There Is no Such Thing as "Normal!"

"OK, that's just not normal!"

It's something we say a lot-- typically in jest-- but what does it really mean? And how does the way we-- and society-- use the term "normal" affect our lives? 

It sounds simple enough, but there's a lot more to this than meets the eye.

I'm Not Normal!

On a personal level, I have lived somewhat under the spectre of being "not normal" for most of my life. 

To many people, I was "not normal" because I was unusually tall as a child and teenager, and even today I have grown up to be 6'4"+ (194cm) tall.

But that's just the visual. I was also gauged as "not normal" because I started 1st grade late, and then skipped 2nd grade and went straight to 3rd grade, all within 9 months. I was "not normal" because I preferred expressing myself in writing, rather than by talking.

There are a bajilion reasons why people have considered me "not normal" since I left home, and during the 35-odd years I have lived as an adult. 

My point here isn't to parade around my "non-normalcy" but to point out how pretty much all of us have probably been labeled "not normal" or a "freak" at one time or another... and, on some level, it makes us feel "other than."

But this is not an article about me...

Messing With Our Minds: The Stigmatization and Pathologization of Non-Normalcy

Being normal-- or not-- was never a big deal for me. 

However I am growing increasingly concerned about some of the underlying trends in society, many of them revolving around the tendency to "pathologize" anything that falls outside some predefined set of standards referred to as "the norm."

In the medical and mental health fields, there have been lots and lots of changes in the course of the past 50 years. Some have definitely improved our quality of life, but there are many that have been of very dubious merit... especially in the mental health field.

Not only are we seeing a proliferation of "syndromes" and "conditions," but people are being urged to "seek treatment" so they can become part of "normal" life again.

Think about the ads you've seen on TV or in magazines... You know the kind: 

"Have you asked your doctor about new Flatulinex? You may be suffering from Unscheduled Gaseous Anal  Emissions, but we can help! Always ask your doctor before using prescription medicines-- side effects may include uncontrollable twitching, heavy breathing, vomiting, loss of brain cells, anal seepage and death." And yadda yadda...

(Yes, I just made that up...)

I'm sorry... it's called farting... humans have been doing it for millennia. And it's normal. But now we're suddenly being told it's a syndrome. And that we're no longer normal, and we no longer fit in.

But now it has become a condition.

Exactly WHO Gets to Decide what Normal Is, Anyway?

I've spent some 35 years as an (informal) student of psychology and the human condition... one of my particular interests has been the psychology of Jungian archetypes and the nature of personality differences.

I once found myself in a group discussion about personalities, and someone made the fairly inevitable comment that I (as an introvert) was being "too quiet."

This led to an interesting debate about the deeper nature of "too quiet" for WHAT and for WHOM, with the extended consideration of who exactly get to decide what any particular human attribute should be... and what metric is being used to establish the norm.

As we drilled deeper into the topic, my extraverted friends came to realize that their comments about introverts being "too quiet" were essentially rooted in fairly arbitrarily derived feelings of discomfort over encountering perceptions and conduct materially different from what felt natural to them.

Like many arguments, the root of the issue was not over anyone being "wrong," just about someone being "different."

Normalcy: Inclusionary AND Exclusionary

Whether we like it or not, we humans tend to be fairly social and tribal in our orientation. Even if we purport to be "loners," we still tend to think of ourselves as belonging to the "tribe of loners."

What's interesting about the whole idea of "normal" is that it is often used as a tool to both INclude and EXclude people from certain groups. 

When we go back and look at pathologization issue, one has to wonder how often there's a real issue to be addressed, and how often a set of standards are created purely in order to make people feel excluded... so that they feel compelled to reach out for a set of "solutions" (real or imaginary) that will make them feel INcluded again. 

Something to think about, next time you feel inclined to reach for the Xanax just because you're feeling a little anxious... who convinced you "anxious" is a wrong feeling?

Narrowing the Goalposts on the Spectrum of Normal Human Experiences

What specifically seems to be happening is that various "states of being" that were not given a second thought 50 years ago are now labeled as "syndromes" and "conditions" in need of treatment. Things once considered part of the Normal Spectrum of Human Emotions are now "illnesses."

30 years ago, I was a pretty healthy, balanced and "normal" human being. Today, I could easily be "diagnosed" with Sensory-Integration Disorder, Adult ADHD (Inattentive), Creative Compulsive Disorder, Dysthymia and a few other things. 

The point here is that the goalposts have been moved... and from two different angles. Not only is the framework for what makes a person "normal" much narrower than it used to be; but the stigma attached to non-normalcy has been ramped up to where people compulsively seek treatment for things they don't need any treatment for.

A Few Words for the Apologists

Of course, there are those who would strongly argue that we are "better off" as a result of these trends. 

Which brings the entire discussion around in a full circle, with the question "Yeah, but WHO decides?" And "What's the objective?"

I remember an article by conservative commentator George Will in the Washington Post some years back, in which he postulated that if Mozart had been a young man in today's world, he would have been diagnosed with ADHD and medicated into oblivion. 

Meanwhile, things like "too much intense creativity" and "questioning authority" (aka "thinking for yourself") are now treated as potential "mental illnesses."

As I have said previously, I am NOT a "conspiracy theorist," however I am old enough to remember a part of history during which people in the former USSR who questioned the "genius" of Communism would be diagnosed with a "mental illness" (a variation of schizophrenia, as I recall) and reconditioned till they saw the error of their ways.

Conform or perish.

Our memories are remarkably short...

Just be YOURSELF (Besides, Everyone else is Already Taken!)...

Ultimately, our real challenge here on Planet Earth is to learn to feel comfortable in our own skins, simply being fiercely and authentically ourselves.

And that is often a lot easier to do if we can just learn to embrace that it is perfectly normal to be "not normal!" Because-- with all the infinite variations in humans-- there is no such thing as NORMAL!

Last but not least, I'd like to give a quick shoutout to Hive account@reddust, whose article "What Is A Visual Intellectual?" largely inspired these words.

What do YOU think? Are you "normal?" Do you think "normal" even exists? Ever wonder who exactly creates the rules for what makes someone normal? Does it feel like more and more of our everyday emotions and experiences are being re-labeled as illnesses? Do you get the sense that "someone" (society? politicians?) are trying to quietly turn us all into "average" automatons? Leave a comment-- share your experiences-- start the conversation!

(As usual, all text and images by the author, unless otherwise credited. This is original content, created expressly for Steemit)