When “This Is Mine” Meets Disgust: The Psychology of Possession and Revulsion
We’ve all experienced that visceral moment—the split second when pride of ownership collides with the shock of disgust. Imagine this: You’re cleaning out an old storage unit and stumble upon a box labeled “Memories.” Inside, beneath faded photographs and childhood artwork, your fingers brush against something slimy. As you pull out a decaying sandwich from 2008, a crumpled note falls out reading, “This is MINE – DO NOT TOUCH!” Suddenly, you’re caught between laughter, horror, and genuine confusion. How could someone fiercely claim something so repulsive? This bizarre intersection of ownership and disgust reveals surprising truths about human behavior.
The Curious Case of Sentimental Rot
Objects become extensions of our identity, which explains why people cling to possessions long after their practical—or hygienic—expiration date. Take the infamous “Refrigerator Museum” phenomenon documented in a 2019 University of Chicago study. Researchers found 63% of participants kept moldy leftovers simply because they “bought it with their own money” or “planned to eat it eventually.” One subject defended a petri dish-worthy yogurt cup for 14 months, insisting, “It’s still technically edible if I scrape off the top layer.”
This behavior escalates in shared spaces. A New York City roommate survey revealed 41% of respondents discovered biohazard-level items (rotten fruit collections, petrified pizza slices) accompanied by territorial notes. Psychologists call this “possessive doubling”—the unconscious urge to defend objects because they’ve become disgusting. The more something repels others, the more it subconsciously feels like “proof” of personal boundaries.
From Gut Reaction to Tribal Instinct
Our disgust response evolved as a biological protector against disease, but modern humans have weaponized it socially. Anthropologist Dr. Elena Torres notes, “Claiming ownership of something revolting functions like an animal marking territory with scent. It’s a primal way to say, ‘This space/item/experiment in fungal growth is unquestionably mine.’”
This explains viral internet trends like “My Roommate’s Science Project” videos, where creators showcase moldy coffee mugs or fossilized bath towels with mock pride. The disgust factor generates engagement precisely because it taps into our ancient tribal wiring—viewers simultaneously recoil and bond over shared horror. As one Reddit user commented on a post featuring a sentient-looking lasagna container: “I’d rather lick a subway pole than touch that…but I kinda respect the commitment.”
The Ownership Paradox: When Attachment Defies Logic
Neuroscience reveals why rationality evaporates in these situations. MRI scans show that defending possessions—even gross ones—activates the same brain regions as physical self-defense. A 2022 Stanford experiment had participants argue ownership of increasingly vile items (used dental floss, expired raw chicken). Despite visible disgust reactions, 78% fought harder to keep items they’d “adopted,” with one subject tearfully declaring, “I’ve grown attached to this rotting pumpkin!”
This paradox stems from what behavioral economists call the “IKEA Effect of Disgust.” Just as building furniture increases perceived value, the effort invested in storing/defending gross items (remembering their existence, hiding them from others) mistakenly inflates their importance. The item becomes a perverse trophy representing personal history or resilience. As one interviewee told Vice Magazine: “That jar of toenail clippings? It’s a time capsule of my first apartment. Gross? Sure. But it’s my gross.”
Breaking the Cycle: Practical Solutions
So how do we reconcile healthy ownership instincts with basic hygiene? Experts suggest:
1. The “Three Senses Test”: If an item fails sight, smell, and touch inspections, photograph it for memory’s sake before disposal. One reformed hoarder shared: “Keeping pictures of my infamous banana peel collage satisfied my nostalgia without the fruit flies.”
2. Shared Space Compromises: Implement “bio-boundaries” using airtight containers for questionable items. A Los Angeles co-living community reduced conflicts by 60% using labeled “Personal Science Experiment” boxes (with monthly clean-out reminders).
3. The 24-Hour Defense Rule: If defending an item causes social friction, wait a day. University of Toronto research shows 90% of “disgust ownership” convictions weaken after 24 hours of reflection. As one participant noted: “Turns out I didn’t need to die on the Hill of That Suspicious Tupperware.”
Ultimately, the dance between “mine” and “disgusting” reflects our complex relationship with control and identity. Whether it’s a teenager guarding a petrified juice box or a CEO secretly hoarding decade-old conference sandwiches, these moments remind us that ownership isn’t always rational—but it’s undeniably human. By understanding the psychology behind our gross little treasures, we can curate spaces that honor sentiment without becoming biohazard zones. After all, as the saying goes: One person’s trash is another person’s…well, let’s just say “treasure” might be stretching it.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » When “This Is Mine” Meets Disgust: The Psychology of Possession and Revulsion