‘Venting Anger’ Only Invites More
In response to the widely publicized shootings in public schools over the past few years, “anger management” programs are popping up across the country to help children understand and control their emotions. But educators and parents seduced by this solution fall prey to one of the greatest myths of modern popular culture: the myth of catharsis.
According to this view, if individuals are not allowed to “vent” their anger or frustration in appropriate ways, it will build up and be expressed violently, perhaps in a spray of gunfire unleashed on classmates, parents or other innocent bystanders. In this Freudian model of aggression, a child must be made aware of his anger and taught to channel it in socially appropriate ways in order to prevent incidents like the one at Columbine.
But far from being the sure cure that anger management programs suggest, the modern imperative that children “get in touch” with their anger may only contribute to the rash of angry outbursts. If one conclusion can be drawn from the research literature on aggression it is that aggression--whether expressed, acted out or witnessed--begets further aggression.
Experimental psychologists have shown that, contrary to popular belief, the expression of feelings of anger and frustration does not eradicate those feelings and may in fact serve to punch them up. If you feel a lot better after yelling at someone or letting off steam, you are more likely to do so in the future. And such rewarding incidents may gradually chip away at the restraints you initially felt or were brought up to feel against the expression of your own aggressive impulses.
In fact, in all of the recent violent incidents in schools, children have been remarkably aware of their feelings about social injustices they’ve suffered, including lack of popularity and outright romantic rejection. According to the testimony of the perpetrators and their closest confidants, the shootings themselves were seen as a means of getting back at the source of their frustration or righting perceived wrongs that had been done to them. There seems no lack of self-awareness about injured feelings suffered by these self-described “victimized” perpetrators; instead, there is a lack of emotional restraint.
But why are today’s children so angry in the first place? One reason may be that they are taught that they are entitled to never feel angry, frustrated or insecure. As a result, plagued by the normal insecurities of childhood and adolescence, children have a mistaken belief that these feelings are not a normal part of life. The same culture that tells children to express their anger tells them they are entitled to feel equal or superior to their peers at all times and in all endeavors.
But this expectation simply defies reality, as does the expectation that every romantic love will be requited. The present culture of entitlement--to equal outcome as well as opportunity--doesn’t prepare children for the failures and frustrations that normal life doles out. And when we train children to believe they will be equally loved, esteemed and rewarded, regardless of what they actually do and how well they perform, they feel automatically justified in their anger when they fail to measure up.
It is safe to assume that children have always had grievances--against parents, teachers, peers--but to feel that these grievances are actionable, children have to have a false sense of entitlement to get rid of their rage and frustration; and that is precisely what the so-called anger management programs may inadvertently cultivate.
The misguided effort to teach children anger management focuses their attention on their own misfortune and, ironically, is a sure way to make them even angrier. The social science literature makes it clear that there is already more than enough emphasis in our formal curricula and popular culture on “letting it all hang out.”
A better way of dealing with rage both in and out of school would be to redirect children’s attention toward more rewarding and productive emotions than anger. A better bet would be to teach them the long-lost virtues of looking beyond themselves, empathizing with the plight of the truly downtrodden and investing their boundless energies in helping ameliorate the pain and suffering of others.
This approach, incidentally, may be one of the reasons religious schools have so far been less susceptible to student violence than public schools. And it is one that is probably not restricted to children or adolescents but could profitably be applied to most adults as well.
What we don’t need is more hotheads lined up for their turn at the recommended primal scream. True anger management should have the opposite effect; it should be directed at letting cooler heads prevail.
