970x125
It seems that the saying “two truths can exist at the same time” is gaining traction in our social conversation. This is an entry point into both how I understand and am reframing ambivalence, a word which is mostly misunderstood, maligned, and sidelined, while ironically being a central and powerful part of our everyday experience.
Ambivalence means:
1: simultaneous and contradictory attitudes or feelings (such as attraction and repulsion) toward an object, person, or action
2a: continual fluctuation (as between one thing and its opposite)
b: uncertainty as to which approach to follow
—Merriam-Webster Dictionary
the fact of having or showing both positive and negative feelings about somebody/something
—Oxford English Dictionary
But what happens with these conflicting feelings, the likely tensions between them, and the idea of uncertainty? Are contradictory attitudes and feelings integrated, or do they exist separately? What do positive and negative feelings about somebody or something really mean? Isn’t it hard to meld them? Isn’t conflict usually avoided?
This is what I have learnt about ambivalence:
Ambivalence calls for us to somehow reconcile that we can experience and feel oppositional emotions and truths at the same time, such as fear and calm, bitterness and sweetness, anger and delight, sadness and happiness. It takes courage and effort to admit to our inner contradictions, those that color our everyday feelings, interactions, and relationships, and which are so often socially and personally unacceptable. We need to flow with this challenging and often counterintuitive state of mind.
To avoid personal discomfort when we are confronted with ambivalence, we often default to the binary, limiting our feelings and interactions to or, neglecting the possibility of and. We may see ourselves, for example, as joyous or deflated, lonely or connected, despairing or composed, resentful or compassionate. Rather than movement and fluidity, this position is dominated by rigidity and a firm adherence to holding only one belief at a time. This widens to a version of living which disregards the value of the other, as the expression goes, “it’s my way or the highway,” with tunnel vision linked with a closed mind and mired in judgment and expectation.
This splitting is completely at odds with the experience of ambivalence, which is rooted in curiosity and flow, self-questioning, and being open to change.
Ambivalence is a misunderstood notion
Misunderstanding and vagueness surround the term ambivalence. When I was researching maternal ambivalence, I realized that most people didn’t understand what the word ambivalence means; there is confusion. When I asked about its meaning, the most common responses included “doesn’t it mean mixed feelings?” “It’s when you aren’t sure. “It means ambiguous.” These descriptions are vague and imprecise and don’t give power to these contradictory feelings, and they are used when the original words, the “mixed feelings”, “not being sure,” and “ambiguous,” would work better.
Another common response is “Isn’t ambivalence the same as indifference?” I explain that these notions are polar opposites. Whereas indifference is a splitting off, a not caring, ambivalence functions on the flow of feelings, connection, and concern, and the reality that inner conflict fuels our interactions and feelings.
This is the essence of ambivalence. The reality that life is rife with inner contradictions, conflicts and tension, pushes and pulls, and that these are transformative. Ambivalence calls for an active participation with these multiple dynamics, and it doesn’t tolerate neglecting the difficult and disturbing feelings.
I disrupt the current narrative by reworking ambivalence
- I encourage a comfort with discomfort. Most of us try to avoid inner and outer conflict, but there is no growth without discomfort, unsettling feelings, and disagreement.
- The notion of flow, the and, encourages us to make space for all our feelings. None are taboo, all feelings are legitimate, and they need space.
- Experiencing a feeling does not mean acting on it; it means making a space to think about it
- We need to surrender to and lean into our uncomfortable and conflicting emotions. These are honest, valuable, and are there for a reason. They give us the opportunity to reflect on and to understand ourselves. We lose a whole segment of our experience when we neglect these troubling feelings, and there is something constructive and optimistic in pushing through the tension that exists between conflicting feelings.
- We must beware of rigidity, which blocks free exchange, is brittle and judgmental, and invites taboo and secrecy. By refiguring contradiction and conflict as essential to our inner and outer discourse, we can lift secrecy and explore difficult topics, which is a catalyst for transformation and self-awareness.
My task is to lift the suspicion that is connected with the word ambivalence, shed its link with negativity, give it a makeover to ensure that its precise meaning is understood, to ensure that it takes its rightful place as a transformative, substantive, and indispensable part of our language.
