Is Comfort Zone a Place or an Emotion?

We are often encouraged to venture out of our comfort zones, push our boundaries and limits, and embrace the unknown. People say that’s where the real growth happens. I concur. Subjecting ourselves to new experiences is a sure-shot way to fuel personal development. Having a routine in place may or may not be detrimental, depending on the kind of person you are. Some people crave a time-tabled life, whereas others need a change every minute of the day.

We often try to stretch our comfort zones by altering our lives, such as starting a new job, relocating, trying novel exercises, or exploring new locations. These are primarily physical adjustments — you cajole your body into taking up these unaccustomed, exciting external goals to nourish your soul. But what about internal comfort zones? Are we open-minded enough to set aside the prejudices we have collected subconsciously over the years?

Mental transformation is unarguably more challenging than physical. Any change starts with the mind, even the physical. Encouraging yourself to expand your corporeal boundaries is often more fruitful than attempting to alter your thought process. It takes determination to discard years of conditioning, escape the chains of our preconceived notions, and declare, “Okay, I see and acknowledge this new way of living, even if it’s unfamiliar territory.” Personally, I find such people incredibly attractive. Their willingness to listen is commendable and praise-worthy. Yet, we don’t see it happen much.

Why are some people more flexible than others when it comes to accepting new ideas and ways of life, welcoming them wholeheartedly as if they were privy to this knowledge all along?

I would like to highlight one sector in particular to make my point: the Hindi movie industry. It is intriguing to observe how professionals evolve to keep up with the changing times. In the Indian series Gulmohar, an effervescent Sharmila Tagore, a senior citizen, plays a character that most in her cohort would have found blasphemous. Similarly, the iconic Madhuri Dixit portrays a determined mother in Maja Ma, traditional in some facets yet unconventional in others. A role many of her peers would have been unwilling to take on. Among the male actors, we have the young multifaceted Ayushmann Khurrana, renowned for taking up any daring character that comes his way. We have actors and actresses across age groups willing to change with the times. But these are just the minority. Most are reluctant to play characters who belong to the LGBTQIA+ community. Ranbir Kapoor, who’s within my age demographic, admitted in an interview a while back, during Shamshera‘s promotions, that he’s not brave enough to take up such roles.

Moving out of our emotional comfort zones is not age-dependent, as you can see. It requires a willingness to listen, understand, and acknowledge.

It is common to find friends and relatives who struggle to accept new ways of the world with its pressing issues simply because they find them unrelatable. They deny support despite knowing our backing may prove meaningful or pertinent to the intended group.

The most humane thing one can do is listen to the experiences and feelings of others and try to see things from their perspective without being judgmental. To sit with others’ thoughts for a while takes courage.

Sexuality is only one example. This rigidity in perceptions can be observed in a variety of scenarios. Conservatives look down upon women who wear clothes they consider vulgar. Feminists are thrashed because they are non-conformists. Men who display their emotions openly are often criticized by their peers and seen as inadequate to cope with daily tasks. Husbands who love PDA are called “hen-pecked.” We just have to take a look around to see the plethora of preconceived notions everyone, including you and I, are harboring.

The morality or behavioral police who preach righteousness are often people who have achieved much professional success in their respective fields by taking risks and boldly venturing beyond the boundaries of their concisely defined comfort zones. However, many refuse to embrace new lifestyles or cultural norms that challenge their convictions and emotional comfort. It is ironic to see them share inspirational videos about exceeding boundaries on social media when they themselves are not entirely free from the clutches of their comfort zones.

Sometimes it’s difficult to move away from what we have accepted so far as it’s an emotional state that we don’t want to let go of. Humans love their comfort zones — whether they be emotional or physical. An object at rest wants to continue being at rest. This theory is not just applicable physically but mentally as well. The discomfort of new fights, marches, debates, terminologies, laws, thoughts, and social media agitations build up our rage and make us criticize how the world is over-sensitive nowadays. Things are changing way too fast, and we can’t seem to keep up. It is overwhelmingly complex, and understandably so.

But whoever said we should accept the new all at once? Take it one at a time. Baby steps. Sit with the new, try to detach from the old, get acquainted with unfamiliar thoughts, ask questions (but kindly), and ruminate for a while. Give yourself time, as you deserve kindness too, to slowly break away from things you have treated as “home” until now.

But accept we should, if not immediately, maybe sometime in the future. To be a kinder person, less judgmental, and empathetic — traits that highlight growth as well. Acknowledging that change is a constant part of life and adapting to new ideas, beliefs, and perspectives is essential to becoming a well-rounded individual.

Shouldn’t we make a concerted effort to step outside our familiar settings, both in terms of our mindset and physical actions? Something to ponder as we continue to navigate the ever-changing world around us.

An Ode to the Witches of Yore

I stumbled upon this cartoon by Tim Hamilton recently. It was an eye-opener of sorts.

Society has habitually portrayed witches as these socially ostracized, spooky characters who are out to do no good. You are expected to eye witches suspiciously and doubt their every motive and move. In the past, women who were declared witches were tortured, shunned, or killed. It still occurs in remote areas. This is in contrast to the new-age magic practitioners, who are vocal about their practice and comparatively more accepted.

Makes you think – what if the term “witch” was originally coined to insult powerful, independent women? Those women who knew how to fly on their own, did not need others, and had an irresistible charm that was hard to ignore but perceived as “evil” by the orthodox out of spite or jealousy. Society is scared of her because she is not following tradition; she has to deal with leery eyes and face many a taunting word.

Sometimes, witches are portrayed as someone with deformed feet, probably a reference to the fact that these women were adept at walking a path opposite the norm. In the modern era, if a witch were to roam around in the same manner, exerting her freedom and rights, she would be called a feminist in a disdainful tone by misogynists. Feminists are often mocked, their ideologies questioned, their intentions slammed, and considered problematic if they decide to take the road less travelled. Maybe witches were the first feminists the world has ever seen; maybe they were the first set of women the world couldn’t control.

The cartoon raises the question: was the conventional image of a witch as a frightening female figure riding a broomstick used as a metaphor for female independence in the past? It might be why to be called a “witch” is considered derogatory, but not a “wizard.” Was this someone’s attempt to chain and deface an autonomous, free, self-governing woman?

How many powerful characters have been disparaged and labeled in the past solely due to their failure to adhere to societal norms? We might never know.

An Ode to Introversion and Quietude

In a world where extroverts are admired and introverts are judged, a book like Quiet by Susan Cain can prove transformative. It might be because Susan Cain herself is an introvert. No one can truly understand an introvert better than another introvert. Extroverts who have taken the time to introspect and reflect on an introverted loved one’s personality trait might also understand and respect introversion. However, they are few and far between.

For most of my life, I was told to talk more, be more extroverted, or “smart”. My introversion was considered a defect, more like a disease I needed to be cured of. I believed it to be true as no one told me otherwise. It wasn’t until I discovered the internet that I realized there are others like me. I was relieved to find people who shared the characteristics that I thought were unique to me. It provided much-needed validation. I started understanding introversion. I started understanding myself from the lens of a new unacknowledged world.

Introverted kids often feel like a misfit because of the constant judgment. Is it any surprise that they often grow up to become shy and underconfident? Nothing undermines someone’s self-confidence more than being repeatedly told they are not okay the way they are.

People find it hard to accept that I’m an introvert now that I’m an adult. I play my part well. Or rather, I have trained myself to play the extroverted part well. I have learned over the years to create this impressionable extroverted façade to gain acceptance into this world of Extrovert Ideals, all for the sake of attaining “normality”. However, I can keep up the act only for a few hours before I feel this mad urge to rush back home to re-energize – in short, to slip into my pajamas and dive into the comfort of books.

Susan Cain covers this façade (of extroversion) and more in her book. The case studies covering different aspects of introversion are a revelation. In the real world, extroversion still gets the upper hand at school, work, and every phase of life. Your competency is determined based on how extroverted you are. The book explores why a teacher, parent, or employer needs to understand the quantifiable benefits introversion brings to the table. The author explains how to reach out to the hidden treasures buried among the buzz and commotion. The solution is pretty simple: the world only needs to stop talking for a little while, introspect a bit, and try listening instead.

To Speak or Not To Speak? The Unexpected Side Effects of Speaking Out Online

It doesn’t seem that long ago when I used to be uncontrollably reactive. Being a hyper-sensitive soul, I would blurt out the moment I came across a social issue. I would write long posts on social media justifying why I felt the way I did. This behavior went on until realization hit – maybe, I was not helping by speaking out.

Maybe – worse – I was unintentionally fuelling hate.

Historically, a person speaking out against injustice with complete bravado has led to inspirational revolutions. The past is a witness to bold and courageous people who had kickstarted life-changing campaigns by speaking out (à la Rosa Parks). But I am beginning to think that similar changes emanating from collective online hysteria might be an exception in the modern era and not the norm.

What am I on about? The whole point of speaking out is to bring awareness and extend our support. But the reality is that we end up attracting only those who already feel the way we do. It is akin to having yes-men around you. The people I should have influenced with my pitch retorted defensively instead of listening, much to my dismay. Real change only happens when people are open to change – when they are willing to listen, acknowledge, and evolve. Real change is when a person with a different ideology finally understands the seriousness of the issue – when a bulb goes off in their head, and they tell you, “Now I get it. I am sorry for thinking otherwise.“

But how often do we hear that?

Instead, most refuse to listen. We talk again to explain further, and they get angrier, resulting in a never-ending cycle.

Bringing my personal experience into the picture, I will list down 3 sensitive topics I had often ranted about on social media and the outcome of each.

Spoiler Alert & Disclaimer: No one changed their viewpoint because of me. No one became any better because of my posts. I have only my personal experience to narrate. Your experience might be much better.

Topic #1 – Politics

I have strong political views. When my country is bleeding, I take it to heart. My loyalty lies with my nation and not any political party. I might prefer some over the others, maybe because they believe in some of the things that I deem important. But I have not pledged blind love to them – I can be rational and put them accountable if they fail.

Since I am not biased toward any political party, I tend to point out the pros and cons of each. Mostly, I like sharing the pros because India gets its fair share of negative publicity.

Here’s where it gets interesting.

Let’s assume there are two political parties – Political Party A (PPA) and Political Party B (PPB). The moment I laud PPA for implementing something noteworthy, the supporters of PPB get agitated. “But what about this other thing the PPA did? ” they ask me. When I applaud PPB, the supporters of PPA express their agitation. Of course, the opposite happens when I point out any cons of the party they support. No one wants to hear debauched stories about the political party they support either. There is no win-win situation here. This bias does not change even when you are armed with data and facts.

Did anyone change their political views because of me? Absolutely not.

Are they still blindly supporting the political party they love? Yes.

Did my energy get wasted in the process? A big YES.

Topic #2 – Women Empowerment

The #MeToo movement was a gamechanger for women across the world. It gave them the courage to speak out. But was it successful in powerfully conveying the message to the opposite sex that sexual molestation or abuse will not be tolerated? Not on the scale we wanted to.

Instead of supporting sexual abuse survivors, I have witnessed men (offline and online) explain haphazardly that women too can be abusive liars. Of course, without a doubt, women can be all of that. But when a man gets into a fight-or-flight mode citing #NotAllMen whenever you start talking about women’s issues, you know something has gone awry. When people are more invested in the #NotAllMen issue than the primary #MeToo issue, it means the whole purpose of the movement has been defeated.

Here too, we fell short of making a real change.

Topic #3 – Religion

Religion is a super-sensitive topic that should be handled with extreme caution. The “me” and “mine” mentality takes precedence over the collective well-being of a country when religion comes into the scene. Each one thinks other religions are inferior compared to theirs. Each one thinks their compatriots can never be wrong.

The more someone stresses the hate their religion gets, the more it seems to make the other communities angry. The responses become similar to what I had penned concerning women empowerment – the whataboutery starts.

When the minority communities talk about the harassment they face in the country, the religious majority gets offended, and vice versa. Religion is the trickiest of all the sensitive topics because it hits people right where it hurts the most. Each one thinks their religion is in danger. One community thinks, “What if our religion becomes a minority?” In contrast, the other one thinks, “What if they demolish our religion?” The main culprit is fear. The more we talk about our religion-based fears, the more it seems to be escalating the fear of our own and others.

Since there are more religious people than atheists globally, politicians worldwide undoubtedly know that the way to any country’s heart is through religion. And they take this to good advantage. Stories are planted, fake data is presented, and all types of hara-kiri happen, especially in corrupted nations. We fall for such antics. They string us around like puppets, and we dance to their tunes blissfully unaware.

The most sensible thing one can do is not give undue attention to toxic, hate-mongering politics. The more attention we give it, the bigger the hate-spitting snake seems to get. When attention wanes, the snake shrivels and dies. It does not know where to go, this attention-seeking monster.

In practicality, restraining oneself from polarizing topics is not easy. It definitely wasn’t for me.

Why is this happening?

I subconsciously knew that speaking out wasn’t panning out as intended. People seem to be getting more polarized. It was only after I read an article by Amit Verma that the truth stared right back at me. I am quoting the results from the 2005 Sunstein experiment from his page. It holds the answers for all this ruckus.

In almost every group, members ended up holding more extreme positions after they spoke with one another. […] Aside from increasing extremism, the experiment had an independent effect: it made both liberal and conservative groups significantly more homogeneous—and thus squelched diversity. […] Moreover, the rift between liberals and conservatives widened as a result of discussing.
Sunstein called this effect ‘Group Polarisation.’ Sunstein defined it thus: “When like-minded people deliberate, they typically end up adopting a more extreme position in line with their pre-deliberation inclinations.”

In other words, the more we discuss something, the more polarized we become. If we look around us and observe what’s happening from a distance, we might realize the truth of it all. With the advent of the internet, it has become easy to discuss things and become more polarized.

I have found that I, too, get agitated after discussing a sensitive topic. My rants do not make anyone better, nor do they enlighten anyone. The only adverse effect is on me – I feel agitated and unhappy. And wait for it – more polarized. I get angry when people with a different thought process don’t get what I’m saying. I get angry when people are quiet and not saying the right things. Of course, being right is subjective. My right might not be the next person’s right – this awareness can help calm our emotions in those moments of despair.

Hypothetically speaking, if someone were to question my long-held beliefs constantly, it would be okay the first few times, but how long would I be okay? Everyone, unfortunately, has a listening threshold. It might explain why men get fed up with constant women empowerment and feminism stories, why religious people find it hard to constantly hear someone criticizing their religion, and why politically-inclined people find it hard to disown someone they blindly love. Beliefs and habits are difficult to break. You can lead a horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. You can lead a person to facts, but you cannot force them to think.

As an experiment, I decided to stop myself from sharing or discussing polarizing topics online. It has been a few months (I’ve stopped counting). I do express my discontent occasionally when someone is not being empathic, but only offline, in a more closed and restricted environment, not subject to foreign voices.

The outcome of this was that I immediately started feeling less agitated and secure. I stopped feeling angry over the slightest things. In short, I felt less polarized and more open to contrarian views. When the interaction is face-to-face, you get to express things more gracefully and compassionately – the things we often miss out on when we tweet or post on social media.