Dear Peter:

You re-wrote beautifully, I am amazed how well you wrote, a moment of perfection, I say! I will read all and reply further Sat morning

Anita

Dear Peter:

At first, as I read your recent post yesterday, and again this morning, I didn’t hear you. Instead, I heard my mother saying about herself and me: “I was not the villain, and you were not the victim!”, invalidating reality and my emotions that fit the reality of what was. But I didn’t know at the time that I was hearing her. I thought I was hearing you invalidating reality and my emotions, and the same-old, same-old frustration and pain reoccurred, that chronic self-doubt, a painful mental condition.

Next, yesterday, I remembered The Rule of Charity and figured I was probably jumping to conclusions here and that I will revisit this in the morning. This morning, I looked at your writing further and saw that you expressed empathy for me, that you didn’t invalidate me, and that you were reflecting on your own experience and how creating more neutral versions of your stories might help you let go of negative emotions. You were talking about yourself, not criticizing and invalidating me (a relief).

Thank you, Peter, for your thoughtful and empathetic response. I appreciate your recognition of the emotional effort that went into my original journal entry.

I understand what you mean about the “victim-villain” dynamic. For me, using labeling language was a crucial step in validating my experiences and asserting my boundaries at that time. It helped me articulate the intensity of the hurt and establish the necessary distance to protect myself.

Over time, as I have healed and gained more perspective, I do find value in using more neutral language about what I refer to as normal life situations (not including the situations of my childhood with my mother). It allows for a broader interpretation and can help in letting go of the negative emotions tied to those stories.

“In hindsight I’m wondering if I felt that I needed to feel the emotions and stay angry to justify the boundaries was creating. (I notice today, not always healthy boundaries)”-
– you mean that you made some decisions in the heat of the moment, driven by anger and hurt, without considering the possibility of reconciliation, or the impact of the decisions on your life long-term (an example would be following a single argument with a partner, a person decides to end the relationship abruptly, without giving their partner a chance to explain or resolve the issue)?

* I created lots and lots of reactive, inflexible boundaries with people (ending contact with people abruptly and forevermore), finding myself alone and lonely. While those decisions provided me with immediate relief and a sense of control, they prevented personal growth, reconciliation, and coming across healthy ways of managing emotions and having a long-term relationship.

“Now that time has passed, do you feel you need the labeling experience to maintain and or justify the boundaries you created?”- in regard to normal situations (I explained “normal situations” above), I do find it very helpful to quiet down the labels, to challenge negative labels, to consider different angles to the story. In other words, to apply The Rule of Charity that you introduced to me.

Thank you for sharing your perspective and for your kind words about my journey. I hope to continue our conversation, it’s amazingly helpful to me. I hope it is helpful to you too.

anita

Dear Adrianne:

Thank you for clarifying that you want to keep the focus on your experiences. I understand that this situation is incredibly challenging for you, and it’s important to give your story the attention it deserves.

From what you shared, it’s clear that you’ve been caught in the middle of family conflicts for a long time, often being unfairly blamed or judged based on your mother’s actions. This has understandably left you feeling frustrated, disappointed, and exhausted by the ongoing drama.

It’s commendable that you’ve set boundaries with your mother and are striving to live your own life. Your desire to be treated as an individual and not an extension of your mother is completely valid. It’s also understandable that you don’t want to lose contact with your family, despite the toxicity.

Studying all that you shared, about you: you come across as a sensitive and reflective young person: you are acutely aware of your feelings and the impact of family dynamics on your well-being. Your reflections show depth and thoughtfulness. You strive to carve out your own identity separate from your mother’s conflicts.

Despite the challenges, you remain committed to living your life on your terms and not being dragged into familial disputes. Your primary motivation, in this context, is to live a life free from the toxicity and conflicts that have plagued your family.

You desire to be seen and treated as an individual, not as an extension of your mother or her conflicts. While you value family connections, you want these relationships to be healthy and based on mutual respect.

About your mother: she has a history of engaging in arguments and conflicts with various family members, and she involved you in her own conflicts. She may feel the need to assert control over family dynamics and rally support and loyalty from you and others.

* In general, engaging in arguments may be a way for individuals to express unresolved emotions and grievances that they don’t know how to process or communicate in healthier ways. Examples: (1) a person has longstanding feelings of resentment towards a family member due to past conflicts or perceived injustices. Instead of addressing these issues directly, they engage in arguments over unrelated topics as a way to vent their underlying anger and frustration.

(2) Someone who feels overwhelmed by stress or emotional pain finds themselves initiating or participating in arguments as a way to release pent-up emotions. The act of arguing provides a temporary outlet for their feelings, a temporary relief, even though it doesn’t resolve the underlying issues.

(3) An individual who feels neglected or unheard may use arguments as a way to demand attention and validation from others. Engaging in conflicts can be a way to ensure their voice is heard, even if it’s through a negative interaction.

(4) A person who struggles with expressing their true feelings may use arguments as a defense mechanism. By focusing on external conflicts, they avoid confronting and revealing their deeper emotions and fears.

(5) Someone dealing with internal conflicts, such as feelings of inadequacy or guilt, might project these feelings onto others through arguments. By blaming or criticizing others, they deflect attention away from their own guilt, insecurities and other internal struggles.

Engaging in arguments as a way of expressing unresolved emotions and grievances is often an unconscious behavior. It serves as a coping mechanism for individuals who don’t have the tools or support to process and communicate their emotions healthily.

About other family members: they take sides in family conflicts, often judging you based on your mother’s actions. Their behavior is reactive, influenced by ongoing disputes and their perceptions of loyalty, and their interactions with you fluctuate based on the current state of family conflicts. They may be motivated by a sense of loyalty to certain family members, leading to divisive behavior. Some cousins might genuinely want to understand your position but are influenced by the prevailing conflicts.

When family members blame you, they may be trying to make a complicated situation easier to understand. Instead of dealing with all the different reasons for the conflicts, they pick one person to blame. This way, they can avoid thinking about the many different things that might be causing the problems. They may project blame onto you as a way to feel a sense of control over the chaotic and unpredictable family environment: by identifying someone to blame, they feel more in control of the situation.

Blaming someone else can provide a temporary release of suppressed emotions. It allows individuals to vent their anger, frustration, or hurt, although in an unhealthy way. Family members’ projection onto you distort their perception of you, viewing you not as an individual but as an extension of the conflicts or negative feelings associated with your mother.

Being unjustly blamed for conflicts you had no part in, you bear the brunt of this projection. You are treated as a scapegoat, which leads to feelings of isolation, confusion, and frustration.

Family members’ actions of projecting blame onto you can be seen as a coping mechanism for their own unresolved emotional responses to the family dynamics. This projection serves to deflect their emotional turmoil, simplify complex conflicts, seek a sense of control, and discharge their emotions. However, it results in unfair treatment and isolation for you, as you are unjustly burdened with the blame for issues you did not create.

* In regard to your cousin from your dad’s side, her happiness at the thought (her misinterpretation) of you not speaking to your mother indicates a strong “team mentality” within the family dynamics. The cousin seems to view relationships in terms of alliances, expecting people to take sides in family conflicts. Her reaction to seeing you in a car with your mother was highly emotional and reactive. She quickly jumped to conclusions and responded with anger. Using terms like “crazy,” “schizophrenic,” and “idiot” indicates a lack of emotional regulation and a tendency to resort to hurtful language when feeling betrayed or upset. By lashing out at you, she discharges her frustration and reinforces her own narrative of loyalty and betrayal. Her behavior reflects a deep entrenchment in the family’s conflict dynamics, characterized by a team mentality, emotional reactivity, projection of unresolved emotions, a need for control, and a lack of empathy.

“Is it valuable to keep them in my life? I am tired by this. I want to live my own life; all this drama is tiring and stupid.”-

– recognizing when it’s appropriate to give up on trying to change longstanding unhealthy family dynamics is crucial, especially considering your young age and the no-mention of an interest from your family in seeking therapy or making changes.

When family members are entrenched in their ways and show no desire to change or attend therapy, it becomes impossible, or almost impossible (says I) for one individual to make meaningful progress in family dynamics. If you are the only one consistently making an effort to improve family dynamics and there is no dependable interest or cooperation from other family members, it might be time to reconsider trying

It takes a family to change family dynamics. It takes a number of family members to commit to making positive changes and to consistently work on it. One person within the family cannot change toxic family dynamics (family dynamics that started most likely way before you were born). Since the effort to change family dynamics is causing you chronic stress, as I understand it to be, it’s essential to prioritize your own mental health.

Trying to change these deeply rooted patterns may be like beating a rock, hoping to get water out of it. No matter how hard you try, the effort will not yield the desired result. It’s important to recognize your limits and prioritize yourself. Choosing yourself is a powerful act of self-care and self-respect.

Choosing yourself isn’t a betrayal of your family. It’s not about rejecting the idea of family, but rather rejecting the toxic dynamics within it. By prioritizing your well-being, you might even indirectly benefit your family in the long run. On the flip side, sacrificing your well-being to try and change them will likely only drain you and harm your mental health. The outcome? More of the same toxic environment for everyone.

Surround yourself with people who respect and support you and invest in relationships that bring positivity and growth. Since currently, this is not available to you within your family, find it elsewhere, is my advice. What do you think?

anita

Dear Adrianne:

I want to be more focused so to better reply. You are touching on something I experienced a lot of growing up (and onward, fo r as long as I was in contact with my mother), and I want to process all this with a fresh brain, tomorrow morning. (It’s Thurs afternoon here).

Anita

Dear Tom:

You are welcome, as always, and thank you for your thoughtful response. It’s great that you have a couple of friends to exchange messages with and that you’re mindful of your partner’s positivity practice.

Here are a few additional ways you might consider expressing your feelings:

Beyond journaling, you might try creative writing, poetry, or storytelling. Sometimes exploring fictional narratives can provide new perspectives on real-life emotions.

Engaging in artistic activities like drawing, painting, or playing a musical instrument can be a powerful way to express and process emotions.

Activities like running, yoga, or even a brisk walk can help release built-up tension and clear your mind.

Dance or other forms of expressive movement (like Tai Chi) can be a unique way to channel your emotions physically.

Beyond the Calm app, you might explore other guided meditations focused on emotional release and healing.

Incorporating mindfulness exercises, such as body scans or mindful breathing, can help you stay present and connected with your emotions.

Joining a support group or group therapy can provide a sense of community and understanding from others who may be experiencing similar challenges, and of course, therapy or counseling.

It’s important to find what resonates with you and feels right for your situation. You’re doing a great job by taking proactive steps for your well-being, and it’s commendable that you’re considering how your actions impact those around you.

Take care and keep prioritizing your emotional health.

anita

Dear Peter:

I admire your commitment to self-reflection and growth. The exercises you mentioned are intriguing ways to explore and appreciate your past without being constrained by it.

“It might be interesting exercises to try to re-write the old stories or journal entries while trying to avoid labeling language. My first attempts were surprising. Without the labels it seems to free the memories, allowing them to flow…. they didn’t become the emotions in the moment, so I didn’t relive the experience by bring the past into the present”-

– okay, I just dug into the very thick folder of my journal entries and typed out this portion of what I shared on May 18, 2013 in regard to my mother, with whom I was still in contact at the time, exactly as it appears on the paper: “Once somebody has hurt you TOO MUCH, for TOO LONG, TOO OFTEN, TOO COMPEHENSIVELY, TOO PERSISTENTLY, TOO BLINDLY to your suffering, and with NO APOLOGIES, NO ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS…, you don’t want any contact with that person… Any such contact is humiliating and a further victimization to the victim of the perpetrator… It is infuriating to me, the perpetrator’s expectation, as well as society’s expectation, that I continue contact with my perpetrator because she is my mother… No contact is necessary for me… for my sense of self-respect, self-compassion- for my sense that I am taking a stand. For as long as I continue contact, I deny and minimize my own experience of so many years. I deny and minimize my decades-old desire to have no contact with her. I NEED to have no contact with her and in so doing TAKE A STAND. Be believable in that she really, really hurt me”.

In the above entry, there are many labeling words, and in big case letters. Some of them are: “TOO MUCH, for TOO LONG, TOO OFTEN, TOO COMPREHENSIVELY, TOO PERSISTENTLY, TOO BLINDLY”- words that emphasize the extent and intensity of the hurt I experienced; “NO APOLOGIES, NO ASKING FOR FORGIVENESS”- words that highlight the lack of remorse or acknowledgment from my perpetrator; “humiliating”- a word that conveys a strong negative judgment about the contact with her; “infuriating”- a word that describes my intense emotional reaction to the societal and perpetrator’s expectations to maintain contact; “perpetrator”- a word that assigns a specific role to the person who caused harm; “victim”- a label assigns a specific role to the person who suffered harm.

There are advantages of using labeling language in contexts as in the above: it helps to clearly express the intensity and nature of emotions. Words like “infuriating,” “humiliating,” and “victimization” communicate strong feelings and make it evident how deeply I was affected by her. By using these labels, I tried to validate my own emotions and experiences (something extremely important in the face of lacking external validation). These labels provided immediate context and understanding to anyone reading these words: words like “perpetrator” and “victim” quickly establish the roles and dynamics in the situation.

My labeling language communicated the severity of my experiences. Repeating words like “TOO MUCH,” “TOO LONG,” and “NO APOLOGIES” highlights the persistent and comprehensive nature of the harm.

I needed to use labeling language to effectively communicate (or try to communicate) the depth and extent of the hurt I experienced. It helped me to articulate the profound impact of the abuse and neglect I endured. By labeling my experiences, I was seeking recognition and validation of my suffering (seeking my own recognition and validation and that of anyone reading or listening to me), trying to ensure that my pain is acknowledged and taken seriously. It helped me assert my need for no contact as a necessary boundary for my well-being. It communicated the importance of this boundary clearly and strongly.

Labeling my experiences empowered me to take a stand. It reinforced my decision to protect myself from further harm, and it helped me to challenge societal expectations that I should maintain contact with my perpetrator. It highlighted the injustice of these expectations and reinforces my right to prioritize my own well-being.

Labels like “infuriating” and “humiliating” communicate the injustice and absurdity of being expected to maintain contact with someone who caused significant harm.

If I was to re-write the above (today) without labeling language, it’d be something like this: “My mother caused me significant and repeated harm over a long period, without acknowledging my suffering or seeking forgiveness, and maintaining contact with her was extremely challenging. The contact with her felt disempowering and harmful. I find it difficult to accept the expectation from both my mother and society that I should continue contact because she is my mother. Establishing no contact is important for my sense of self-respect and self-compassion, and it allows me to assert my boundaries. Continuing contact means diminishing my own experiences and long-held desire for separation. I need to establish no contact to honor my own feelings and experiences and to acknowledge the impact of the harm I have endured.”-

– By removing labeling words, the narrative becomes more neutral and objective, and it encourages you, the reader, to interpret my experiences and emotions based on your own perspectives, without being influenced by my pre-assigned judgments.

Removing these labeling words is supposed to (so I am reading online this morning) support my healing process by allowing me to process my experiences without being overwhelmed by the intensity of labeling judgments. Without labeling, there is supposed to be a sense of emotional detachment from the events, which can make it easier to process and reflect on them without being overwhelmed.

To the right above, I say this morning, more than 11 years since my massively LABELING writing above, that using non-labeling, more neutral and objective language would have harmed me, because I desperately needed MY voice to be heard. Following a lifetime of not being seen or heard, I (me, myself) needed to be seen and heard.

Fast forward, now, being that I did cut contact with my mother shortly after that journal entry (May 2013), now that I did protect myself, I can see the benefit in using non-labeling language because it allows the reader to feel what he/ she would feel, based on his/ her life experience, reading about my experience, and not feel weighed down/ limited by my strong emotions.

Although I see it as a disadvantage to un-label my journal entry back on May 18, 2013, I see un-labeling advantageous in the context of much lesser impactful interactions with people. Example, an original journal entry: “I felt so angry when my friend didn’t show up for our meeting. It was so rude and disrespectful of her. I can’t believe how thoughtless she is. This always happens, and it’s incredibly frustrating. I always feel like I’m the one who cares more in this friendship.”

Rewritten without labeling language: “When my friend didn’t show up for our meeting, there was a strong emotional response within me. The situation triggered a reaction where I experienced intense feelings. I noticed that this event reminded me of past experiences where I felt similarly. It seems like I often find myself in situations where I question the dynamics of my friendships, and the level of care involved.”

In the revised version, the emotional reactions and thoughts are described without labeling the emotions as “angry”, “rude”, “disrespectful”, “thoughtless”, or “frustrating”. Instead, the focus is on the experience and observation of the emotions, allowing for a more neutral and reflective narrative. If the revisited version is followed by The Rule of Charity, let’s say, it can lead to a more balanced and true perception of the friend, leading to empathy and calming the anger.

On the other hand, empathy for my mother was the ongoing experience that has kept me in contact with her for way too long. More empathy for her in 2013, would have kept me imprisoned for longer, making it a lifetime of devastation for me.

See, I just used strong, labeling words: “a lifetime of devastation”, and I used those words because my mother has been, truly, a lifetime devastation for me: although much healing has been done, still- every day, almost every moment of every day- I experience an intense physical tension, a physical disquiet that accompanies these tics- my left shoulder twitching just now, here’s a tic involving my neck, here’s the usual trouble to extend my belly so to breathe comfortably. This is a physical- neurological and permanent damage that my mother inflicted on me.

It is not possible for me to undo/ reverse this particular damage- no matter what I do or don’t do, and for how long- same as a victim of chronic neurotoxicity (long-term damage to the nervous system caused by exposure to toxic substances, an irreversible damage which includes symptoms like tremors, rigidity, and involuntary movements) cannot undo or reverse their damage, no matter how much and for how long they try, no matter how much anger they release, no matter how much therapy they receive. Some things can’t be reversed.

Another permanent damage is my ADHD and learning disabilities (trouble with memory and processing information), which is the reason why I write (or type) so much, ever since I was able to write. It helps me process information. And processed, I forget and have to re-process. Actually, I just exhausted myself processing and typing so much in this post. I hope that it wasn’t too for you, Peter? If you’d like, I can submit shorter posts for you in the future.

anita

Dear Zenith:

Try to tell yourself these things and let these things sink in. At the surface, they don’t make a difference. To make a difference, they need to reach deep.

Anita