I was a really active kid growing up, and learned early that in a physical sense, there is a difference between “good pain” and “bad pain.” Twisted ankle: bad pain. Sore muscles: good pain.
Sharp, senseless, destructive pain: bad pain.
Manageable, constructive pain: good pain.
To me, harm is bad pain. Discomfort is good pain. And these exist in every facet of life.
The problem is that there is a lot of confusion of these two, – that people can’t or won’t tell them apart and won’t acknowledge that there’s a difference. And because of that, people will willfully refuse to be educated about the difference.
People who have never been forced to feel any kind of pain feel resentment at having to experience “good pain” for the first time. Aka – the confrontation of their own weakness or wrong-ness, and the consideration of why and how they should change that.
Society & media also preaches that only certain kinds of people should have to experience any kind of pain – teaching women, Black people, POC, LGBTQ+, Trans folx, that they should expect and accept all kinds of pain – but often teaches it in coded ways (the fates of characters on movies and TV shows, the fates of human beings in real life as decided by our justice system) under the guise of meritocracy and “liberty and justice for all.” So then people who have a vested interest in maintaining their privilege can turn around and point to the overt, empty message of equality instead of confronting the tangible (and yeah, painful) reality of the situation as justification for their bad policies and bad behavior.
And there’s an extra caveat is that “good pain” is also only “good” in moderation. This reminds me of exceptionalism. People forced to outperform all their peers just to survive and be considered worthwhile humans are being forced to undergo trauma. That is trauma. Forcing discomfort, or something you might otherwise consider “good pain” on someone overburdened by oppression is automatically harm, or “bad pain”.
In my white suburban upbringing, our lives were mostly ruled by the phrase:
“If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.”
Except of course that “nice” means “something that is not socially sanctioned.” So sexism, racism, homophobia – as long as they were expressed in a socially acceptable way, they were considered just as “nice” as “I love your jacket,” or “have a good weekend”.
Curious as to other folks’ thoughts on this. Does this spark recognition? What are other things I missed? What did I get wrong? What vibes with others?
I really like this question and have been thinking about it a lot. Thank you Laura and Saba for sharing and bringing up amazing examples!
In agreement with you Laura that unrelenting discomfort can easily become harm - great point. Something I want to add is that I wouldn't say discomfort is always "good" or constructive, even without being escalated to harm, but it definitely is important to accept the experience of it in order to know what it means. If I don't, I might be too caught up by it to recognize the cause, what's really important to know about the situation, or my options to manage the discomfort. I don't want to imply that discomfort should be avoided. It's a signal. Sometimes that signal is actually telling us to move away from a situation though, and being able to interpret that is equally as important as knowing when to sit through discomfort and grow. For me, this is about listening to how I feel and how the other person/people feel.
Discomfort is a signal that says "Hey, things feel off and I'm not enjoying it - why is that?" There are small discomforts and big discomforts, but it's always important to hear my discomfort out. Being able to manage small discomfort helps make big discomfort less intimidating and this can help prevent harm.
Maybe I'm encountering something unfamiliar and I'm not sure how it feels yet. Or maybe I'm encountering something I already know doesn't feel nice - an awkward interaction, I have to work with someone I don't work well with, it's too cold in here for me but everyone else likes it this way, I'm in a conflict, I caused harm and I'm feeling bad, this thing triggers my anxiety, etc. My discomfort lets me know something is out of balance, and the context of the situation will impact how well I can manage that. Can my needs or both our need's be met? First of all, are we willing? Maybe I need to sit through the discomfort of a conflict and grow with someone, maybe the imbalance is internal and I need to focus on growing on my own, or the imbalance is nothing more than bad chemistry and I can just let it be there. Maybe I need to leave the room to get a sweater.
This can also be where discomfort turns into harm. If the situation or other person doesn't allow me to manage my discomfort, that situation or person can become harmful for me. If I'm not allowed to go get a sweater (care for my body), I might get sick. If someone invalidates me in a conflict, I am harmed. And vice versa.
Harm can happen in an instant or it can happen slowly. If I'm forced by economic and social conditions to work a job that over-stresses my joints or my mind, I'll be harmed. If I can't choose to leave a relationship with someone who actively makes me feel uncomfortable (this isn't about unwillingness to face discomfort), there inevitably will be further harm done. I think harm and discomfort are related in that harm is not comfy, but harm happens when boundaries are crossed and/or autonomy is restricted and/or there are long-term destructive impacts. Not owning personal discomfort and refusing to process it can also cause harm. My feelings are mine, regardless of what's causing them. The potential is there to harm myself or someone else by avoiding them. This probably would tie back into the first email, talking about levels of conflict. Discomfort could be a precursor to harm. If we are able to deal with it appropriately, we can hopefully prevent harm.
I think it's important (and maybe uncomfy) to talk about how "harm-doers" can be harmed back, and that harm is valid too. The email talks about this in a great way and I love the challenge of re-framing the way we think of each other within conflict, to something more human than "victims" or "harm-doers." And this opens up a whole spectrum of how we can understand each other and choose to act. Maybe we can dissolve perceived harm in some situations this way, or prevent further harm from being done by retaliation or other ineffective solutions. Maybe in other (appropriate! like life or death!) situations, we can understand better that harming someone back is the move towards balance and actually within our power. What I mean by this is that if I don't have to see myself as a victim in a situation where I am being physically harmed, I can give myself more power to protect my body. I know I wish our culture validated (real) self-defense, and that dis-empowered folks felt more empowered in their bodies. I could go on way too long so I'll stop here. Hopefully all of this makes some amount of sense! Discomfort needs attention and embrace, this is crucial to healing cycles of harm.
Laura, Ely, and Saba, thanks for your deep sharings.
Similar to you, Laura, I've always associated discomfort with risk-taking (good pain). That's it's good to be uncomfortable because that means that there is potential growth in whatever related area. Later on in life, discomfort took on an additional meaning, depending on context. It was also a warning sign for me, Ely. Discomfort alerted me to something that was happening that I would be against what I value as human rights, what I understand as flourishing, or that it is potentially crossing personal boundaries. On a personal level (in the past) I would acknowledge the discomfort and not voice it because it may make other people uncomfortable or unhappy. In recent years, I'm learning to be more attuned to this discomfort-warning sign and also think through a more active response.
When I think someone else is experiencing high intensive discomfort (pain/trauma), I do respond differently than I would to myself. In the past, I would try to assure the person that everything will be ok or look at the bright side. I know. Unhealthy optimism and causes more trauma. Growing up, that's how people responded to my pains or discomforts when I did talk about it. I was taught to not talk about pain and trauma maybe not directly but indirectly through observed behaviours. There's been a lot of unlearning.
In recent years, I'm learning to respond in a way that more akin to 'sitting in discomfort and pain' for myself and others. The process of unlearning has required me to hold back on my initial instincts to 'make things better' and dive into a practice of lament. I've been thinking a lot about meta-emotions (how we feel about our feelings) and realize that I do that a lot. And what does it mean to acknowledge the discomfort or other feelings and perhaps not judge myself for it. But recognize how I need to be more aware and practice for change.
To me, harm only has a negative connotation. It is an action has caused emotional, physical, mental, and/or spiritual wrong to someone or a group of people or the environment. My initial response is often how to heal or restore or close up the wound. I am mindful of time - and messiness in how that happens. I think north american societies do tend to focus more on fixing and reaching 'healing' goals in a very linear way whereas I don't see healing as something so linear. In recent years, thinking about what (systemically) has caused the harm, the actors that caused the harming, and also how the actors were harmed themselves have become more instinctual.
Ely, thanks for bringing up the time factor when talking about harm (short duration or over a period of time). It reminds me that chronic harm causing chronic discomfort and pain are so difficult to understand and heal from. Especially when crusts of protective (healthy or unhealthy) measures form. Transformation has so many layers.
I used to work for an educational organization that worked on peace education and one of the core tenets about not vilifying the harm-doer was understanding that humans all have the potential to be harm-doers, and imbalanced power, contexts, and our choices are all factors that play into the cause of harm. Ely, I agree that Luna's discussion on re-framing and maybe(?) dissolving the dichotomy resonated with me. Do you think we have to start w/ some sort of 'simplified' spaces or identifications and then make sure build on that understanding? Or is there a way to start at a space recognizing the multiplicity and complexities of peoples' relationships to harm, healing, and justice?
I was a really active kid growing up, and learned early that in a physical sense, there is a difference between “good pain” and “bad pain.” Twisted ankle: bad pain. Sore muscles: good pain.
Sharp, senseless, destructive pain: bad pain.
Manageable, constructive pain: good pain.
To me, harm is bad pain. Discomfort is good pain. And these exist in every facet of life.
The problem is that there is a lot of confusion of these two, – that people can’t or won’t tell them apart and won’t acknowledge that there’s a difference. And because of that, people will willfully refuse to be educated about the difference.
People who have never been forced to feel any kind of pain feel resentment at having to experience “good pain” for the first time. Aka – the confrontation of their own weakness or wrong-ness, and the consideration of why and how they should change that.
Society & media also preaches that only certain kinds of people should have to experience any kind of pain – teaching women, Black people, POC, LGBTQ+, Trans folx, that they should expect and accept all kinds of pain – but often teaches it in coded ways (the fates of characters on movies and TV shows, the fates of human beings in real life as decided by our justice system) under the guise of meritocracy and “liberty and justice for all.” So then people who have a vested interest in maintaining their privilege can turn around and point to the overt, empty message of equality instead of confronting the tangible (and yeah, painful) reality of the situation as justification for their bad policies and bad behavior.
And there’s an extra caveat is that “good pain” is also only “good” in moderation. This reminds me of exceptionalism. People forced to outperform all their peers just to survive and be considered worthwhile humans are being forced to undergo trauma. That is trauma. Forcing discomfort, or something you might otherwise consider “good pain” on someone overburdened by oppression is automatically harm, or “bad pain”.
In my white suburban upbringing, our lives were mostly ruled by the phrase:
“If you can’t say anything nice, don’t say anything at all.”
Except of course that “nice” means “something that is not socially sanctioned.” So sexism, racism, homophobia – as long as they were expressed in a socially acceptable way, they were considered just as “nice” as “I love your jacket,” or “have a good weekend”.
Curious as to other folks’ thoughts on this. Does this spark recognition? What are other things I missed? What did I get wrong? What vibes with others?
I really like this question and have been thinking about it a lot. Thank you Laura and Saba for sharing and bringing up amazing examples!
In agreement with you Laura that unrelenting discomfort can easily become harm - great point. Something I want to add is that I wouldn't say discomfort is always "good" or constructive, even without being escalated to harm, but it definitely is important to accept the experience of it in order to know what it means. If I don't, I might be too caught up by it to recognize the cause, what's really important to know about the situation, or my options to manage the discomfort. I don't want to imply that discomfort should be avoided. It's a signal. Sometimes that signal is actually telling us to move away from a situation though, and being able to interpret that is equally as important as knowing when to sit through discomfort and grow. For me, this is about listening to how I feel and how the other person/people feel.
Discomfort is a signal that says "Hey, things feel off and I'm not enjoying it - why is that?" There are small discomforts and big discomforts, but it's always important to hear my discomfort out. Being able to manage small discomfort helps make big discomfort less intimidating and this can help prevent harm.
Maybe I'm encountering something unfamiliar and I'm not sure how it feels yet. Or maybe I'm encountering something I already know doesn't feel nice - an awkward interaction, I have to work with someone I don't work well with, it's too cold in here for me but everyone else likes it this way, I'm in a conflict, I caused harm and I'm feeling bad, this thing triggers my anxiety, etc. My discomfort lets me know something is out of balance, and the context of the situation will impact how well I can manage that. Can my needs or both our need's be met? First of all, are we willing? Maybe I need to sit through the discomfort of a conflict and grow with someone, maybe the imbalance is internal and I need to focus on growing on my own, or the imbalance is nothing more than bad chemistry and I can just let it be there. Maybe I need to leave the room to get a sweater.
This can also be where discomfort turns into harm. If the situation or other person doesn't allow me to manage my discomfort, that situation or person can become harmful for me. If I'm not allowed to go get a sweater (care for my body), I might get sick. If someone invalidates me in a conflict, I am harmed. And vice versa.
Harm can happen in an instant or it can happen slowly. If I'm forced by economic and social conditions to work a job that over-stresses my joints or my mind, I'll be harmed. If I can't choose to leave a relationship with someone who actively makes me feel uncomfortable (this isn't about unwillingness to face discomfort), there inevitably will be further harm done. I think harm and discomfort are related in that harm is not comfy, but harm happens when boundaries are crossed and/or autonomy is restricted and/or there are long-term destructive impacts. Not owning personal discomfort and refusing to process it can also cause harm. My feelings are mine, regardless of what's causing them. The potential is there to harm myself or someone else by avoiding them. This probably would tie back into the first email, talking about levels of conflict. Discomfort could be a precursor to harm. If we are able to deal with it appropriately, we can hopefully prevent harm.
I think it's important (and maybe uncomfy) to talk about how "harm-doers" can be harmed back, and that harm is valid too. The email talks about this in a great way and I love the challenge of re-framing the way we think of each other within conflict, to something more human than "victims" or "harm-doers." And this opens up a whole spectrum of how we can understand each other and choose to act. Maybe we can dissolve perceived harm in some situations this way, or prevent further harm from being done by retaliation or other ineffective solutions. Maybe in other (appropriate! like life or death!) situations, we can understand better that harming someone back is the move towards balance and actually within our power. What I mean by this is that if I don't have to see myself as a victim in a situation where I am being physically harmed, I can give myself more power to protect my body. I know I wish our culture validated (real) self-defense, and that dis-empowered folks felt more empowered in their bodies. I could go on way too long so I'll stop here. Hopefully all of this makes some amount of sense! Discomfort needs attention and embrace, this is crucial to healing cycles of harm.
Laura, Ely, and Saba, thanks for your deep sharings.
Similar to you, Laura, I've always associated discomfort with risk-taking (good pain). That's it's good to be uncomfortable because that means that there is potential growth in whatever related area. Later on in life, discomfort took on an additional meaning, depending on context. It was also a warning sign for me, Ely. Discomfort alerted me to something that was happening that I would be against what I value as human rights, what I understand as flourishing, or that it is potentially crossing personal boundaries. On a personal level (in the past) I would acknowledge the discomfort and not voice it because it may make other people uncomfortable or unhappy. In recent years, I'm learning to be more attuned to this discomfort-warning sign and also think through a more active response.
When I think someone else is experiencing high intensive discomfort (pain/trauma), I do respond differently than I would to myself. In the past, I would try to assure the person that everything will be ok or look at the bright side. I know. Unhealthy optimism and causes more trauma. Growing up, that's how people responded to my pains or discomforts when I did talk about it. I was taught to not talk about pain and trauma maybe not directly but indirectly through observed behaviours. There's been a lot of unlearning.
In recent years, I'm learning to respond in a way that more akin to 'sitting in discomfort and pain' for myself and others. The process of unlearning has required me to hold back on my initial instincts to 'make things better' and dive into a practice of lament. I've been thinking a lot about meta-emotions (how we feel about our feelings) and realize that I do that a lot. And what does it mean to acknowledge the discomfort or other feelings and perhaps not judge myself for it. But recognize how I need to be more aware and practice for change.
To me, harm only has a negative connotation. It is an action has caused emotional, physical, mental, and/or spiritual wrong to someone or a group of people or the environment. My initial response is often how to heal or restore or close up the wound. I am mindful of time - and messiness in how that happens. I think north american societies do tend to focus more on fixing and reaching 'healing' goals in a very linear way whereas I don't see healing as something so linear. In recent years, thinking about what (systemically) has caused the harm, the actors that caused the harming, and also how the actors were harmed themselves have become more instinctual.
Ely, thanks for bringing up the time factor when talking about harm (short duration or over a period of time). It reminds me that chronic harm causing chronic discomfort and pain are so difficult to understand and heal from. Especially when crusts of protective (healthy or unhealthy) measures form. Transformation has so many layers.
I used to work for an educational organization that worked on peace education and one of the core tenets about not vilifying the harm-doer was understanding that humans all have the potential to be harm-doers, and imbalanced power, contexts, and our choices are all factors that play into the cause of harm. Ely, I agree that Luna's discussion on re-framing and maybe(?) dissolving the dichotomy resonated with me. Do you think we have to start w/ some sort of 'simplified' spaces or identifications and then make sure build on that understanding? Or is there a way to start at a space recognizing the multiplicity and complexities of peoples' relationships to harm, healing, and justice?