12: Reaction Formation
A third method of redirecting uncomfortable feelings toward something less threatening, reaction formation is the purposeful adoption of ideas that are diametrically apposed to what comes natural to a person.
A common example is that men who feel attracted to a person of the same sex going out of their way to act in a "manly" manner - often to disguise an unacceptable emotion he genuinely feels from others, but in some instances to disguise it even from himself.
Consider the case of Congressman Mark Foley, who chaired a committee on exploited children and vehemently denounced those who use the Internet to predate upon children, while at the same time exchanged sexually explicit messages with teenaged boys online. It is also manifest in the prohibitionist who is an alcoholic, the children of wealthy individuals who profess anti-capitalist philosophies, and the like.
Reaction formation is often misinterpreted as passive-aggressive behavior or simply hypocrisy - but in those instances an individual is merely seeking to deceive others and is well aware of doing so.
There is a distinction to be made between reaction formation and "undoing," which is a common practice among abusive parents who later spoil their children with gifts and lavish affection to "undo" the previous abuse. Undoing is a manipulation tactic that addresses behavior, not emotions or beliefs.
A particularly interesting instance of reaction formation is in the doomed romance: two people who are deeply attracted to one another deny their interest, and the signals they give indicate to the other that they have none. As a result two people who might love one another deeply appear to all concerned to detest one another.
Another interesting instance occurs when a person has a negative opinion of a group but a positive opinion of certain of its members - such as a misanthrope who is devoted to her husband or a racist who marries someone from the very group he detests. This contradicts the typical pattern of generalization, in which encounters with a few individuals, or even one, are ascribed to a group (a woman whose husband's infidelity causes her to dislike men in general)
Reaction formation is often recognizable by the melodrama of a person's ostensible protests: their dislike tends to be exaggerated, compulsive, and inflexible. Even a casual observer is aware that the degree of their hatred is irrational, and the moments in which it is expressed seem unpredictable.
Confronting a person directly about their reaction formation is not advised: they will become irritated or evasive because it causes them considerable distress. Calling attention to their irrational or inconsistent behavior threatens to cause them to confront an emotion that they are working very hard to avoid, and are quite terrified at the proposition. (EN: This is likely true of self-deception in general.)
The author mentions that Stockholm Syndrome may be related to reaction formation: a person who refuses to accept their own vulnerability changes their reaction toward their tormentors to feel empowered, as if their situation is one that they have chosen or accepted, rather than something that has been forced upon them.
He also mentions an inverse situation, the Lima Syndrome, in which abductors develop sympathy toward their hostages to repress the knowledge that what they are doing is morally unacceptable.
He pauses to mention that the captor-abductee bond, which forms in both directions, may be deeply rooted in culture: it was not uncommon in more primitive times for a man to abduct his bride, and to form a genuine attachment to one another in that situation. (EN: The basis of a honeymoon is, in fact, an abduction of a bride for a period of time necessary to form an emotional bond.)