Changeable and non-changeable personality traits

[sarahmichigan]

I saw this question asked in an advice column, and I thought it was interesting. I'm paraphrasing, but basically the question was: How do you know when a personality trait that annoys someone is something you should change, or if it's just a quirk that the other person should be more tolerant of?

Again, I'm paraphrasing, but the columnist said it depended on whether it was a personality trait that was actually reasonably liable to change, and whether you really wanted to change that personality trait.

She gave the example of being a worry-wart. If your tendencies to worry a lot annoys a friend or relative AND it's something you'd like to work on, you can probably learn some stress-coping techniques and can modify the behavior. However, your partner/friend cannot expect you to become a totally low-key laid back person, because it's probably part of your temperament to be a bit of a high-strung worry-wart.

In the book I've been mentioning, "Destructive Emotions," the brain scientists posited that you CAN change your temperament over time by repeatedly working on replacing negative emotional patterns with positive ones, but it's a very slow, gradual change.

So, do my readers have anything to add? Examples or counter-examples? Also, which personality traits would you like to change about yourself? I'll think about it a while and post some of my reactions in the comments.

Comments

[pstscrpt.livejournal.com]

I've noticed that many traits seem to have positive and negative sides. For instance, mogwar pretty much wears her heart on her sleeve. It's incredibly charming when she's happy or turned on, and is pretty much what made me fall for her; the flip side is that it comes out just as much when she's in a bad mood.

In my case, I've noticed at work that my biggest strength is probably flexibility. I have no problem adjusting for changing requirements at the last minute, and I can usually come up with half a dozen different approachs to the same task, with pros and cons for each. The flip side is that I have trouble settling on one of those half dozen approachs; I'm wishy washy, and I tend to over-research.

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

I've often thought about the idea that personality traits have drawbacks and advantages. Good examples!

[flyinglemurs.livejournal.com]

Yeah I think thats very true. Even being a worry wort...on one hand it can be annoying and cause you undue stress. But OTOH, sometimes worry worts are those who prepare ahead to avoid the things they are worrying about happening, or are more cautious, and avoid more trouble because of it. IE, never ever letting the tank get below 1/4 because of a worry you will run out of gas and get stranded. And therefore never running out of gas. Etc. Meanwhile some of my more laid back seat of the pants friends are always getting themselves into scrapes of some sort. So its good and bad.

Incidently far I've managed to always let the tank run down to the very last bit and yet not run out of gas (which now that I said that is bound to happen)...but I worry o enough other stuff.

[tacit.livejournal.com]

Personality traits exist for a reason. It's not necessarily as simple as these traits have "drawbacks and advantages," I think, unless you take a very flexible approach to what constitutes an "advantage;" rather, I have found that personality traits--even those which seem harmful or destructive--exist for a reason.

Often, personality traits which are harmful or destructive exist because at one time they served a useful function, but have outgrown their usefulness. In other cases, personality traits which seem harmful or destructive still continue to serve a function, but that function is obscure or is not really in the best interests of the person who has those traits.

For example, low self-esteem might serve a function as a defense mechanism. If a person has never developed tools to deal with failure constructively, but instead internalizes failure, then low self-esteem might serve to prevent that person from attempting things he fails at; if he believes "I should never try to do X because I am not a good enough person to succeed at X," then he may not have to deal with the emotional consequences of trying X and failing.

I know and recently had a bit of a falling out with a person whose overriding personality trait is overwhelming guilt. This person responds with intense, disproportional, and in some cases completely over-the-top guilt to any perceived failing or criticism, no matter how slight; walking into her apartment if a throw pillow is slightly out of place will precipitate a fifteen-minute apology for what a "disaster" the house it.

And this overwhelming guilt response serves a function. If you suggest to her that something she has done was hurtful to you in any way, even in a small way, the guilt response enables her to couch the situation in a way that makes you the villain; you attacked her, or else she wouldn't feel so guilty, right? And because you attacked her, you are a bad person...which means she does not have to consider what you have said, she does not have to internalize the things that she has done which were hurtful, and she does not have to change her behavior--because you're a bad person, right? It serves a function that protects her from many of the consequences of her behavior. (Of course, the resulting interpersonal mess is a consequence, but apparently one that she consciously or unconsciously finds preferable to any other.)

Shelly tends to see a distinction between personality traits that are the consequence of simple preference, personality traits which have developed as a response to danger or are a reflection of a person's relative acceptance of risk, and personality traits which have developed in response to unsupported fear. Fear of abandonment, insecurity, and the like tend to belong to the third category. I think that in many ways this is a useful model for determining what kinds of traits are acceptable and what kinds of traits are destructive; it has been my experience that personality traits which are a result of unsupported fear are by far the most destructive, and manifest themselves in many ways, sometimes surprising.

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

Maybe it's more accurate to say: "For every personality trait that is off-putting to others in some way, the person who has that trait must be getting some kind of benefit/use from maintaining the personality trait."

The most obvious benefit is that it's easier to stay yourself and NOT to change, generally.

[tacit.livejournal.com]

I think that's reasonable. The main issue is that the benefit may be largely illusory, or may come at a cost that is very high...but changing personality traits that are rooted in defensive behaviors is extraordinarily difficult to do.

[stacycat69.livejournal.com]

A lot of my lovers tell me that I overthink things. If they were more in my life, I wouldnt have to think as hard :-)

But, its very hard for me to change my emotions, thinkings, and attitudes without an outward sign of change. So, im sure that I could change my temperament, but not without severe stress on my part.

[sarahmichigan.livejournal.com]

My thoughts on this are as follows:

1. I mainly agree with the columnist that it depends on whether the personality trait is something that it's reasonable to expect to be changed, and that it has to be something YOU are unhappy about, too, and WANT to change.

2. However, I think people often underestimate how much of their personality is subject to change. People often use the mantra, "They have to accept me the way I am if they want to be my friend," without realizing that if "the way I am" is driving people away, it's not reasonable to expect people to accept you the way you are. It's reasonable for people to accept that you're a blue-eyed and a little scatter-brained. It's NOT reasonable for people to have to accept that you're going to be late to every date you set with them and expect them not to get upset because that's "just the way you are." You MIGHT find some friends who will accept your constant lateness, but you're also likely to piss off and alienate some good people who feel that your scatter-brained ways are sending the message that your time is more important than theirs is.

3. Personality traits I'd like to change include: being worry-prone, having trouble changing gears/plans quickly, and self-righteousness. As pstscrpt mentioned above, most personality traits have both negative and positive aspects. I've always seen "self-righteous" as a completely negative trait that I'd like to eradicate. But as my mother recently reminded me of, I've always been a fighter for the underdog, someone who stood up when I thought something was wrong or unjust, or someone was being poorly treated. I think that's the positive flip side of the negative trait.

damned if you do, damned if you don't

[lefthand.livejournal.com]

Someone will always hate you for the way you are. If you are smart, educated, sexual, or attractive, someone will hate for characteristics that are otherwise an upside. That skews the response to this question. There are some people that will always hate you because you have better circumstances than they do. These folks generally aren' worth worrying about.

Everyone decides what is intolerable for them. This is actually a hard limit and is not subject to debate, excuses or rationalizations (excuses really only work when the other person is looking for a reason to excuse you, otherwise, they generally just increase annoyance). It doesn't have to be justified or explained by the person who has the limit. It simply is.

Sounds pretty dire, and it is. It can often be headed off with a little preemptive action. One of the big warning signs that something is wrong is you friend starts making little jokes (http://www.livejournal.com/users/lefthand/6613.html) about the behavior, quirk or mannerism. This often the first and only warning you get that it is bothering them. Failure to address it (change it, since talking about it won't do a lot of good, they have made up their mind already) at that point will like mean the friendship / fuck association is coming to a close. Typical things that trip this off include

1. public embarrassment / humiliation
2. violating sexual boundaries
3. failure to adhere to appropriate ideology (feminism and fundementalist xianity are big offenders in this regard)
4. disliking their pets
5. having sex they don't approve of
6. consistent disrespectful behavior like consistent tardiness, blown off dates or "cute" nicknames
7. Caught in a big lie

If the person makes an outright stand on the issue, you might get to talk about it but often the conflict is already over.

btw, self-perception is often wrong. If you hear the same sort of jokes from several different people, that is what the public opinion is.

[flyinglemurs.livejournal.com]

Re number 2- Very good point. And sometimes I hate it when people use that "accept me as I am" as an excuse for bad behavior, or more particularly, bad treatment of others.