The yuk factor and others

by jgnat 65 Replies latest jw friends

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    Note how an "Unbelieving Mate" is marginalized. Like "kissing a corpse" as I was told was said at a convention. I used to think I could get hubby in line following his own rules by going to the elders. But, nope. I'm contaminated by the world. When I am talking to the elders I might as well be Charlie Brown's teacher.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFPXQkZE6hA

    Besides, from hard experience, I've learned it does not pay to try and use a Witnesses' rules against them. It just pushes closer to conformity and farther from independence.

    P.S. the same goes for those divorcing their Witness, or those in the broken hearts club who are tempted to turn their former loves in for their transgressions. Nope, you're all contaminated. Your words, thoughts and opinions have no weight in the society.

  • Apognophos
    Apognophos

    The sense of disgust is a fascinating and clever adaptation in the brain that functions like a beneficial phobia. It causes people to avoid things that are bad for them even though they don't know intellectually why they should avoid them. For instance, bodily functions are disgusting to us because they are toxic to us or because being unclean in general triggers our sense of disgust. That's why even primitive peoples usually bathe regularly; it's an instinct based on disgust which allowed humans to avoid germs millennia before we knew what germs were.

    People who have higher intelligence tend to have higher levels of disgust, or lower tolerance for uncleanliness, sometimes to a degree that seems illogical, as if the disgust sense is going haywire. Tesla couldn't stand having overweight people work for him. Some will only eat white foods because anything else is "dirty".

    Sometimes there is a benefit to seemingly random aversions. I know someone who dislikes drinking opaque liquid since he can't see what's inside it, and only eats his food dry because sauces, dressing and such gross him out. He has a natural aversion to pork and seafood, despite having never been near a Jewish person. You can see how these would actually be useful aversions to have in a natural setting, eating unprocessed foods.

    Much of this thread talks about morality in conjunction with disgust, but I find that the kind of disgust that most repels people is always of a squishy or icky nature. We may disapprove of someone's morals, but we'd much rather hang out with them than with a friend who we admire but who hasn't bathed in a week or washed their clothes.

  • cofty
    cofty

    Just marking. I am enjoying the thread, thank you.

    any ex jws eat blood after leaving? - Miss Fit

    Yum black pudding!

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    How could you turn off or deflect the yuk response, especially if it has been used, say, for shunning?

    I suspect it would be similar to treatment for OCD; "Exposure Response Training (ERP)". Perhaps unfortunately, this would be most effective with the subject's permission. How lucky would we be to have our loved-ones agree to ERP training so they are no longer disgusted by us?

    This certainly could be used by ex-Witnesses who don't want to be triggered by old responses any more.

    The trick is to have the subject voluntarily expose themselves to a known trigger (starting with the easiest) for a period of time without resorting to old coping strategies. I have used this technique (instinctively) over the years by exposing hubby to all sorts of worldly types. My favorites, of course, are the Wicca neighbours. How he adored that family. Weeks or months later he'd quote an article how such people are destined for death, and I would say, "You mean like Wicca family? Really?" He'd make conciliatory noises and back down. These days he rubs shoulders with all types of people.

    I think a newbie mistake is to thrust the object of aversion (maybe ourselves) in to their face without their permission or preparation.

    The linked article has an interesting snippet. One eighty-minute exposure is more effective than many smaller exposures.

  • Apognophos
    Apognophos

    To be honest, I don't see a relation between the sense of disgust and shunning. There is a certain disgust in a JW towards trappings of "Christendom", like crosses and churches, but shunning is mostly just following orders. Most JWs are not afraid of worldly people or disfellowshipped ones. They just don't think they should be around them. They are, however, afraid of apostates in a more visceral way. I still see this as a self-defense mechanism or tribalism, but I don't know if it could be called disgust. Your example of a Wiccan family is an interesting one, as that would bring up the JW fear of demons. However, a JW would rather talk to a witch than an apostate. How do you work on their fear of apostates when they won't permit even a few minutes' exposure to one?

  • cofty
    cofty

    Most JWs are not afraid of worldly people or disfellowshipped ones

    I disagree. I always make an effort to talk to JWs when I see them. I have definately seen disgust on their face many times.

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    Or, how could we turn a Witness's aversion to blood for instance, to save their life?

  • cofty
    cofty

    Perhaps just helping a JW to understand that their biggest objection actually is disgust is an important step.

    I remember when I was debating blood with fellow elders one of them proposed his disgust at the thought of having blood as his main reason regardless of any evdence that theor theology was wrong.

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    How about inserting the visual of "kissing a corpse"?

    Or milder, used by my husband often, the "dregs"? You see, he gets the pure truth, and I ingest the "dregs" from Christendom. He loves that word, "dregs" because he had me explain it to him. The visuals are unforgettable.

    Or a dirty lollypop?

  • jgnat
    jgnat

    Interesting, cofty, because of what I am reading about the rider and the elephant (reason and intuition respectively). The elephant is frankly, stronger and more responsive. The rider's main job is to justify the elephant's decision to go right or left. In this model, reasoning was developed primarily to help us influence our fellow tribespeople to go our way, not to come to the absolute truth on a matter.

    That elder's response is the very same that Haidt had found with subjects who were given disgusting but non-harmful stories. The subject could be given all the reasons in the world why his response was illogical, but he would not give it up.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit