Problems with people telling me I'm "suppressing" emotion

[Jake]

Recently I've been getting really annoyed at my friends, some of whom have known me over a decade (or at least I thought they knew me), who are convinced I actually feel the whole range of emotions that they do, and that I'm just suppressing my feelings so I can project this image of a logical, level-headed person. I tell them I really just don't feel emotions as strongly as they do, and they literally tell me that I'm in denial. I tried to explain to them about the different personality types and they just told me that my personality type doesn't define me, and that I shouldn't be afraid to let my true self show. I tried to explain to them that this is the true me, but they can't seem to wrap their thick emotional skulls around the concept that someone might not feel emotions exactly the same way as they do. Have any of you experienced similar annoyances, and if so how do you deal with them? I know I could just ignore their stupidity, but I hate to see them behaving so irrationally, and I hate when they patronize me and tell me to stop hiding my feelings. (And yes, all of the people giving me these problems are guardians or idealists. I don't get bombarded with this nonsense by my artisan or rational friends.)

 

[Milo]

Probably not your best choice of friends in the long-run. Just ignore them or reply "Right...". You don't even have to explain. I myself, eventually migrated to a group of highly intellectual friends.

Jeez, I'm answering all of your posts today. Haha

 

[Hadoblado]

In all likelihood you probably do suppress some emotions, it's sorta normal. That said, it should be fairly easy to convince them that different people experience emotions differently.

 

[Ex-User (9062)]

It should be fairly easy to convince them that different people experience emotions differently.

Seconded.

 

[redbaron]

Just reverse the circumstances on them.

- Tell them to stop suppressing their intelligence
- Tell them off for hiding their true self behind societal-influenced emotions

If they try to come up with excuses, patronize them and say that they're in denial about their true selves. They only act emotional to fit in with society, when deep down they're actually like you.

Best case scenario, they realise that people are not so simplistic that everyone is similarly emotional to the way they are, and they start to take the things you say about personality theory seriously.

Worst case scenario, you realise what inane dumb cunts they are and stop being friends with them.

 

[Hadoblado]

- Tell them to stop suppressing their intelligence

Nice.

 

[BigApplePi]

What emotions might they be talking about? Who sez two people have to feel the same emotions if they felt them at all?

 

[Milo]

- Tell them to stop suppressing their intelligence

Brilliant! Oh man!

 

[juansk]

Brilliant! Oh man!

Yeah, he nailed it.
I guess it happens when you develop your "T". You start to understand feelings mechanisms. That way you can manipulate them and understand that sometimes something might not be a big deal. Other people could feel overwhelmed and confused about it, but you're more clever. Its not supressing your feelings, its just understanding them and then moving on.

As that guy said, maybe its time to try to help them developing that rationality, and if it doesnt work, its because they're dumb, so its pointless to keep that friendship in the future.

 

[Moocow]

*takes a swig of beer* Not everyone out there's gonna realize how profoundly different most strangers are from themselves, but when they do, they're faced with all the same blind fear of staring into the void.

 

[Cybin]

Hello everyone. I've been a long time lurker, but decided to make a profile to respond to this post. I used to think I was "emotionless" like the op does, and got mad at people who would say otherwise. I now know that they were actually right. Looking into my past to see why I am the way I am now, and recent events in my life which caused me to re-evaluate things I came to the conclusion that I have suppressed my emotions. I stumbled across a website the other day which actually describes INTP emotions perfectly.

http://www.intpexperience.com/emotions.php

Basically INTP's are very emotional, but because of past experiences getting hurt, we put up a wall and suppress all emotion. We are so good at it, that we often convince ourselves that they don't exist. If it weren't for some good friends, and some illicit substances, I don't think I ever would have realized it.

 

[Moocow]

Hello everyone. I've been a long time lurker, but decided to make a profile to respond to this post. I used to think I was "emotionless" like the op does, and got mad at people who would say otherwise. I now know that they were actually right. Looking into my past to see why I am the way I am now, and recent events in my life which caused me to re-evaluate things I came to the conclusion that I have suppressed my emotions. I stumbled across a website the other day which actually describes INTP emotions perfectly.

http://www.intpexperience.com/emotions.php

Basically INTP's are very emotional, but because of past experiences getting hurt, we put up a wall and suppress all emotion. We are so good at it, that we often convince ourselves that they don't exist. If it weren't for some good friends, and some illicit substances, I don't think I ever would have realized it.

I'm gonna argue that you don't actually know if this is what's happening. Not that we are truly unemotional but particularly when we bring good friends and illicit substances into the mix, one can be convinced of many things, the reality of which depends on little more than being convinced of them.

 

[Cybin]

I'm gonna argue that you don't actually know if this is what's happening. Not that we are truly unemotional but particularly when we bring good friends and illicit substances into the mix, one can be convinced of many things, the reality of which depends on little more than being convinced of them.

Perhaps, but if that is the case, then is that not true of everything? I came to my conclusion because I had conversations with INFP friends who could see it in me, and then I started thinking about it more and more. After experimenting with drugs, I found that they break down the walls people put up. It allowed me to look at myself with a different perspective, even days after the high was gone. This was especially true with MDMA and to a lesser extent LSD. Do you not remember times, perhaps as a child when you were really happy or sad and released those emotions to people and found you did not get the reaction you were expecting? Instead you felt embarrassed causing you to either consciously or unconsciously put that wall up. You released emotions, got a bad reaction and never released them again. Looking deep into my past I know that I have done that several times. And I am willing to bet, most people on here have as well. That is how the INTP works after all. As a young child you came to a conclusion that showing emotion was bad, so now you don't do it. It will always be there though.

 

[Moocow]

Perhaps, but if that is the case, then is that not true of everything? I came to my conclusion because I had conversations with INFP friends who could see it in me, and then I started thinking about it more and more. After experimenting with drugs, I found that they break down the walls people put up. It allowed me to look at myself with a different perspective, even days after the high was gone. This was especially true with MDMA and to a lesser extent LSD.

I've split my response in two as you raise two separate topics.

Yes, cultural/social learning is real, and it is limited, but I'm not arguing about that anyways. I'm asking you what the basis is to give special credence to any particular emotion experienced, especially when you bring drugs into the picture.

How do you discern the effects of the drug from your "true self"? What is the criteria that makes it "true"?

Here is my own assertion but it's much more important to me that you answer that question rather than try to refute this:

Spoiler

What I have put together from observing myself, those close to me, and my years studying psychology, is that you can observe fluctuations of the following aspects of any given mental state:
Suggestibility, whereby external information changes your beliefs without your awareness;
conviction, with which you emotionally reinforce a perception;
self-ownership, the appearance of having chosen one's actions and cognitions.

It seems obvious to me that all psychotropic drugs have some effect, even if slight, on those three aspects. Psychedelics can increase all three. One is simultaneously open to even the subtlest, most unconscious suggestions, while leaping to new conclusions with extreme enthusiasm, all the while under the spell that they are carrying out some deliberate action. I'm arguing that you can describe the effects of social psychedelic use as hallucinations of choice and certainty, masking an increased receptivity to others' beliefs and emotions. The line between hallucination and the normal functioning is fuzzier with other experiences as the same can be said of trance states, mob mentality, basic sexual infatuation, etc.

 

[Moocow]

Do you not remember times, perhaps as a child when you were really happy or sad and released those emotions to people and found you did not get the reaction you were expecting? Instead you felt embarrassed causing you to either consciously or unconsciously put that wall up. You released emotions, got a bad reaction and never released them again. Looking deep into my past I know that I have done that several times. And I am willing to bet, most people on here have as well. That is how the INTP works after all. As a young child you came to a conclusion that showing emotion was bad, so now you don't do it. It will always be there though.

Everyone has, because we express innumerable instances of each emotion and receive innumerable and varied reactions to them. How can you recount, sum, and weigh every instance? Does this simplified, behaviorist generalization not do a great disservice to our sense of personal responsibility, our years of learning and adaptation, contemplation, and choice?

And am I supposed to feel that my true self is congruent to my infancy? I'm a functioning member of society now, not a teet-suckling grub. The question I come to here is the same as the prior post: How do you discern which emotional experiences are definitive, and which are fleeting and circumstantial? Furthermore, how do you necessarily determine this about your past self as well?

 

[juansk]

You can repress emotions cause you wanna make better decisions. Ive been quite popular at school and luckily still have a good family. Im this way cause i consider emotions to put some kind of haze in my thought process. I think the best option is to be more emotional when is needed, for example, when you get intimate with a girl. Besides some punctual situations it seems pointless to me.
I dont regret losing that daily default emotional state of mind

 

[EditorOne]

Cybin's first post hit the mark. We prefer to deal with thinking because we get spotty results when dealing with things emotionally. Eventually you can discount emotions to the extent you can fool yourself into thinking you don't have them, but you do, you've just learned to not use them as a decision-making tool. The danger is that they can leap out and jump you when least expected.

"I used to think I was "emotionless" like the op does, and got mad at people who would say otherwise" Cybin, I had to laugh when I read this, because, of course, anger is an emotion.

 

[Cybin]

Cybin's first post hit the mark. We prefer to deal with thinking because we get spotty results when dealing with things emotionally. Eventually you can discount emotions to the extent you can fool yourself into thinking you don't have them, but you do, you've just learned to not use them as a decision-making tool. The danger is that they can leap out and jump you when least expected.

"I used to think I was "emotionless" like the op does, and got mad at people who would say otherwise" Cybin, I had to laugh when I read this, because, of course, anger is an emotion.

I realize that, but that is my point. We suppress our emotions so much that even when we do show them usually in the form of anger or depression that we ignore or forget about it later on.

 

[pernoctator]

Just reverse the circumstances on them.

This was my first thought too. But to make it easier for them to understand, make it about their interests. After all, a personality type is really just a collection of preferences. You can accuse them of suppressing their true selves because they are unable to feel equal passion for your or each other's interests.

 

[Cybin]

Everyone has, because we express innumerable instances of each emotion and receive innumerable and varied reactions to them. How can you recount, sum, and weigh every instance? Does this simplified, behaviorist generalization not do a great disservice to our sense of personal responsibility, our years of learning and adaptation, contemplation, and choice?

And am I supposed to feel that my true self is congruent to my infancy? I'm a functioning member of society now, not a teet-suckling grub. The question I come to here is the same as the prior post: How do you discern which emotional experiences are definitive, and which are fleeting and circumstantial? Furthermore, how do you necessarily determine this about your past self as well?

How many memories do you have of showing emotion and it going well, and how many do you have of showing emotion and getting a bad response? I assume you have more of the latter because the negative sticks with people more. These moments are almost traumatic to us and often seared into our brains. Now I have a question to you. Do you not believe that your childhood had a great impact on who you are now? These were the learning years, they made you who you are. By the time you have reached a stage in your life where you have the capability to understand these things, have a sense of personal responsibility, etc. These walls have been put up in place and heavily reinforced. And it is extremely hard for the INTP to see this, as they have already convinced themselves from a relatively young age that they are emotionless.

 

[Jake]

Cybin's first post hit the mark. We prefer to deal with thinking because we get spotty results when dealing with things emotionally. Eventually you can discount emotions to the extent you can fool yourself into thinking you don't have them, but you do, you've just learned to not use them as a decision-making tool. The danger is that they can leap out and jump you when least expected.

"I used to think I was "emotionless" like the op does, and got mad at people who would say otherwise" Cybin, I had to laugh when I read this, because, of course, anger is an emotion.

I never said I was emotionless, I simply said I don't feel emotions the same way as my friends. My feelings aren't as intense. They also love to present false dichotomies and point out that I show emotion sometimes, so therefore I must be suppressing my other emotions. I've tried to explain that I feel some emotion, just not as much as other people. It's a spectrum, not an either/or situation.

Anyway I had the same idea about flipping the situation around on them, and it seemed to work. They're not stupid people, just a bit self-absorbed until someone points it out.

 

[Cybin]

I've split my response in two as you raise two separate topics.

Yes, cultural/social learning is real, and it is limited, but I'm not arguing about that anyways. I'm asking you what the basis is to give special credence to any particular emotion experienced, especially when you bring drugs into the picture.

How do you discern the effects of the drug from your "true self"? What is the criteria that makes it "true"?

Here is my own assertion but it's much more important to me that you answer that question rather than try to refute this:

Spoiler

What I have put together from observing myself, those close to me, and my years studying psychology, is that you can observe fluctuations of the following aspects of any given mental state:
Suggestibility, whereby external information changes your beliefs without your awareness;
conviction, with which you emotionally reinforce a perception;
self-ownership, the appearance of having chosen one's actions and cognitions.

It seems obvious to me that all psychotropic drugs have some effect, even if slight, on those three aspects. Psychedelics can increase all three. One is simultaneously open to even the subtlest, most unconscious suggestions, while leaping to new conclusions with extreme enthusiasm, all the while under the spell that they are carrying out some deliberate action. I'm arguing that you can describe the effects of social psychedelic use as hallucinations of choice and certainty, masking an increased receptivity to others' beliefs and emotions. The line between hallucination and the normal functioning is fuzzier with other experiences as the same can be said of trance states, mob mentality, basic sexual infatuation, etc.

Sorry about the multiple posts. I just woke up and it is easier to organize my ideas by doing this.

Well, what is your "true self" anyways? I guess that is a topic for another debate. I have never felt like my use of mdma has changed my memories, though who knows, memories are very fragile. I found the drug simply let me look into aspects of my life that I wouldn't normally be comfortable with, and learn why I was not comfortable with them. While under the drug you often can't discern between your "true self" and the drug. That part comes after the trip. After weeks of analyzing and contemplating the trip, one may be able to come to a conclusion about these matters. So, how do I know if what I experienced is "true"? Well simply, I can't. I am not convinced that anything is true. These are simply my observations in this strange reality.

 

[Cybin]

I never said I was emotionless, I simply said I don't feel emotions the same way as my friends. My feelings aren't as intense. They also love to present false dichotomies and point out that I show emotion sometimes, so therefore I must be suppressing my other emotions. I've tried to explain that I feel some emotion, just not as much as other people. It's a spectrum, not an either/or situation.

Anyway I had the same idea about flipping the situation around on them, and it seemed to work. They're not stupid people, just a bit self-absorbed until someone points it out.

Fair enough, I think your friends hearts are in the right place though. Try not to get too annoyed with them.

I only bring up the "emotionless" part because I often see on INTP forums people talking about how they have zero emotions, but then go around and respond in a different thread about how depressed they are and that intps and depression go hand in hand. It's that wall, they are obviously showing emotion because they are depressed, they just want to ignore it. I am not directing this to you at all, just something I have observed on many of these forums.

 

[pernoctator]

they have already convinced themselves from a relatively young age that they are emotionless.

The problem with this statement is that, reading between the lines, you're saying that high emotion is "the" natural human state state. You wouldn't say of an ostensibly emotional person that they "convinced themselves that they are emotional", although this is in reality an equally valid scenario.

Perhaps it's true, for you, that you would prefer to be more expressive, and this was unwillingly suppressed by trauma you experienced. But don't be overzealous about your revelation and assume it applies to everyone else as well.

They also love to present false dichotomies and point out that I show emotion sometimes, so therefore I must be suppressing my other emotions.

they are obviously showing emotion because they are depressed

Case in point.

 

[crippli]

Sorry to hear that. If I smile, people tend to light up, and bring fourth a photographic camera to capture the moment. This makes me not smile anymore. Also makes me queston their ability to effectivly capture the emotional space. In reality they come off just as retarded as me, if not more.

I find much amusing. That doesn't mean I will smile. If they want to know if I am amused, they should ask.

 

[Cybin]

The problem with this statement is that, reading between the lines, you're saying that high emotion is "the" natural human state state. You wouldn't say of an obviously emotional person that they "convinced themselves that they are emotional", although this is in reality an equally valid scenario.

Perhaps it's true, for you, that you would prefer to be more expressive, and this was unwillingly suppressed by trauma you experienced. But don't be overzealous about your revelation and assume it applies to everyone else as well.

Fair enough. I did not mean to be overzealous. Though I think it is true for many of us, especially after reading the comments on the page I linked. It obviously won't be true for everyone. I also don't exactly express my emotions, it depends on the situation and the people I am with. When I express emotion with people it is because they have gained my highest level of trust. I know I in fact do feel them though, and often times they are so strong it scares me. Thankfully those eruptions of emotions are few and far between.

 

[EditorOne]

I never said I was emotionless, I simply said I don't feel emotions the same way as my friends. My feelings aren't as intense. They also love to present false dichotomies and point out that I show emotion sometimes, so therefore I must be suppressing my other emotions. I've tried to explain that I feel some emotion, just not as much as other people. It's a spectrum, not an either/or situation.

Anyway I had the same idea about flipping the situation around on them, and it seemed to work. They're not stupid people, just a bit self-absorbed until someone points it out.

Fair enough, I misread.

 

[Jake]

I find much amusing. That doesn't mean I will smile. If they want to know if I am amused, they should ask.

As long as you don't then expect people to take your feelings into account. What I hate is when people don't tell me about their feelings, but then expect me to take it into account when they are secretly sad or angry, when they haven't even told me what they're sad or angry about. It's fucking infuriating. I doubt you do this though, doesn't seem like an INTP move.

 

[Jennywocky]

As long as you don't then expect people to take your feelings into account. What I hate is when people don't tell me about their feelings, but then expect me to take it into account when they are secretly sad or angry, when they haven't even told me what they're sad or angry about. It's fucking infuriating. I doubt you do this though, doesn't seem like an INTP move.

Yeah, basically that's the rule I operate under -- the "fair is fair" rule.

If I hide my feelings or act like I don't care, then I don't expect people to read my mind or ask me about things or act like they care.

I really hate it when people can't just tell me straight up what they want or expect me to be digging into business they've taken pains to avoid bringing up.