The Tyranny of Doing: Impact of Trauma

A common theme I hear among my clients is guilt or shame for not "doing something" when something bad happens to them. Or shame about perceived pressure to "do something" to solve a situation that is ultimately out of their hands. I notice my own internal pressure to "do something" whether it is about injustices, the cleanliness of my house, or to do something to augment my income. This newsletter is 100% an offshoot of that internal pressure.

Our culture is obsessed with "doing". Capitalism tells us that we are only as good as our productivity, or our wealth. (The amount of work we do is rarely directly connected to our income, but culture conveniently ignores this.) So being busy, being productive then helps us feel good about ourselves. Rest is frowned upon, being unable or unwilling to "do" is labeled as "lazy", and hustle culture is praised above all else. As our economy has shifted from a maker economy to a service and information economy it becomes more challenging to identify what “doing” actually is in the work world.

White supremacy, Puritan work ethic, capitalism, and the patriarchy all work together to push this narrative. White Western, neurotypical male ways of being, reacting and emoting are held above all others, and are held up as the standard by which everyone is measured. The reasons for someone not meeting the standard are myriad and varied, including, but not limited to: trauma, disability, poverty, and neurodivergence. And those who fail to meet this standard are shamed and belittled. This shaming can be from internal or external sources. Usually the shaming starts out external and then becomes internalized over time. People become their own bullies.

The tyranny of “doing” becomes significantly increased with social media engagement. Never before have we as a species had a window into what other people are doing in their day-to-day lives. Sure, there’s been advice columns and self-help books since newspapers were invented. And we have asked parents, peers, teachers, coaches and faith leaders for advice and support when we struggled. But never before have we had the ability (and the likelihood, given algorithms) of having someone else’s “best way of doing it” pumped into our eyeballs with such constant regularity. Whether it’s advice about cleaning, or mental health, or a call to action from activists, there is a constant stream of short-form videos about what you “should” do. With the unspoken subtext that failing to do those things constitutes a failure on your part.

As one of my very smart friends said: The internet is where nuance goes to die.

This started out as a one-issue post, and it’s grown the more I thought about it. I’m going to break “doing” into four areas: trauma, activism, chores/housework, and neurodivergence. The areas overlap and interconnect, but if I don’t break it up it will be a textbook chapter in no time.

Definitions and function of the nervous system

A traumatic event is defined as an experience that overwhelms a person's ability to cope. It is possible to experience trauma and not experience a long-term traumatic response, given appropriate treatment and support. Traumatic experiences activate the sympathetic nervous system, resulting in "fight, flight, freeze or fawn" responses. Fight and flight (or flee) responses are high-energy "doing" responses, where someone can either fight off, or run from danger. Freeze and fawn reactions are low-energy responses, designed to get an organism through the danger alive and relatively unharmed. (“Relatively” being the key here, the goal is survival of the organism, not completely avoiding harm.)

The sympathetic nervous system is also often referred to as the “lizard brain”. It’s the system of responses that are responsible for helping an organism stay alive. Anything with a spine has these responses. And because they’re so old and foundational to our nervous system, they occur outside of our conscious control. The parasympathetic nervous system is the partner to the sympathetic, and is responsible for “rest and digest” in comparison to “fight, flight, freeze”.

Most people learn about fight or flight by the time they are in high school. And that’s where most people’s understanding of stress or fear responses stops. Because fight and flight are “doing” responses, they are easily observable. Freeze and fawn responses, by contrast can look like “doing nothing” or even “allowing” the dangerous or painful thing to occur. This is where the tyranny of doing really takes hold.

Social impacts

Fight or freeze almost always depends on the relative power of the person being threatened. An animal, or a person is more likely going to react to danger with fight or flight if they are reasonably confident that that response will keep them safe. Animals with bigger teeth, claws or speed tend to be the “fight or flight” type of animals. (Think predators, very large herbivores, small rodents or lizards.)  In contrast, slower, less powerful animals tend to employ freeze as a means of survival. (Think opossums or frogs playing dead, deer freezing in headlights.) The fewer natural defenses you have, the more likely you are to freeze to try to minimize harm.

Children who experience trauma are much more likely to respond with “freeze”, especially if the cause of the trauma is an adult. Children have much less power than adults, and therefore cannot independently get away from the danger. In some cases, kids are dependent on the very people causing the harm. Because trauma shapes the brain and responses long-term, people who experience trauma as children tend to freeze in response to danger even into adulthood.

Women experiencing trauma at the hands of men also tend to freeze in response to the dangerous situation. Some of this has to do with socialization of not wanting to be disruptive, but more of it has to do with the very real fear that setting a boundary or fighting back will make the situation worse. Women are often at a physical disadvantage compared to men. The less power you have relative to the danger, the more you’re doing to shut down and hope it passes with minimal negative impact. The goal is survival.

By contrast, adult men experiencing a traumatic event are more likely to respond with fight/flight because of their greater power relative to the potential assailant or event. And because men often can fight their way out, or run away from a dangerous situation, they assume that everyone else is able to do so. Back to the paradigm of white male responses being the default by which everyone else is judged. The idea of the “good victim” who fought, yelled and tried to get away being worthy of protection or being listened to vs. the victim who froze in response to danger is a perfect example of this.

The conversation I find myself having with traumatized clients over and over again is this: Having a freeze or fawn response to danger is absolutely normal. It does not mean that someone wanted the danger to happen, is ok with it, or is “allowing” it to happen. “Failure” to run away, fight back or scream for help does not mean that someone is in any way responsible for whatever harmful thing happened to them. The only person responsible for an assault is the one doing the assaulting. If you have set a verbal boundary and it is ignored, not fighting back doesn’t mean that you are in any way responsible for the harm you experienced. You do not have to do anything for your trauma to count, or for your emotions to be valid and worthy of care.

Rethinking “doing” as the only acceptable response

There is an inherent bias towards noticing an action rather than inaction. It’s hard to prove a negative. Because the “tyranny of doing” is baked in to our, culture, societal norms, and laws, there is implicit judgement of “doing nothing” in response to danger. Even when the body physically refuses to move, or the brain is so confused as to what’s going on that it can’t respond effectively. The assumption that an inability to do something is the same as an unwillingness to do something is another branch to this tree.

If we zoom out from individual conflict and look at the impact of systems, we notice that those who are most negatively impacted by systems tend to freeze or fawn in response to increased danger. Witnessing cruelty, taunting and threats from the highest forms of government has pushed many of my clients into a freeze state, while people less directly impacted are exhorting “everyone needs to do something!” Sometimes focusing on survival is the only thing someone can do, and that needs to be ok.

Next article will be talking about doing in the context of activism.

Please let me know if you would like me to write about something in particular.

Take good care of yourselves.