The Two Sides of Acceptance
The Two Sides of Acceptance
by Brady C. Malone, MA, TLLP
Acceptance as an approach to emotional regulation is both widely mentioned and misunderstood. This prevalence is, in part, because insights associated with Buddhism and Eastern philosophy in general are experiencing a revival in Western culture, especially in psychotherapy circles. Acceptance is misunderstood, in my view, because it is a highly general term that can carry several different meanings. This leads to some agreeing they “practice acceptance” while in reality they practice very different things.
I see at least two kinds of acceptance: Acceptance as avoidance and acceptance as allowance.
Acceptance as Avoidance
Acceptance as avoidance can be seen in different forms. The often-uttered phrase, “It is what it is,” is usually employed to convey a sense of acceptance about unfortunate circumstances. The phrase is sometimes understood to express a stoic attitude towards the unsavory disappointments of life: conflict as central to human relationships, for instance, or the impersonal destructive forces of nature; things in life we lament but cannot change.
“What’s the point of getting bent out of shape?” and “There’s no point in crying over spilled milk” are additional examples. While phrases like these might seem like acceptance, I would argue that they are examples of conflating acceptance with avoidance. With a simple sentence, one can easily wave any worry, uncomfortable thought, or sense of dread. A powerful tool, indeed.
I don’t mean to suggest that acceptance as avoidance is an issue or poor coping skill. In fact, acceptance as avoidance can be a very useful and adaptive skill when used in moderation and in appropriate settings. The same is true for any coping strategy: Humor, for example, is often viewed as a healthy way to manage severe emotional turmoil. It’s also true that there is a time and place for humor and its unregulated use can be inappropriate, during a serious argument with a friend or partner, for example. The point is, acceptance as avoidance can be useful, but it’s important to remember it’s not the only form of acceptance.
Acceptance as Allowance
Acceptance as allowance, on the other hand, is a different way of approaching emotional regulation. Whereas acceptance as avoidance confers an evasive advantage over unwelcome emotions, acceptance as allowance provides one with the mental space to process unwelcome emotions as they naturally arise.
For example, when a natural disaster decimates a community, loss, frustration, and intense anxiety are expected emotional responses. Those who practice acceptance as avoidance may elect to sidestep these responses and quickly “come to terms” with their situation and begin the constructive and adaptive process of rebuilding. Those who practice acceptance as allowance may first give themselves permission to freely grieve and emote whenever the impulse occurs. Such a practice may well delay and interrupt the inevitable rebuilding process, but what is gained is a newfound tolerance for unwelcome emotions, a kind of familiarity with being uncomfortable that can be useful.
Comparatively, those who tend to practice acceptance as avoidance may not be as adept at navigating their internal experiences of negative emotions. The consequences of that could be a lack of awareness of mounting internal tension, becoming easily overwhelmed, or making counterproductive efforts to stealthily maneuver around certain emotions. The aim is not to favor one strategy over the other, but to clarify that there are at least two complementary ways to practice acceptance.
It is common and forgivable to confuse mental health with the absence of negative emotion. In truth, mental health is associated with the ability to tolerate and make use of all emotions—and to regulate them effectively when their immediate expression is unwise. All emotions have adaptive functions; disavowing an entire category of emotion will necessarily result in some form of maladaptation.
The cost of acceptance as allowance is, of course, the direct experience of negative emotion. While this is painfully true, developing an intimate relationship with the full range of emotional experiences also provides one the opportunity to cultivate a sense of self that is reflective, assured, honest, flexible, and better prepared to manage conflicts and live a value-consistent life.
Brady C. Malone, MA, TLLP, provides psychotherapy for adults and couples at Apex Therapy Services. He uses an integrative therapeutic approach for those interested in uncovering the roots of their problems. While experienced with a range of mental health problems, he has specialized training and expertise in narcissism, low self-esteem, long-term depression, exiting long-term relationships/divorce, and self-sabotaging behavior.
