Continuing the previous Post, the neo-native digital generation is ‘post-globalized’. They deal with the consequences of climate change and digital technology advances -changes in job contracts and the relationship with work environment- in social area, along with new forms of expression and self-experimentation, in their private lives. Centennials are sociologically considered an engaged generation, in contrast with Millennials, who were supposed to be more individualistic, an idea we might have agreed with in our first version of this essay but, from apsychological perspective, it doesn’t sound fair anymore [1]. Centennials are an engaged generation in a different way Boomers were. Their first consensual social issue is climate change. This way, they are committed to building a better world, in general, through ‘micro-politics’: social projects, preservation of nature, and, among companies and wealthy social classes, the culture of encouraging social entrepreneurship grows. In addition, they are sensitive to minority rights, and this seems to be the two big social issues that make people feel emotionally connected nowadays. These empathetic behaviors, however, are the result of Millennials changes in behaviors and values. They have gone through the anxieties of not having an established psychological ground and of living in a world that would not count on stability anymore. Changes bring and require anxieties and much energy until readaptation. Centennials are the result of Millennials expansion. They experience a world without boundaries in which everything is connected, and, in this sense, they don’t have much to expand. Coming back to clinics, with regards to such cultural aspects, it’s plausible to say that what makes Centennials stay in tune/empathize is how the Earth will survive global warming- and, hence, their children and future generations-, one the one hand, and what resonates with internal experiences that are hard to define or admit, on the other. The “sharing nature” of the online life have enabled the formation of small groups and strengthened them. The criterion for belonging is sharing emotional difficulties and finding support in the group. This way, the experience/behavior which was previously associated with shame, embarrassment or exclusion slowly becomes part of their self- perception. These groups define themselves as minorities[2]. Therefore, the emotional suffering they experience is the shared element that works as a cause they engage in and it gives them a sense of belonging. This sense of belonging works as self-affirmation and helps build strengthen of Ego. We could say that they are a sort of “Place of Speech” [3] in the sense that they are different from psychiatric diagnosis, for instance. The latter have a central role on giving people a sense of belonging and relief, especially when they are going through huge emotional suffering and there is no available explanation and expertise to treat it, but they are not “first-person” experience/discourse. This way, belonging to a mental health cause could be seen as taking a place in a fight for respect for differences (singularities) and, in this sense, it is more aligned to what we usually associate with a social cause. Some examples in our area are: 1) Autistic Spectrum- High functioning autists started to claim that they don’t have an emotional disorder, they are just different, i.e, neuro atypical (especially from 90s on, after Asperger Syndrome was included in DSM4); 2) LGBTQIAP+ community. The group has been expanding and including more people in the diversity spectrum, i.e, in their usual claims for respect and inclusion. These are consequences of Millennials’ achievements, which are now taken for granted. Being able to put themselves in the other’s shoe regarding mental health issues (deficits/disabilities) has also become a social expected behavior. Empathy turns into a very popular word to refer, in general, to being kind to others. Thus, we observe a slowly shift to more tolerance and sympathy towards individual experiences in general: gay marriage, gender equality, which are added to old fights such as the ones against racism, women’s rights and etc, at least in liberal societies. In short, in what concerns the Spirit of the time (Zeitgeist), what makes today’s individuals feel emotionally connected are environmental issues and minority belonging and rights. And how is this all connected to new Egos, emotions and anxieties? To be continued on the next Post
[1] We do not want to make assertions or draw conclusions about issues that belong to other areas of expertise, and, hence, are beyond our knowledge and the goal of this essay. Our ideas are grounded on clinical observations, mostly supported by Psychodramatic Analysis methodology, and aim at offering plausible reflections on today’s emotional suffering that are accessible to any reader. [2] We will concentrate on groups undergoing mental health suffering. Firstly, because the general topic concerning how internet and social media have changed people’s behaviors is beyond our knowledge and objective. Secondly, to keep the focus on our goal, which is to understand how new egos and symptoms are, to a certain extent, a reflection of cultural changes. [3] ‘Place of Speech” is a concept with multiple sources that are used in different contexts. In “Analysis of Speech”, a field from French philosophy, it is used by authors such as Bourdieu, Foucault, Butler and Orlandi. These authors refer to speeches as ‘relations of power ‘according to the place and the ways they will be announced by the speakers. In Brazil the term has become popular through the work of Djalma Ribeiro: “(…) a black philosopher and feminist writer to emphasize the necessity to give black people a say about their own suffering. It alludes to the fact that academic and intellectual production about black social conditions would be written mainly by white thinkers. In http://en.wikipedia.org
Comments