March 29, 2007

"Try healthier, more constructive ways of using anger--like confronting others directly (like on Blogging Heads TV)."

Says Dr. Helen, who points to a study that shows that women are angrier than men and thinks the problem may be that female anger tends to get expressed in passive-aggressive ways.


AlanDownunder said...

No. That would be uncivil. Which is beyond the pale. And betrays fixations. Try cognitive therapy instead.

salvage said...

I thought you weren't talking about this?

Robin Goodfellow said...

I've noticed an unhealthy trend towards greater passive aggressiveness recently. For example, there are many circumstances of rude public behavior (cell phones in movies / restaurants, indoor smoking, etc.) where the general reaction of the public has been to use heavy handed legal or technological solutions indirectly rather than individual confrontation and opprobrium in person. This is a bad trend, I think. A healthy society requires an open dialog at a personal level. "Communicating" indirectly through passive aggressive laws and regulations is fundamentally unhealthy.

The Exalted said...

How do you repond to allegations that you look like Tara Reid?

Maxine Weiss said...

Ah, yes---the Personality Disorders.

Which quadrant, which axis of the DSM-IV is "Passive-Aggressive Personality Dysfunction" located.

The codes.

I'm trying to remember, is it 379.5, or 378.7 or some such.

We have to have a code for these contrived disorders, you we can bill 'em out to whoever, the workplace, the goverment, insurance....big monies involved, while the rest of us see our premiums rise due to frivolous and fraudent diagnoses....but I digress.

Yes, the ubiquitous "Personality Disorders": Grandiose Personality Disorder, Narcissistic Personality Disorder etc...

When did "Personality" become a disorder?

When the arrogant Psychiatrists realized they weren't smart enough to become cardiac surgeons, and created a whole pathology out of thin air.

If nothing else, very inventive, all give them that.

Peace, Maxine

Paul Zrimsek said...

Would these healthy, direct displays of female anger be the same healthy, direct displays of female anger you spent half the diavlog whining about? Or do rants fit into separate diagnostic categories depending on whether they're incoming or outgoing?

Maxine Weiss said...

Yes, I realize it's rather early in the morning for me to start in, but this is war! I'm on a rampage.

I'm determined to rip through the Mental Health Community. And I won't rest until I've completed a complete shakedown of these fraudulent Barbarians masquerading as "Health Care Professionals", and the complete sham of "Mental Health" via Dr. Thomas Szasz.

I'm determined to strip every last Psychiatrist of his phony and fraudulent license. They are nothing but drug pushers and let them go back to sweeping floors and cleaning toilets, like they should be. That's what they're good for

Folks, this is War !!!

Peace, Maxine

Mark Daniels said...

I think that Helen is right on both counts, that women are angrier than men and that their anger tends to be expressed in passive-aggressive ways.

My wife, who feels no hesitation about expressing anger in helpful ways, is a healthier and less angry person than many women because she doesn't feel the need to bottle up her feelings.

However, historically our culture has put men in places of authority, whether at home, in the workplace, or in social settings. Women have basically been told to get with the male-set program. This incites anger without productive ways to express it.

I don't subscribe to the "tea kettle" school of thought that tells us if we don't immediately vent our spleens, we'll implode. Venting everything we feel can be narcissistic and imprison us and our relationships to our fleeting feelings.

But I do think that relationships in all contexts would be healthier if so many women didn't feel constrained to live in the manner described by Helen.

The Bible has an interesting passage which I share with people--female or male--when they're thrashing with how to deal with a confrontation they need to have: "Be angry; but do not sin. Do not let the sun go down on your anger." The point: It isn't "bad," as I think many women are taught, to feel anger. The question is what to do with it. Do you use it to discuss things with the object of your anger, with the goal of finding a commonly-acceptable solution and of repairing the relationship? Or do you allow it to live inside of you and make you hateful toward the other person, often expressing the anger and now the hatred, in passive-aggressive ways?

That passage from Ephesians, then, is commending taking ownership of our feelings and finding productive, healthy ways to deal with them. In other words, we don't allow our feelings to micromanage our pshyches and lives, programming us. We program ourselves.

The most hate-filled person I know is a an angry passive-aggressive woman who, when confronted with how hurtful her words are, claims that she's being misunderstood and implies that people who think otherwise must either be having bad days or be losing their minds. (More passive-aggressiveness.) This woman may even believe it when she makes these claims. But her family will tell you that her approach is very destructive to her, to their family, and to everybody's health.

I think that Helen's insights are right on!

Have a good Thursday, Ann.

Better Living: Thoughts from Mark Daniels

TMink said...

Maxine, last time I posted about this you jumped up and down with your panties in a wad because I used the word "we." Is this where I return the favor?

"We have to have a code for these contrived disorders, you we can bill 'em out to whoever, the workplace, the goverment, insurance....big monies involved, while the rest of us see our premiums rise due to frivolous and fraudent diagnoses....but I digress."

What you mean "we" mental illness denier?


TMink said...

"Folks, this is War !!!

Peace, Maxine"

Wow. Too amazing for words. Or at least many words. Maxine, war and peace are generally considered antonyms. Using them in such close proximity makes you look daft. Not that there is any such thing as being daft.


David said...

I'm with Maxine on this one. The recent GEICO commercial with the caveman and the psychiatrist is spot on: So easy a caveman could do it or so easy a psychiatrist could do it!

The psychiatrist says "That doesn't make sense to me."

These snake-oil distributors generally are P.C. provocateurs looking for a way to encourage a cult of victimhood at great expense to society. The alternative is to take responsibility for your actions and communicate in a civilized manner.

Passive/aggressive bushwhacking usually gets found out to the detriment of the perp. Self-esteem problems are traits that are learned. They can be unlearned if you quit blaming others.

bill said...

"Folks, this is War !!!

Peace, Maxine"

Wow. Too amazing for words. Or at least many words. Maxine, war and peace are generally considered antonyms. Using them in such close proximity makes you look daft. Not that there is any such thing as being daft.


Trey, missing the one time Maxine's humor is actually funny tags you as the daft one.

Then the need to publicly call her out, lecture, and admonish her highlights certain controlling aspects of your personality that you should probably seek professional counseling to absolve.

As long as you're talking about words, let's look at your use of "antonym." If you weren't so insecure about your education you would have typed the perfectly fine "opposite."

And I think you left a word out of this sentence: What you mean "we" mental illness denier?

I think we can all agree that there's nothing more annoying than pointless nitpicking and a snotty attitude. If I was your mother, I would be ashamed.

bill said...

If I were your mother. Now I'm ashamed. Then again, I wouldn't have written my comment if you hadn't written yours, so this is still all your fault.

But if Maxine hadn't written hers, then you wouldn't have responded; so the fault is hers.

Or is Ann Althouse to blame because she wrote the post? Or is Dr. Helen the one who should be truly ashamed for my error. I guess, in the end, it's all God's fault.

Oligonicella said...

I think there's a distinct difference between contrived and named. If a disorder can be accurately discribed, then there's a good reason to name it.

Anyone arguing that people who enact their aggression through 'behind the scenes' actions don't exist aren't really observing the population.

Anything, including chewing gum, can and should be called a disorder if it interferes with your life enough to cause severe problems.

Or, are suicidal tendencies merely another personality?

My biggest problem with psychiatry(ists) is the apparent god complex. Diagnosis and treatment is not a science, it's a craft.

Theo Boehm said...

Oooh! Maxine's at it again.

I remember getting angry with Maxine about this issue once.  Then it finally dawned on me. 

Folks, the best way to understand Maxine is to think of her as a kind of barmy Greek chorus with no ontological status.  Trying to understand where Maxine's coming from would quickly get us into realms of metaphysics that, as the Sutra says, are not profitable to pursue.

Just smile.  Be happy.

And don't be ashamed.

bill said...

Did someone say Suicidal Tendencies? Cue music:

I was sitting in my room and my mom and my dad came in and they pulled up a chair and they sat down, they go:
Mike, we need to talk to you
And I go:
Okay what's the matter
They go:
Me and your mom have been noticing lately that you've been having a lot of problems,
You've been going off for no reason and we're afraid you're gonna hurt somebody,
We're afraid you're gonna hurt yourself.
So we decided that it would be in your interest if we put you somewhere
Where you could get the help that you need.
And I go:
Wait, what do you mean, what are you talking about, we decided!?
My best interest?! How can you know what's my best interest is?
How can you say what my best interest is? What are you trying to say, I'm crazy?
When I went to your schools, I went to your churches,
I went to your institutional learning facilities?! So how can you say I'm crazy.

They say they're gonna fix my brain
Alleviate my suffering and my pain
But by the time they fix my head
Mentally I'll be dead

I'm not crazy - institutionalized
You're the one who's crazy - institutionalized
You're driving me crazy - institutionalized

They stuck me in an institution
Said it was the only solution
To give me the needed professional help
To protect me from the enemy, myself

Fen said...

Trying to understand where Maxine's coming from would quickly get us into realms of metaphysics that, as the Sutra says, are not profitable to pursue.

I kinda enjoy trying to figure Maxine out. She the sorbet of the Althouse vortex?

Glenn said...

"On"?! That would be both a poor and an inappropriate choice. 'Poor' because it's pretty much settled that video is a 'cool' medium and displays of heated and directed anger just come across as crazed and uncivil; 'Inappropriate' because redirecting anger at others, who happen to be available on, that ought to be directed towards the original source of the anger, just isn't the way that most reasonable and civil people have decided to act.

And by the way, isn't a curious coincidence that direct anger doesn't play well on TV and our whole country has a tough time directly expressing anger too. Hmm. The destruction emanating from the TV only begins with short attention spans, hyper-consumerism, heightened aggression in kids, and obesity.

Maxine Weiss said...

Don't mock me; I'm on a rampage.

I intend to rip through the Mental Health Community and, one by one, strip each Psychiatrist, and useless Social Worker, of his/her license.

And, I can do it. There's a group of us on the Thomas Szasz site that have started a grass-roots movement to vanquish the Mental Health Community, and we start by going after their licenses.

Cut off the gravy train. Stop the drug flow-Big Pharma etc..

Don't mock me; join me. (

Peace, Maxine

blake said...


Whenever someone corrects the use of the subjunctive, it calls to my mind a Loudon Wainwright song (IWIWAL = I Wish I Was A Lesbian):

Okay, so I'm riding around in this car with this woman I'm close to a couple times a week. And I'm noticing she's looking out the window and checking out other women. "Isn't she lovely? That's a great hair-do. what a nice outfit," and I said "Hey, babe! What is the deal? You're noticing all these other chicks! Maybe... you're a lesbian". She looks at me and says "I wish I was a lesbian". Now at that point I wanted to say "You mean you wish you were a lesbian, 'cause grammatically..." But I let it slide, I didn't want to ruffle any feathers... But you know, that sentence, that retort, "I wish I was a lesbian", it kinda got stuck in the ol' Loudo's mind, kinda gestated there for 7 or 8 minutes, and this tune popped out!

bill said...

blake, yep, obviously that was my point of reference for the correction.

XWL said...

Maxine, is this discussion weighing down your Thetan?

Time for another Audit.

(and I was composing this before I noticed you brought in Szasz to this thread).

And just to avoid any accusations of passive-aggressiveness, I do not mock your (likely) belief in Scientology, I believe that Scientology is self-mocking.

(the best reference material on this matter would have to be this.)

Whenever someone launches into a tirade against the "Psychiatry Scam", it's not hard to figure out where they are coming from.

Palmer said...

"But the fact is that, if people decide to slam you and fight back, you shouldn't get too mad. You should accept that as part of a process that makes you more prominent."
----Ann Althouse

AllenS said...

Good eye, XWL. Are you close to crossing the bridge yet, Maxine?

Hoofin said...

I am still surprised that that whole thing got the play it got.

Bissage said...

Similarly, it's not hard to figure out where XWL is coming from when he lies about his intent to mock Maxine’s “(likely)” [sic] belief in Scientology.

If Maxine is a disingenuous advocate, then what are you?

I know very little about Scientology, except: (1) it is a religion or belief system that unites individuals; (2) these individuals seem to take it seriously, for better or worse; and (3) Scientology is neither dadaist nor punk so it is “([un]likely)” [sic] to be self-mocking, assuming arguendo that a religion or belief system is capable of mockery, at all.

Next time, why don’t you simply say that Scientology is stupid because you think it’s stupid?

You’ll be a better person for having been so forthright.

And I might agree with you.

P.S. AllenS, why did you say “[g]ood eye, XWL”? He said it was “not hard to figure out ….” Would it not have made more sense for you to have simply declared that you think less of Maxine because you think she is a Scientologist?

You know, you two, I’ve been a fan of your comments for a long time now, but that was just mean, pure and simple. Mocking a particular religion or belief system is one thing. Taunting an individual for his or her religiosity or beliefs, in general, is quite another.

Now, you two go to your rooms and think about what you’ve done and don’t come down until you’re sorry.



ron st.amant said...

There's an article in (I think last month's) Maclean magazine- a student did a study of the blogosphere and found there was a larger proportion of men to women active in blogging, however she also discovered that the women used more profanity in blogging (?!?)

not that one has to be angry to use profanity...but I guess it helps.

AllenS said...


It was a simple question that could be answered with a yes or no. "Crossing the bridge" is a Scientology achievement. It has something to do about being "clear". It's been a while, but I had a relationship with a Scientology woman, and she told me about it.

Bissage said...


I thought you were being mean.

Please accept my apology.

AllenS said...


The worst thing about commenting is how to write in a way that will not be misunderstood. I don't know your thoughts on Scientology, and while I have only met one, I can truthfully say, the one that I knew, had an extremely thin skin.

Bissage said...


I don’t give a rat’s ass about Scientology. But I do have a chivalrous streak. I hear tell that makes me a sexist. Oh, well.

Peace, Bissage.


Galvanized said...

Girls are socialized from a young age that to express their anger physically is uncivilized and trashy. We were taught to suppress our anger by our mothers. As far as socialization, in movies in particular, the angry woman is most often characterized in one of two ways -- either crying (implying vulnerability/injury) or passive-aggressively (seeking revenge by sabotage or secretive little mean acts). Women today are more apt to save their anger for a rainy day, to use it to their advantage later.

But, as shown in the altercation at the newspaper the other day between those two fashion writers, there is some overlap of influence in today's society on anger.

I think society is teaching our daughters to act out their anger. TV shows images of beautiful, higher-class women catfighting it out (for example, Desperate Housewives) which young girls aspire to)

Today's girls are clearly more comfortable physically expressing their anger on girls and boys alike, but only after verbal sparring. But the passive-aggressive is still a means for the "nicer" girls. Get the breakdown from any girl in public school. You can laugh at me on this, but I think that the popular music and music videos are the main vehicles for socializing children nowadays; and women in the songs/videos (particularly hiphop) show women physically asserting their anger. There is very little bottling up going on anymore. A lot of this is status/cultural, too.

Where I do agree with the article is that anger expressed passive-aggressively is indeed a female tendency. For the most part, men just don't do this; but, if so, it is considered effeminate. In short, I think people believe that testosterone acts, estrogen plans. It will be interesting to see in studies how the next generation changes the findings.

TMink said...

Bill, "What you mean "we" mental illness denier" is a paraphrase of a very famous, somewhat tired joke. Sorry you missed it.


TMink said...

David wrote: "These snake-oil distributors generally are P.C. provocateurs looking for a way to encourage a cult of victimhood at great expense to society."

Too many people in my profession are. Not all of us are, but too many of us are.

"The alternative is to take responsibility for your actions and communicate in a civilized manner."

We agree completely. Much of my work is with people who have been abused as children. Lately, most of my patients are children. They can use some help in understanding what happened to them and sorting out responsibility issues. That is what I do, and it is a great job!

But Maxine is personal with me. She insulted me as a quack and a money grubbing fraud. I am angry at her for typing that lie and I am getting back at her a bit. Sorry if it makes you uncomfortable, it is aimed at exposing her as a dingbat.


TMink said...

Maxine, with enemies like you, I predict a huge growth in the psychiatry industry. I would alert my broker if I had one.