Emotions vs Behaviors: Reality of Control

[Little Illy]

Hey guys! I was on Facebook and saw this Tumblr repost, and it is too good not to share here. If we really analyze what this user is saying, we can easily see how this is a massive issue in our CG/L community. Black is what he or she wrote - blue is my addition.

 

_________________________________

 

"A distinction for anyone who is young and hasn’t figured this out yet:

 

You are allowed to have whatever emotions you want. No one can control your emotions. Emotions are healthy responses to things.

 

You are not allowed to have behvaiors that are harmful just because you have certain emotions. Your behaviors are what you can control, and they are far easier to control than your emotions.

 

You can be jealous about someone or their talents until you turn green, but it is harmful to yourself and to that person if you try to sabatoge them because of it. You can be so angry you can literally feel your temperature rise, but this does not give you permission to rage at others.

 

Your emotions are valid. They are always valid. You are a person of value. However, your behaviors are not always justified because of those emotions. You may not be able to control your emotions, but you can certainly control your behaviors." (~ undastra/Tumblr)

 

More so than just recognizing the differences between emotions and behaviors, you must always realize that, like you, people will react emotionally. And if you have the capacity to keep your behaviors level, you may also end up helping someone balance out their own emotions.

 

Two great quotes I heard, and live by, really puts this whole thing into perspective:

 

"I don't judge a man by his thoughts. I judge a man by the actions born from those thoughts."

 

"Going to church doesn't make you any more of a Christian than standing in a garage makes you a car."

 

Always look to how someone acts; he may be a racist, yet he is the most polite person to all creeds and races. She may be an eccentric "crazy" girlfriend, but she is controlling all of her anxiety, insecurities and fears deep inside,  And then again, a person very well may have the picture perfect identity, yet they can be the cruelest people.

 

At the end of the day everyone needs to realize, we are in control WAY more than what we ever want to admit. We know when we are snapping at someone, even if we can't stop it, we know we are doing it. And because of this we all have a responsibility to own up to our emotions and behaviors, but more importantly - as this Tumblr user said - we need to control the things we can, and have understanding for the things we can't.

 

And as members of the community, we should always remember it is okay to be emotional. This dynamic feeds on emotions. However, we should never neglect to notice the behaviors of those around us. Is that Daddy acting like a Daddy, or is he too at the whim of his emotions? Does that little actually TRY to communicate or does she let her emotional Three-Year-Old side take over and not say a thing? Are they doing things they can control? OR using this dynamic as a means to let their emotions control them?

Edited July 30, 2018 by Little Illy

[Guest Looby-Lou]

Great post. 

I would like to add that emotions are best not ignored. Our emotions can be very helpful to us. Even the so-called negative emotions (anger, jealousy, anxiety, etc.)

Our emotions ALWAYS tell us something

And if we're clever we will pay attention.  We will observe our emotions. And we will figure out what they're telling us.

 

It might be something basic such as "This situation is good for me" or "this situation is making me uncomfortable". Or it might be something subtle, that feeling that "I just can't put my finger on it..." and we need to allow ourselves time to understand.

If we observe and understand our emotions, then we can decide how to behave in a positive, constructive way.

 

Often if we're feeling conflict inside ourselves, it's a sign that our emotions and our actions (behaviour) are in conflict. We need to figure out whether our emotions needs to be acknowledged but not given in to. Or whether our emotion (or gut instinct) is telling us to modify our behaviour. 

 

Obviously we all behave in reactive emotional ways sometimes, it's part of being human. And sometimes it's great fun to do that!

But sometimes it's wise to watch our emotions & modify our behaviour. Often that will help us to feel more comfortable with ourselves. And to interact better with others.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Looby-Lou

[Guest You're adorable.]

Well. I couldn't have said it better. (And that acutally turns me green with envy.)

 

And I suppose that even the trigger that made you write this post was some kind of emotional response to something that happened.

 

The most basic, underlying fact is that no matter how much we try to "wrap" ourselves in our distinguished outer layers, armor ourselves with knowledge, whether scientific or humanitarian, deep down we are still that fragile pack of emotions that was formed when we were kids. And every outside stimuli, no matter how small, will always 'filter' through those outer layers, but still fall into that fragile ball of basic responses that we inherently are.

 

The best way to see peoples true nature is with conflict. The very reason why conflict is born is not because we don't agree on the 'outer' layer, no. It happens because something pokes that small ball of what we are. So when someone that I have a conflict with tries to persuade me that they are not mad or that they are not touched by what I said, they will fail miserably.

 

So as Illy said very well, we can't help being emotional or try not to act emotional when it's in our very nature. The key thing to do is to admit it to yourself and not live in denial. And when the time comes, the outer layers that we are constantly building thorough the course of our lives should make sure that we can handle situations appropriately. (Is still green with envy.)

 

I am glad that someone is at the same page as I am. Thank you, Illy.

 

<_< <_< <_< <_< <_< <_< <_< <_< <_<

Edited July 30, 2018 by You're adorable.

[Guest JackSkellington]

Liked this very much.

 

Not as eloquent as the two posters above, but i'd like to acknowledge something that is worthwhile, and strikes a chord with me.

 

To me it boils down to something simple. Try to be nice

[Kaiser]

Meanwhile, in the real world.......

 

 

"I say that every prince must desire to be considered merciful and not cruel. He must, however, take care not to misuse this mercifulness. … A prince, therefore, must not mind incurring the charge of cruelty for the purpose of keeping his subjects united and confident; for, with a very few examples, he will be more merciful than those who, from excess of tenderness, allow disorders to arise, from whence spring murders and rapine; for these as a rule injure the whole community, while the executions carried out by the prince injure only one individual. And of all princes, it is impossible for a new prince to escape the name of cruel, new states being always full of dangers. … Nevertheless, he must be cautious in believing and acting, and must not inspire fear of his own accord, and must proceed in a temperate manner with prudence and humanity, so that too much confidence does not render him incautious, and too much diffidence does not render him intolerant. From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved more than feared, or feared more than loved. The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting. For it may be said of men in general that they are ungrateful, voluble, dissemblers, anxious to avoid danger, and covetous of gain ; as long as you benefit them, they are entirely yours; they offer you their blood, their goods, their life, and their children, as I have before said, when the necessity is remote; but when it approaches, they revolt. And the prince who has relied solely on their words, without making other preparations, is ruined, for the friendship which is gained by purchase and not through grandeur and nobility of spirit is merited but is not secured, and at times is not to be had. And men have less scruple in offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared; for love is held by a chain of obligation which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails."

 

 

-Machiavelli, " The Prince"

[Guest You're adorable.]

Meanwhile, in the real world.......

 

 

"I say that every prince must desire to be considered merciful and not cruel. He must, however, take care not to misuse this mercifulness. … A prince, therefore, must not mind incurring the charge of cruelty for the purpose of keeping his subjects united and confident; for, with a very few examples, he will be more merciful than those who, from excess of tenderness, allow disorders to arise, from whence spring murders and rapine; for these as a rule injure the whole community, while the executions carried out by the prince injure only one individual. And of all princes, it is impossible for a new prince to escape the name of cruel, new states being always full of dangers. … Nevertheless, he must be cautious in believing and acting, and must not inspire fear of his own accord, and must proceed in a temperate manner with prudence and humanity, so that too much confidence does not render him incautious, and too much diffidence does not render him intolerant. From this arises the question whether it is better to be loved more than feared, or feared more than loved. The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting. For it may be said of men in general that they are ungrateful, voluble, dissemblers, anxious to avoid danger, and covetous of gain ; as long as you benefit them, they are entirely yours; they offer you their blood, their goods, their life, and their children, as I have before said, when the necessity is remote; but when it approaches, they revolt. And the prince who has relied solely on their words, without making other preparations, is ruined, for the friendship which is gained by purchase and not through grandeur and nobility of spirit is merited but is not secured, and at times is not to be had. And men have less scruple in offending one who makes himself loved than one who makes himself feared; for love is held by a chain of obligation which, men being selfish, is broken whenever it serves their purpose; but fear is maintained by a dread of punishment which never fails."

 

 

-Machiavelli, " The Prince"

 

Haha. The only problem is... this is not a real world. Or, to be more precise, the real world that you refer to. If you decide to use a teachings of 15th century (yes, I googled him)  thinker to try and talk some sense into people that their life goal is to get most likes on their snapchat photo and have a mental beakdown if they don't, you are going to fail. Of course.  

 

Don't get me wrong. I understand the thing that you try to prove here. I understand it very well. The thing is that it just isn't applicable here. The above text would be aplicable in some of the 3rd world countries, for which I assume you refer to as 'the real world'. We are not living in those. We are not struggling to survive. Simplified, your thinking goes like this: "You people have detached from reality as far as you possibly can. There are people dying from hunger, disease and war. They are not bothered by whether somebody liked their snapchat or not. You are living in a bubble that will someday pop, and when it does, you will cry"

 

I agree. I really do. But just that statement will not teach them anything. Most of the people here are emotionally damaged one way or another. The very fact that we are here proves that our tastes, sexual or relationships-wise are very different from the vast majority that lives in "the real world", even if in already distorted one. Our pyramid of needs has shifted to the uppermost (lowermost?) levels. We don't have to worry about food, or if we make it after we catch a flu or not. Or whether we come home from shcool only to see that our home was destroyed be a missle along with our whole families. Is it good is it bad? For some it's bad, for some it's good. But most people can't tell the difference because they just don't care.

 

People are no longer the selfish, hateful creatures that are only there to survive. No, no, no. Our very instinct of self-preservance is being threatened in the day and age that we live in. But we jsut can't solve things 'the old way'. We have to find workaround. Appeal in different way. We can't rule by fear and abuse. Most of people here come from a background that involves some kind of abuse. Do they behave the way they are expected to according to that piece of text? Don't think so. Old ways just don't apply anymore. We either move to new stuff, or die with the old stuff. 

 

The only thing that text showed me is that my english is still inferior.

[Kaiser]

Machiavelli is still widely respected as a pivotal voice of reason and logic in Western academic circles that haven't been totally emasculated yet. He is almost literally THE point of reference for all political and societal thought since his time, up until now.

 

Has nothing to do with First or Third World optics, and everything to do with human condition. Which absolutely applies to the discussion at hand.

 

Reason, logic > emotion and feelings.

 

 

You wrote: ""You people have detached from reality as far as you possibly can. There are people dying from hunger, disease and war. They are not bothered by whether somebody liked their snapchat or not. You are living in a bubble that will someday pop, and when it does, you will cry"

 

 

Don't ever put your words in my mouth.

Edited July 30, 2018 by Kaiser

[Little Illy]

Meanwhile, in the real world.......

 

 

In the real world, the debate of having control and either being loved or hated is irrelevant here. Here is the acceptance that things are within our control, we control it (even if it is just communication). In the real world, people rarely assume great positions of power (leading a whole People) and that grand gesture isn't comparable. 

 

I will say it is comparable to deciding who you listen to when you are deciding how to act. Do you take warning from the emotional, from the one who's behaviors are unpredictable or do you react to those who have more control, more understanding? 

 

The block of text doesn't really add anything for me. Sorry.

[Guest ~*~Sachita~*~]

And as members of the community, we should always remember it is okay to be emotional. This dynamic feeds on emotions. However, we should never neglect to notice the behaviors of those around us. Is that Daddy acting like a Daddy, or is he too at the whim of his emotions? Does that little actually TRY to communicate or does she let her emotional Three-Year-Old side take over and not say a thing? Are they doing things they can control? OR using this dynamic as a means to let their emotions control them?

 

I like where you are going with this, Illy.  Thank you for bringing it up.  Hopefully it will get through to some people.  Unfortunately, it has been my observation that people who could most use this advice will likely not bother to read it, or think it doesn't apply to them.

[Kaiser]

In the real world, the debate of having control and either being loved or hated is irrelevant here. Here is the acceptance that things are within our control, we control it (even if it is just communication). In the real world, people rarely assume great positions of power (leading a whole People) and that grand gesture isn't comparable. 

 

I will say it is comparable to deciding who you listen to when you are deciding how to act. Do you take warning from the emotional, from the one who's behaviors are unpredictable or do you react to those who have more control, more understanding? 

 

The block of text doesn't really add anything for me. Sorry.

His words are applicable on a macro and micro scale.

[Little Illy]

His words are applicable on a macro and micro scale.

Meanwhile, in the real world... "

Don't ever put your words in my mouth.

Must be the presentation then.

 

You can apply any person of note or philosopher in any situation. What is important is the value you have learned from them. They spark genius, they aren’t just genius. That is why they are so great and can be quoted in our time. But just quoting someone, with very little association would almost be a slap in their face. Show them you’ve taken in their information and explain how you’ve grown. Just placing a quote with clipped and terse comments automatically makes people want to go against your word. Not his word, but yours. Add some thought, add some UNDERSTANDING and politely debate the topic and we all win. Because from that text I’ve gained fear is the best method of loyalty, and that is also quite abusive. Though one could easily argue the opposite. So state your position or forever be at the whim of interpretation. And, otherwise, we can just send quotes back and forth till the end of time.

Edited July 31, 2018 by Little Illy

[Little Illy]

I like where you are going with this, Illy.  Thank you for bringing it up.  Hopefully it will get through to some people.  Unfortunately, it has been my observation that people who could most use this advice will likely not bother to read it, or think it doesn't apply to them.

You are 100% correct, those who need an eye opener rarely take one. All we can do is try to saturate the community with good information and understanding and hope it spreads.

[Kaiser]

Must be the presentation then.

You can apply any person of note or philosopher in any situation. What is important is the value you have learned from them. They spark genius, they aren’t just genius. That is why they are so great and can be quoted in our time. But just quoting someone, with very little association would almost be a slap in their face. Show them you’ve taken in their information and explain how you’ve grown. Just placing a quote with clipped and terse comments automatically makes people want to go against your word. Not his word, but yours. Add some thought, add some UNDERSTANDING and politely debate the topic and we all win. Because from that text I’ve gained fear is the best method of loyalty, and that is also quite abusive. Though one could easily argue the opposite. So state your position or forever be at the whim of interpretation. And, otherwise, we can just send quotes back and forth till the end of time.

". The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting. "

 

Doesn't get much clearer than that.

 

The funny thing is, Machiavelli is discussing controlling the behaviors of people who can't control their own emotions. He tells his love is weak, because Man will use it to his advantage.

 

 

 

Which is pretty much the topic you brought up. Controlling emotion.

 

I suggest you read his works. Might gain some insight into the human condition a little better.

[Little Illy]

Must be the presentation then.

 

Because from that text I’ve gained fear is the best method of loyalty, and that is also quite abusive. 

 

 

". The reply is, that one ought to be both feared and loved, but as it is difficult for the two to go together, it is much safer to be feared than loved, if one of the two has to be wanting. "

 

Which is pretty much the topic you brought up. Controlling emotion.

 

I suggest you read his works. Might gain some insight into the human condition a little better.

 

I did read the block you sent and funnily enough, I gleamed that lil part from it. As I quoted. 

 

I respect you deviation to control, I see a theme, and how fear may equal control in your world and how maybe fear is the best motivator at your disposal. 

 

But this piece was never, ever about controlling other people, but rather controlling yourself. Or at the very least recognizing you need control. People and emotions are the two things we inherently cannot control in our lives - so what should we control? Our behaviors. 

[Kaiser]

"I respect you deviation to control, I see a theme, and how fear may equal control in your world and how maybe fear is the best motivator at your disposal."

 

 

I don't know how to make it any clearer that I chose the passage because he speaks of fear AND (<-----key word there.) love together.

 

Machiavelli goes on to say if you can only have ONE (<----another key word.) then it's best to use fear.

 

It's absolutely about controlling other peoples behaviors and emotions as they interact with our behaviors and emotions. Notice what I said there...As they interact with OUR emotions and behaviors. You must control how YOU react to them.

And sometimes, a good offense is the best defense.

 

 

At for this "theme" you've prescribed to me, lol....ok. What you think you know about me, you couldn't cover the head of a pin.

Edited August 1, 2018 by Kaiser

[Guest DuckDaddy66]

Back to the DDLG world 

 

You are allowed to have whatever emotions you want. No one can control your emotions. Emotions are healthy responses to things.

 

You are not allowed to have behaviors that are harmful just because you have certain emotions. Your behaviors are what you can control, and they are far easier to control than your emotions.

 

For new Daddy's and new Little's this is starting out is learning to to separate those two.  So if my little is feeling really really insecure resulting in a lock down behavior, then much cuddle and care is needed. As a Daddy, this is my job and agreement to the relationship.  Then when my little has an emotion that results in a unacceptable behavior, then it's my job as a Daddy, to punish said behavior but respect the emotion. 

[Little Illy]

Back to the DDLG world 

 

For new Daddy's and new Little's this is starting out is learning to to separate those two.  So if my little is feeling really really insecure resulting in a lock down behavior, then much cuddle and care is needed. As a Daddy, this is my job and agreement to the relationship.  Then when my little has an emotion that results in a unacceptable behavior, then it's my job as a Daddy, to punish said behavior but respect the emotion. 

 

Daddy and I have an understanding. We can be well and truly pissed at the situation, but we NEVER devalue how the other is feeling. They may have a "fuck you!" feeling, but it can be completely valid. So we communicate, commonly, that "I'm just angry with the situation" and understand that means that he or I may not have the capacity to 'act right' during that emotional moment, but we have communicated which is the correct behavior. 

 

You are your Little sound lovely!!

[Guest Revurex]

This is slightly deviating from the Op's point but it reminded me of a paper I was reading a while back. Does emotion cause behavior? The first theory being direct causation. The most used example being that fear causes one to run away. The second theory is that conscious emotion comes after behavior, operating like an inner feedback system. People may choose their actions due to the anticipated emotional outcome.

 

For those interested here's the link to the paper. SFW https://www.researchgate.net/publication/253055859_Does_Emotion_Cause_Behavior_Apart_from_Making_People_Do_Stupid_Destructive_Things

Edited August 21, 2018 by Revurex

[Guest Looby-Lou]

 

 

For those interested here's the link to the paper. SFW http://assets.csom.umn.edu/assets/128887.pdf 

 

 

I'm interested! But the link doesn't work. Please can you try again?

Thank you.

[Guest Revurex]

I'm interested! But the link doesn't work. Please can you try again?

Thank you.

 

Edited link.

[Guest Looby-Lou]

Edited link.

 

 

Great! Thanks