This is warts n’ all acceptance of all the things that make up the complexity of the ‘self’, a term we use when referring to the ‘me’ we understand ourselves to be.
We decide who we are, how our ‘selves’ are constituted, by processing and interpreting the information we glean from our environment. How do others esteem me? Do they like me?
Does my self-assessment, my own estimation of my worth, depend on the assessments of others? Or do I accept that any clanger, rejection, or failure don’t or can’t in themselves define me in a global sense i.e., my total worth or value.
If we tend to over rely on others estimation of us, we have reached a stage of ‘needing’ rather than ‘preferring’ that others view us well e.g., likeable, respected, esteemed, funny, smart.
"I need you think I’m OK for me to be OK."
A student once asked me if he was a good boy. I asked what he meant and he said I like it when people say I’m a good boy. I asked him how he knows when he is a good boy and he said when people ‘tell me I am.’ I asked him when he is most likely to be told he is a good boy and he replied, ‘when I do something good’ (what others expect me to do).
"I can’t disappoint people who expect me to be good."
He also said that when he does things that others disagree with or who may feel aggrieved about something about him, he thinks he has made them feel that way. I asked him if he thinks that other people’s feelings, like his mum’s annoyance is caused by him and he said, "yes."
"I make my mum mad!"
What has this person learned about his ‘self?’ He is learning that his worth depends on the assessment of others. He ‘is’ good or bad depending on others estimation of his worth.
According to REBT (Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy) he accepts his ‘self’ only on condition that he is esteemed well by others. His ‘good’ self exists only if others say it does!
That he has learned to believe that he ‘makes’ others sad or annoyed or angry puts him at considerable psychological risk. He has learned that he is responsible for how others feel and of course this is an irrational belief. He may become hyper vigilant around other people’s sensibilities, not wanting to cause any upset or discomfort to others because he’s responsible for how they feel!
Unconditional self-acceptance regards the self as a composite of too many qualities, characteristics, capabilities etc good and bad and so it doesn’t make sense to abstract one from the many and decide that it defines your you-ness.
‘Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You.’ Dr. Seuss
Alas we tend to do this at times but we can self-correct e.g., I am likeable even if others may think otherwise, I am not their opinion of me. So, the warts ‘n all idea means that our OK - ness remains constant even when as fallible human beings we will inevitably stuff up.
But for those young folk who believe their worth is subject to certain conditions e.g., how others rate them or how well they perform at tasks, then they will benefit from knowing how they can challenge and change the irrational ideas they may hold to be true about their ‘selves.’
So how can we help young people become the best version of their ‘selves,’ one which will serve them well?
1 Talk about thinking, feeling, and behaving, what they are, and how they are each connected to each other. E.g., if I BELIEVE I’m dumb, I FEEL sad and I WITHDRAW.
2 We can have helpful or unhelpful ideas about ourselves, others, and life in general, our beliefs.
3 We can find out what those beliefs are e.g., ‘if someone doesn’t seem to like me then I am unlikable.’
4 We can begin to change how we think about ourselves if we learn how to think about our thinking.
Some ideas to teach unconditional self-acceptance:
1 Talk about a bike and its general composition, wheels, tyres, frame, spokes etc. If a spoke on one wheel is broken, does it make sense to decide the bike is totally no good and we should get rid of it? Why or why not? One fault doesn’t make the bike (us) worthless.
2 If we aren’t too good at something, or we didn’t make the soccer team does that mean we are totally useless, that we are totally no good e.g., using the bike analogy above, one of our spokes might be a bit wobbly but the bike’s essentially OK (unless we decide otherwise).
3 Place a few dots on a sheet of paper. Look at the page what do we notice. We might focus readily on the dots. We may also notice that most of the page is clear of any dots or blemishes. When we self-down we notice only the blemishes and decide they define us (our ‘self’ page is full of dot blemishes), that we are no good. We might however look more broadly and decide that the sheet is essentially blemish less.
It isn’t an either/or proposition, we can’t be totally bad or be totally good, we are just worthwhile, unconditionally because as Albert Ellis (creator of REBT) says, ‘we exist.’
If we consider our ‘selves’ in the context of everything that constitutes our makeup, one fault or failure or blemish can’t represent the whole. In that sense we are always OK and that’s what we teach our young charges when we teach Unconditional Self-Acceptance.
PS Unconditionally accepting ourselves doesn’t mean we elect to remain stagnant and not develop and evolve, to improve ourselves. It isn’t a license to do nothing or to e.g., break the law because ultimately ‘I’m OK no matter what.’ It is a healthy attitude of acceptance of our makeup and to work hard at the things we decide we want to get better at. Get my drift?
Giulio is an ED.D. candidate at the University of South Australia. He is a student counsellor in the public school system and specialises in Rational Emotive Behaviour Education. He is also a consultant to schools in counselling-based behaviour education systems in school. He is the author of two self-published teacher/counsellor resources; People and Emotions and Have a Go Spaghettio! both endorsed by Dr. Albert Ellis, creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy. He is a member of the International Committee for The Advancement of Rational Emotive Education.