My post from earlier:

Good Saturday Morning, Nea:

I want to start by appreciating the clarity, maturity, and emotional insight you bring into these conversations. You think deeply, you integrate new ideas thoughtfully, and you’re able to look at painful dynamics with honesty rather than defensiveness. That level of reflection is rare, and I value it.

“I’ve seen him put so much energy into friendships. Many of those friendships eventually end after some conflict or behaviour, and then new ones take their place… I even saw something similar with my husband. Their relationship felt very different in the earlier years, but the dynamic changed significantly over time, especially once work became involved… they once had a genuinely close relationship”-

My understanding: his relationships can last only as long as the other person continues to reinforce or mirror his preferred identity: central, respected, admired and unchallenged. This is why early friendships feel warm and invested, and why his early relationship with your husband felt close.

He feels warm emotion, but it comes from ego gratification. It is warmth rooted in how he feels about himself, not in how he feels about the other person.

His internal sense of self is very fragile, a low tolerance for shame, or for being wrong. He cannot tolerate equality, disagreement, accountability, or emotional complexity.

The moment a relationship requires genuine empathy, shared responsibility, or the ability to repair conflict, his emotional structure collapses. He becomes defensive, volatile, violent, or blaming, and the relationship deteriorates or ends.

When the other person stops admiring him, disagrees with him, or no longer serves his image, the relationship deteriorates and is replaced with a new one.

The same dynamic explains the shift with your husband: the early closeness felt real to your husband, but for your father it was conditional— based on admiration, harmony, and being seen as central or respected. Once work entered the picture, introducing hierarchy, responsibility, and the possibility of criticism, your father’s strategic restraint collapsed, and he reacted the ways he did.

His affection depends on the other person mirroring him, not challenging him, admiring him, keeping him comfortable, and reinforcing his preferred identity. Once any of these conditions change, the affection collapses.

Anita

Hey Dear Confused:

“But what type of thing could have happened to her in the past and got triggered?… I don’t remember her ever telling me that someone lied to her in the past”-

Copilot: “A big reaction to a small lie often comes from old childhood wounds, even if she never told Confused about a specific betrayal. For example, she may have grown up with a parent who said one thing and did another…

“A child depends on a parent to make the world predictable. If the parent says, ‘I’ll be there,’ but doesn’t show up… or promises, ‘I won’t get angry,’ but then explodes… the child’s nervous system learns that words can’t be relied on. Even small mismatches — a tiny lie, a changed story, a detail that doesn’t line up — start to feel like the beginning of something unsafe.

“The child doesn’t learn this intellectually; the body learns it. So, in adulthood, when someone she cares about says something that doesn’t match their behavior, even in a small way, her nervous system reacts as if she’s back in that childhood moment of being blindsided. That’s why a tiny inconsistency now can trigger a huge emotional response: it’s not about the present lie; it’s about the old pattern her body remembers.”

The above is only an example of a possibility in general terms, Is it a possibility in her case?

🤔 Anita

Hi Nea:

I’m looking forward to replying further this evening, but for now, I want to say that you’re dealing with a lot, emotionally, while heavily pregnant, and your physi al and mental health are most important.

wish you could take a few days away from your father’s house, or somehow take a break while still living there. Maybe make a few rules for yourself to follow, like no longer talking about your father with your husband, and exactly how you behave around your father.

Also, the serenity prayer comes to mind; God, grant me the serenity to accept the things zi cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.

Anita

Good almost- noon time, Nea:

I was in an hours-long process of answering your last 2 posts when I had to get off the computer, and here I am on the phone.

I’ll complete that post when I’m back to the computer, but for now, summarizing what I wrote there in the simplest language:

Your father and my mother are struggling people, so fragile inside that they can’t endure any amount of criticism, challenge or shame.

The feeling of shame is uncomfortable for everyone, but for them- any bit of it is intolerable.

So, I understand the inner working and empathize with them. At the same time, the impact of their behavior is very harmful for those who care about them.

So, by intent, they’re only protecting themselves (from intolerable feelings of shame), but by impact, they’re harmful and abusive.

If I was you, Nea, I would never leave my daughter with him without being there to supervise. Otherwise, she’ll be his next victim- again, not by intent- but by impact.

How to co-exist with him?

No amount of submission will do, no amount of accommodation will do.

And no way of helping him or changing him.

You just have to.. well, to not live with him, and then limit visits in time and place, so that you can leave whenever the time is right, and.. I suppose, pray for him, because practically, there’s nothing you can do for him.

More when I’m back to the computer.

Anita

Hi Nea:

* I’m adding this after completing this message: this may be too much. Please feel free to not read or stop reading at any time. No need to respond if this is too much *

I am back at the computer and can look things up:

Strategic Empathy means he can perform empathy when it benefits him, using ’empathy‑like’ behavior to manage his image, and showing restraint only in relationships where consequences exist.

Instrumental Empathy means empathy used as a tool to achieve a goal: to gain approval, avoid conflict, maintain reputation, and control how others see him.

Another term you might feel useful is Selective Restraint. This describes how he controls himself only when he fears consequences, wants to maintain a certain image, avoid looking bad, or appear reasonable.

Real empathy includes * Curiosity — you want to understand another person’s inner world, * Responsiveness — you adjust your behavior to reduce harm, * Consistency, * Accountability — you care enough to change harmful patterns, and * Non‑performance — it’s not about image, approval, or control.

Real empathy is felt, not calculated; it leads to change, while strategic empathy leads to performance. Real empathy shows up in private, while strategic empathy shows up in public.

Nea, about the words he used against you and your husband, phrases like: “bitch”, “shut the fuck up”, “get the fuck out of my house”, “you don’t fucking know anything”, “fucking piece of shit”, “I’ll show you”, and “asshole”- That’s dominance language.

These words mean: ‘I am above you.’, ‘You have no right to speak.’, ‘Your feelings don’t matter.’

‘I control this space.’, ‘I decide who is allowed to exist here.’

‘I will crush you if you challenge me.’, ‘I will escalate if you don’t submit.’

He uses these specific words because they degrade, humiliate, silence, intimidate, and trigger fear and compliance.

His phrase “I’ll show you” is especially important. It means: ‘I will escalate.’, ‘I will overpower you.’, ‘I will punish you for not submitting.’, and ‘I will demonstrate my dominance.’

His “get the fuck out of my house” means: ‘You exist here only by my permission.’, ‘I can expel you at any moment.’, ‘Your presence is conditional on obedience.’

His “you don’t fucking know anything” means ‘Your perspective is invalid.’, ‘Your voice has no weight.’, ‘You are beneath me.’

His words are weapons designed to silence, dominate, intimidate, humiliate, and maintain control.

This is not a ‘difficult parent.’ This is an abusive one.

And his financial generosity is part of the control structure, not evidence of goodness. Many abusive or domineering parents are financially generous because it maintains loyalty, dependence, image, and power.

Children of abusive parents often say: ‘He (or she) can be generous.’, ‘He can be charming.’ etc. This creates confusion because generosity feels like ‘proof’ of goodness. But his financial generosity does not cancel out the name‑calling, the intimidation, the humiliation, the threats, the emotional volatility, the dominance language, the lack of accountability, and the absence of genuine empathy.

It is entirely possible — and very common — for someone to be financially generous, socially charming, publicly restrained, and still be emotionally abusive, domineering, unsafe in private, and harmful to their family.

As I’ve been typing this message, Nea, I’ve been feeling this heat in my face, anger, as in: ‘How Dare He?’

Your father and my mother have a lot in common. Although they’re not the same.

I have images of my mother, memories of her face- kind, loving, warm. Big brown eyes. I have memories of the hurt on her face and in her voice, and me swearing I will do ANYTHING and EVERYTHING to fix her hurt, to make her feel better.

I remember her in private, thoroughly shaming and humiliating me any way she could until she was exhausted and yet in public: charming, pleasing, ‘good’

In cartoons the bad character is 100%, unequivocally bad. In real life, the bad parent is (simplified) a former innocent, hurt child.. and you can see remnants of that innocence and hurt in the abusive adult they turned out to be.

Anita

Hey Dudu Confused 🙂

“It’s hard to believe how bad she took it..”- that’s what happens when an old injury gets trigerred and bleeds into the present.

Somebody lied to her real bad, and your tiny, panic-driving lie opened that wound.

The now paused (at the least) relationship doesn’t look promising to me because (1) the distance, (2) the first troubled irl visit, (3) the second that didn’t materialize.

I’m afraid that if the 2 of U got back together long- distance, she’d treat you like a ‘suspect’ and you’d have to walk on eggshells so to not go back into the guilty “Narcissistic ass****” category she had placed you in, a category where you don’t belong!

I would love to be wrong, and maybe I am.. but that would take a whole lot of real, honest, ongoing work.

What says Confused?

🤔 Anita

Hey Confused: got to get away from the computer for a few hours, I’ll be back in the evening. Please be good to the precious Confused!