Scripts People Live

by Claude Steiner

  The Therapy of the Three

  Basic Scripts: The

  Therapy of Depression

  Scarcity of essential life support causes depression. People need food, shelter, space, safety, drinkable water, breathable air, and human contact (or strokes). Hungry, crowded, scared, and alienated people are sad and unhappy (the folk word for depressed) no matter what else is going on.

  Scarcity can be caused by natural accidents or can be artificially created. Competition creates scarcity for many while providing for the few. I say this in spite of the fact that competition is touted to do the opposite, namely bring plentitude. Actually, the way it works in western society, competition between people brings about increased productivity, the major benefit of which is reaped by a priviledged few with enough given back to people to keep them competing.

  Because the audience of this book is Middle America—the average citizen who has a reasonable supply of food, shelter, space (maybe), safety, water, and breathable air (just barely)—I speak of the therapy of depression being aimed at the artificial scarcity of strokes which in this group is usually the cause of depression.

  Depression is the single most common complaint of people who seek therapy. Whether in its mild, banal form or its severe, acute, tragic form, depression, as has been pointed out before, is the result of stroke deficit. Therapists who bother to ask their clients why they are depressed will find that most people (except for the few who are couch-broken by previous therapists and have come to disbelieve their own common sense) will say that they are depressed because they have no friends or loving relationships or that their loving relationships are not satisfactory. When depression becomes severe and begins to manifest itself in the form of physical symptoms such as apathy, sleepiness or sleeplessness, overeating or loss of appetite, a constant tendency to cry, or suicidal thoughts, people will often lose sight of what it is that they are missing. But in most cases of depression it will be found that the person readily sees how her or his depression would be lifted if she or he could get a certain specific kind of stroke from a certain, specific kind of person or persons. Thus the appropriate strategy for depression is teaching people the procurement of the strokes that they want.

  Breaking Down the Stroke Economy

  The process of defeating the rules which maintain the artificial scarcity of strokes is called breaking down the stroke economy. In order to break down the stroke economy and free up available strokes people need to overthrow the injunctions that interfere with stroke procurement—asking for strokes, accepting strokes, offering strokes, rejecting strokes that are not wanted, and giving oneself strokes are all permissions which will generate strokes and ultimately get rid of depression.

  People need to know what kind of strokes they want. Strokes can be roughly divided into physical and verbal. Physical strokes can be hugs, kisses, backrubs, being held, squeezed, touched, caressed. Physical strokes can be strong or light; they can be sexy, sensual, or just friendly. They can be nurturing or slightly teasing. Verbal strokes can be about a person’s physique—her face, her body, his posture and movements; or about a person’s personality—her intelligence, his lovingness, sensitivity, courage, and so on.

  People have specific needs for specific strokes, and these needs are often kept secret because people are ashamed of needing something and not being able to get it. In the same way in which people who are hungry blame themselves for being poor and not being able to afford food, so do people who are in need of strokes feel ashamed and embarrassed about their need. As a consequence, they keep the nature of the strokes that they want secret, the more so the more they crave them. A person who gets a lot of physical strokes, hugs, kisses, in some form, will have little difficulty asking for them (again, a case of the rich getting richer). However, a person who for some reason or another gets very few physical strokes and is in dire need of them, is very likely to be ashamed of his need and keep it secret. Samuels1 points out that people give the kind of strokes that they want as a way of indicating their need. It can be seen that this method of getting strokes is very ineffective and in fact it creates even more scarcity. Typically, for instance, a man might want sexual strokes from his wife while she wants verbal strokes about being loved. As a consequence he gives her sexual strokes which she doesn’t really want, and she gives him verbal strokes which he doesn’t really want. The more she gives what he doesn’t want, the less satisfied he is, the less he gives her verbal strokes, the more resentful she is—because she’s not getting what she wants in return, and because she is giving away what she wants herself (creating an even greater feeling of need). The same is happening with him. This example is given to demonstrate that it is important that people learn to ask for (and give) what they want (and are asked for) in the way of strokes. In group work, Permission is given to disobey the injunctions about strokes in a number of different ways. In breaking down the stroke economy it may be useful to remember the following points:

  Faith in human nature. Therapists are often afraid that certain individuals simply will not get strokes even if they ask for them. As a consequence, they are afraid of proposing stroke exercises for fear that certain people will not get the strokes they want. This fear is evidence of the fact that the therapist, like everyone else, believes that strokes are in fact a commodity and that they are in actual rather than artificial scarcity. The fact of the matter is that in a group of eight people, it is highly unlikely, if at all possible, that any person who asks for strokes will not be stroked to satisfaction. True, if a person asks for very specific kinds of strokes from a specific person, she may be disappointed. But if the strokes that are asked for are not specific and if the whole group is asked for them, it is a certainty that there will be enough strokes to satisfy the request. It is the nature of human beings to be loving, and therapists need to develop the kind of trust in human nature which will make it possible for them to fight against Stroke Economy without hesitation or apprehension.

  Stroke starvation. Persons who are completely stroke-satisfied are rare. Because of this it is hard to describe the behavior of stroke-satisfied people. Certainly, it would be an extraordinary, novel, and satisfying state to achieve. It would probably free the person for activities other than stroke procurement and it would be accompanied by a feeling of calm in the “I’m O.K., you’re O.K.” position. It is also likely that a stroke-satisfied person would have no interest in consumer items which are strictly related to stroke hunger, such as new cars, new clothes, cosmetics, etc.

  Because negative strokes have a certain value for the satisfaction of stroke hunger, people, when they get hungry enough, will be willing to take negative strokes just to keep going. Thus, depending on their stroke Survival Quotient,1 some people will be able and some will be unable to reject negative strokes. One can’t expect a stroke-starved person to reject “Plastic Fuzzies” any more than one can expect a starved person to reject rotten food.

  Some people get stroke-starved because they reject good, available strokes. For instance, some men’s tastes (see “Playboy,” Chapter 15) have been perverted by the media so that they come to crave very special kinds of strokes2 and will only accept them from Playboy centerfold models or their earthly look-alikes. Thus, they reject strokes from real, loving women around them and eventually wind up in a stroke deficit, “starving in the midst of plenty.” This situation is similar to that of a city-dweller starving in a forest surrounded by roots and berries which he doesn’t recognize as nutritious.

  Acceptance and Rejection of Strokes. Taking in or accepting a stroke is a biological process, like eating, which requires a certain amount of time to be completed. Strokes have to be allowed to “soak in.” Just as when one waters a plant in very dry soil where the water takes a certain amount of time to penetrate the soil, so do certain strokes and certain people have different “soaking times.” In any case, when a stroke is given, it may take anywhere from five to fifteen seconds (or more) for it to be completely accepted.
r />   A stroke can be rejected at a number of different levels. Some strokes are received with an obvious discount such as a shrug, a grimace, or an overt denial. For instance, a group member says to another: “I think you’re a very intelligent person.” The person might respond: “I don’t think so; I don’t believe that you really mean it. You probably are just trying to make me feel better. Anyway, I know I’m not intelligent, you must be putting me on.” This kind of a discount is easily detected. However, strokes can be discounted in more subtle ways. It is because of this that it is important to carefully observe how a person receives the stroke and whether the stroke is “soaking in” or being rejected. Stroke rejection is revealed by certain gestures, pauses, looks, sighs, reciprocation of the stroke, or a speedy “thank you.” Very often when people receive strokes they immediately hear a statement from their Pig Parent to discount it. That statement is usually detectable in the face and body of the person in the form of a minute muscular change. It is important to demystify stroke discounts and to pinpoint the Pig Parent message which causes them.

  The clearest indication that a stroke has been accepted fully is when a person receives it, smiles broadly and comfortably, and says nothing.

  When a person receives a stroke that she does not want, it is important that she reject it outwardly and overtly. Sometimes it is hard to know whether a stroke that we receive is genuine or not, especially when our Pig Parent tells us that it isn’t. As a consequence, it’s important to air the fact that the stroke is, for the moment at least, not acceptable. Further investigation might result in the conclusion that the stroke was genuine and the rejection was caused by the influence of the Pig Parent or, and this is quite possible as well, that the stroke was not really a wanted stroke or, indeed, that it was actually not genuine. Which is which is best determined in a group context where the observers are usually objective and capable of helping to discriminate between the above alternatives.

  Nurturing. Strictly speaking, strokes go from one human being to another (though it is possible to get strokes from other animals). However, people can accumulate strokes like food and water and stroke themselves with them. We are able to accumulate things we need to different degrees. Our bodies can only accumulate oxygen for about three minutes’ worth of life, but we can store food and water for weeks. Strokes are stored, too. Kupfer1 speaks of the Stroke Bank. I believe the ego state where strokes are accumulated is the Parent. Positive strokes are accumulated in the Nurturing Parent and negative strokes are accumulated in the Pig Parent.

  People with scripts have strong Pig Parents always willing to defeat the Child and weak Nurturing Parents that have no reserves of strokes to help them through rough times.

  Thus, having a big, well-stocked Nurturing Parent for self-stroking is very important to maintain an O.K. feeling, though no matter how strong the Nurturing Parent, it is not possible to keep an O.K. feeling without a steady supply of strokes from others. Ultimately, feeling O.K. depends completely on the strokes we get. No one can maintain the “I’m O.K.” position very long with no stroke input, and even less long when the only input is negative strokes.

  Sometimes the Nurturing Parent accumulates strokes but can’t use them because they are reserved exclusively for others. “Mother Hubbard” (see Chapter 14) is an example of such a person. Self-nurturing of self-stroking has to be learned by most people, and I will describe exercises to do this later.

  Plastic vs. Warm Fuzzies. Strokes vary in their genuineness. Some strokes are thinly disguised critical statements, as, for instance, “You are very beautiful for someone who’s fat,” or, “You are trying real hard.” Other strokes are comparative in nature and arouse competitive feelings in people. For example, “You are the most beautiful person in this group,” or, “I love you more than anybody,” instead of “You are very beautiful,” or, “I love you.” It is important that people learn to give strokes which are genuine and not contaminated with competitiveness or critical Parent content. Contaminated strokes are called colloquially “Plastic Fuzzies,” and people should learn to not give them and reject them when given.

  One major situation in which people give phony or “plastic” strokes is when they feel they should give strokes and actually have none to give. Either because they are directly asked, but usually because a person is coming on Victim and hooking his Rescuer, a person may feel that she should “come across” with strokes. Under such circumstances, it is often the case that people will manufacture strokes that they do not actually feel. Needless to say, in a free stroke economy this is to be avoided, since it throws it completely out of kilter by undermining its basic assumptions. People need to believe that it is O.K. not to give strokes to a person when they are not felt, since, in a free stroke economy, someone else who feels them will.

  Touching. Touching is a therapeutic maneuver of great potency which has fallen into disrepute, probably because of the problems associated with it. As in the example of laughter where Fun is therapeutic and the gallows transaction is harmful, the use of touch needs to be thoroughly explored and its therapeutical potential isolated from its harmful possibilities. Touch is the most basic tissue transaction, and I believe that it is an essential ingredient when working with the tragic extreme of scripts. In my opinion, physical strokes are also a specific and powerful antidote to depression, except in the rare cases where it is clearly related to organic causes.

  It seems prudent at this time, though, due to a lack of clear understanding about the negative effects of touching, to handle this potent therapeutic tool with care.

  In groups, I avoid touching the people I work for and encourage a maximum of touching between them. I also discourage social contact between myself and group members as well as intimate contact between them outside of group sessions. I encourage social contact between group members and hope that they will be available to each other for support and Protection.

  Organizing a Stroking Community

  The problem-solving group is an artificial situation in which the rules of the stroke economy do not apply. In time, people in the group will operate within this free stroke economy. However, clearly this is not a sufficient solution for a person who suffers depression and is unable to get strokes. That person needs to be able to obtain strokes in the world as well as in the group. Part of the task of the therapy in depression is to teach the person how to obtain strokes in the outside world where the rules of the stroke economy are usually in force. This requires that the person choose her friends and partners carefully and that she make agreements with them with respect to the free exchange of strokes. It is important for people who are depressed to relate to people who are willing to abandon the rules and to exchange strokes freely. Without being able to develop relationships with such people, it is not possible for a person who has a Lovelessness script to “close down the show” and put a new one on the road. As a consequence, working on a Lovelessness script requires that a person organize a circle of friends and loved ones outside the therapy group in which strokes are readily available. Only when a person has learned to ask for strokes, to give strokes, reject strokes, and to give himself strokes freely, and when he has learned to relate to people in such a way that strokes from other people are forthcoming, will it be possible to give up the Lovelessness script.

  The following exercises have been useful in breaking down the stroke economy.

  Exercises

  1) Giving Strokes. The person needing to learn how to give strokes (“It”) goes around the group and gives a stroke to every person in the group. Or “It” chooses one particular person in the group and gives her a series of strokes, as many as he can think of. Or each person in group asks for a specific kind of stroke and “It” gives it (only if he genuinely can do so, of course). This latter exercise is difficult and requires careful Protection.

  2) Asking for Strokes. “It” stands up in the center of the room, and people give her strokes. She works on accepting them as they are given. Or, “It”
asks a certain person to give her a certain specific kind of stroke that he has trouble taking, and she works on accepting it. In all of these exercises the whole group watches for “plastic fuzzies,” how strokes “soak in,” and gives Permission and Protection.

  3) Self-Stroking and Nurturing Parent. “It” stands in the middle of the room and makes a series of positive statements about himself with the help of the group members who suggest ideas, object when the self-strokes are “plastic” or become self-criticism, and applaud when the strokes feel good. This exercise is called bragging. Bragging can be combined with asking for strokes and learning how to reject strokes that are not wanted.

  Wyckoff1 describes her exercise to develop the Nurturing Parent. In it, two or more people start by writing with crayons with their left hand (if right-handed)2 on a large piece of paper what their ideal Nurturing Parent would be like—adjectives like “warm,” “big,” “smooth,” “giving,” “loving,” etc. Next, on the other side of the paper, people write what they would like to hear from their ideal Nurturing Parent; sentences like “I love you,” “You are beautiful,” “Enjoy yourself,” etc. Following this, each person reads, with appropriate feelings, what she has written.

  Other group members help decontaminate the strokes, taking out veiled criticism, hidden conditions and expectations, and other Pig Parent content.

  Now people exchange their lists and read them to each other in groups of two or three while they hold and stroke each other accordingly.

  People can also read the list to themselves while looking in a mirror.