THE way. I mention the influence of the Christian religion here because I have encountered this in my professional experience. People brought up in a strong Protestant tradition tend to find enjoyment very difficult to bear and even if your parents are atheist, aspects of a Protestant ethic may still have come down to you. People brought up as Catholics tend to mistrust their own thoughts, which according to the Church may be sinful enough to warrant eternal hell without even being acted upon. Since no human being can totally avoid “sinful” thoughts, such a system can create a barrier of repression, with self-righteousness outside the barrier, and self-doubt (often not consciously realized) and guilt within. This fosters a reliance on being sanctioned by the “outer authority” (which may be the Church or may have been transferred to any other institution of power).

This leads on to the interesting question of whether belief in God relates to susceptibility to depression. Logically, it would make sense that those who believe in a more authoritarian and punishing God, and who therefore act more like children towards a father, would generally be more prone to depression than those who do not believe in God or those who believe that they are part of God and therefore responsible for their own higher morality and the choices and directions of their lives. However, this is not my experience. The variable that cannot be measured is depth of belief. It is quite possible for someone to believe, intellectually, in total personal responsibility and yet to act very dependently, and it is possible for someone to believe in God as a punishing old man, and yet to act out of inner self-reliance.

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
Freedom of thought and body movement

• Get rid of Health Insurance Maze
• Short-term Explorative Psychotherapy
• Complementary Alterna Medicine (CAM)
• Instant Medical attention and Health Care
• At the Back of Beauty
• Past history and personality
• The mind-Mind Care
• Head for the Wilderness continue...
• The Fully Alive Body
• Anti-anxiety Drugs