Deciphering My Relationship With the FOO-Victims of Circumstance?

[Nerburg]

Here comes a wall o'text. I really did try to keep it as succinct as I could, believe it or not. My thanks to anyone who can help me out here, or plod through this post in its entirety.As the title says, I'm in a state of ambivalence about how I should be viewing my immediate relatives, specifically my mother. Over the past year and a half (about) I've become passing familiar with the FDR philosophical/psychological view (I.e. Truth) on personal relations and it's been quite the rush, like being dropped onto the top of the Grand Canyon, to look down on formations of people milling about below, antlike in their patterns of movement, but predictable after a long enough period of observation.(This in regards to friends, strangers, fictional characters who are now analyzable in terms of the causes and effects of their dysfunction. On a side note to this side note, it's interesting how most of the truths this community is aware of are viewable during character interaction in popular media (TV, movies), only it seems that even the writers don't know what's dripping out of their script).Thus far I feel I've finally acknowledged most of the dysfunction in my early childhood, which was the root of my previously unacknowledged adult dysfunction, which has in turn allowed me to take ownership of myself and my actions, the taking ownership of which has allowed me to reverse dysfunctional or destructive behaviors of my own, in order to lead a happier life. So while I've leaped forward in taking responsibility for myself and thus breaking the multigenerational cycle of destructive, dysfunctional, and abusive behavior, my quandary exists in assigning moral responsibility to those who had a role in my negative early childhood experiences.The main contention that I have in mind would be to what degree my mother is responsible for the things I suffered. The only reason I lack certainty, and raise the normally refutable statement, 'she did the best she could', is that from my seventh year of life onwards, she was quite arguably a victim of circumstance (and by extent, the whole family), for during a skiing field trip for my older brother, which she was chaperoning, an accident led to her having a T5 spinal cord injury, disabling her from the chest down, leaving her behind as a paraplegic to this day (she basically has use of her arms and muscles above, but not including, the abdominals). This event changed the whole timeline of my life, from that moment onwards.While the majority of abuse occurred after this incident, which I will provide context for down the line, there was still some abuse which occurred before. It isn't negligible by any means, but it's a shorter list than most of the people I know or have heard about. Considering her own history, which I can detail if requested, it's understandable, but that is no excuse: I was circumcised as a baby, my mother divorced my father when I was around 3 (she claims he was cheating, he denies and claims it was a dissatisfaction divorce), I was in daycare around two and a half, and I was spanked only twice in my memory, all of which occurred before I was 7. I was taught about the religion of my father but I was not bullied into it, as one of the sayings in the Qur'an my father was fond of is, 'no coercion in religion', so it never stuck with me.Now, that's my early childhood before the skiing accident and while it's not good, it's significantly better than a lot of people's most important formative years. It's relevant, but not necessarily the focus of this post.Two months before my mother's skiing accident, she remarried, and I think he was a nice enough fellow with my brother and I during the yearish+ they were dating. But people change when subject to extreme stress. Two months after they marry, his new wife is a paraplegic. There's nearly a two year recovery period (and it's much more complex than that, because of surgery after surgery and adaptations that need to be attempted/scrapped/modified) but for simplicities sake, we'll leave if there. Outside observers notice that I become obese (which is one of the dysfunctions I am currently succeeding in conquering) after mom is disabled, but the next few years are probably the fuzziest in my memories in terms of life at home (the distinction being that I can remember lots of details about school).Anyways, during the following years, my brother and I were subject to worse than previously. By the time I'm in 6th grade, there are verbally abusive fights between my brother and step-father about thrice a week, sometimes more, sometimes less. I get some too, but not nearly as often as my brother. The verbal fights included physical intimidation, so, the big step-father would be screaming, looming over us kids, jabbing his index finger forcefully into out chests until we were backed against a wall. One time my brother was woken up at midnight with school the next day, because he did dishes but had the drain plugs in the wrong sides of the sink. Stuff like that. The climax was one night when for whatever reason, my step-dad and brother were fighting again, and the step-father slammed my brother against the fridge and started screaming in his face. My mother called the police on him then, but he ran away from the house and nothing ever came of that.So my point is that my mother, who was raising two children as a single mother married a guy to stop that from continuing (single motherhood). It probably would have worked out, without anywhere near the almost daily abuse had events not multiplied the pressure on them by over 9000. Do I need to hold her morally responsible for choosing this abusive man, who would not have been who he became had not the fates destroyed his new marriage? They are divorced now, but in order for her and her children to live, she needed the man during the immediate recovery and for a long time afterwards, for money and much more than just money.If any extra info/context is needed, please let me know. I would really appreciate some feedback on this, whether you see me irrationally rationalizing or if you have an answer or question or ANYTHING at all. Thank you very much.

[dsayers]

Thank you for sharing. To suddenly be handicapped can be a very difficult transition.

 

There was two points I wanted to make. The first one, which I hope is obvious, is that if person A attacks person B over drain plugs, it's not at all about the drain plugs. Which leads to my second point...

 

Your stepfather was living his values. For example, if a man doesn't view rape as an option, he will not rape a woman even if she rejects him. In order for your stepfather to physically assault (yes, forcefully poking somebody is assault, especially given the size disparity) either of you, assault has to be a possibility in his values. If he did not assault people his size who could evade him, then you know that it's not that what happened to your mother changed him or pushed him over the edge. He was simply living his values in a set of circumstances where he understood there was little risk of consequences.

 

If you accept that the man was living his values, then yes, your mother was responsible for bringing him into your lives. Which would be consistent given that she chose to have children with a man she divorced not long after having children. I'm not saying she's a bad person, just that her values didn't place the safety of her children as high as they should've been with either of those men.

 

There's a lot of people out there that have children as if it's something they can just wing or it's something we don't need to study as if it's innate. But for as long as we've been able to communicate and write stuff down, we've had the potential to do just about everything BETTER whether it's innate or not.

 

If I were in your shoes, I'd have a really hard time deciding what to do with these points. I don't think being handicapped that she gets a pass. On the other hand, she's experienced a great deal of suffering. However, this doesn't diminish her responsibility, or how much YOU need for her to own this and hopefully make up for it. I hope others are able to come up with some good advice in this regard. The best I could come up with is to confront her on these points for your own sake. Managing her suffering is not your responsibility

 

I hope this is helpful. I really feel for you and for the difficulty of the situation that you are in and that your mother is in.

[Nerburg]

Thanks for the reply dsayers.

Thank you for sharing. To suddenly be handicapped can be a very difficult transition.There was two points I wanted to make. The first one, which I hope is obvious, is that if person A attacks person B over drain plugs, it's not at all about the drain plugs. Which leads to my second point...

Yes, I'm aware of this and I didn't mean to imply that this was a valid explanation.

Your stepfather was living his values. For example, if a man doesn't view rape as an option, he will not rape a woman even if she rejects him. In order for your stepfather to physically assault (yes, forcefully poking somebody is assault, especially given the size disparity) either of you, assault has to be a possibility in his values. If he did not assault people his size who could evade him, then you know that it's not that what happened to your mother changed him or pushed him over the edge. He was simply living his values in a set of circumstances where he understood there was little risk of consequences.

What I was trying to get at was that she wouldn't have tolerated any behavior like that had she not been so desperately dependent; the consequences for that kind of acting would have been high and thus that form of abuse would not have existed. I do, however accept that he was living his values, as he was brutally beaten as a child by his father, who was a cop, and he became a hardcore liberal as an adult, so non-aggression was not the foundation of his ethics. So I believe abuse would still probably have occurred, albeit in a much less destructive manner.

If you accept that the man was living his values, then yes, your mother was responsible for bringing him into your lives. Which would be consistent given that she chose to have children with a man she divorced not long after having children. I'm not saying she's a bad person, just that her values didn't place the safety of her children as high as they should've been with either of those men.

You are not wrong.

There's a lot of people out there that have children as if it's something they can just wing or it's something we don't need to study as if it's innate. But for as long as we've been able to communicate and write stuff down, we've had the potential to do just about everything BETTER whether it's innate or not.If I were in your shoes, I'd have a really hard time deciding what to do with these points. I don't think being handicapped that she gets a pass. On the other hand, she's experienced a great deal of suffering. However, this doesn't diminish her responsibility, or how much YOU need for her to own this and hopefully make up for it. I hope others are able to come up with some good advice in this regard. The best I could come up with is to confront her on these points for your own sake. Managing her suffering is not your responsibilityI hope this is helpful. I really feel for you and for the difficulty of the situation that you are in and that your mother is in.

I really do appreciate the feedback. I have been discussing these issues with her (parenting, politics), though with regards to my own childhood, not as specificly and bluntly as here. I've just not quite found the approach that would bypass the defensive barriers that are up, though I know it can be done, as she's an intelligent woman who is capable of discussing almost anything- current events, philosophy, history, etc. it's just when the emotional defenses are triggered that bad things happen.Unlike the circumcision, which can't possibly be justified, I give her major props for even getting us this much of a chance in the world. She'd already broken most of the cycle of abuse from her own mother, but did not quite make it all the way. Instead of sexual, extreme physical and emotional abuse that she went through as a child, while living in extreme poverty, she managed to pull herself out of that environment and raise children in a middle-class, verbally and less-physically abusive childhood. Today we stand on the shoulders of giants, and what that woman has gone through in her life makes me understand that she is one of them which I stand upon.Again, it is very helpful and I appreciate the support you've given. I just want to reiterate that I am not giving her a free pass in terms of moral responsibility, only showing that the issue is muddy, from my viewpoint.

[dsayers]

What I was trying to get at was that she wouldn't have tolerated any behavior like that had she not been so desperately dependent

 

This is why I was careful to point out that the man was living his values. She doesn't need to see the behavior itself if she understands that the value of coercion is dangerous to her children.

 

Also, desperately dependent on what exactly?

 

the consequences for that kind of acting would have been high and thus that form of abuse would not have existed.

 

When I spoke of risk of consequences, I was referring to in the moment. The man would not poke a full grown person who is capable of evading because they could either punch him in the face or flee and call the police. He instead chose to poke the two of you because he was bigger than you, you could not escape, and you were dependent upon him. The very things that would require a higher moral standard he used as an excuse to hold a lower moral standard.

 

 

she's an intelligent woman who is capable of discussing almost anything- current events, philosophy, history, etc.

 

This isn't helpful. It is a lot easier for me to talk to you about abstract items than it would be for me to talk about abuses I've leveled upon others in the past. Because the former doesn't require me to examine myself or be honest about ME.

 

Furthermore, is somebody abuses you or facilitates abuse of you, demonstrates that they are "an intelligent [person] capable of discussing almost anything," but will not discuss their abuse of you or take responsibility for their actions, then they are in fact REvictimizing you. This is very important to understand.

 

I give her major props for even getting us this much of a chance in the world. She'd already broken most of the cycle of abuse from her own mother, but did not quite make it all the way. Instead of sexual, extreme physical and emotional abuse that she went through as a child, while living in extreme poverty, she managed to pull herself out of that environment and raise children in a middle-class, verbally and less-physically abusive childhood.

 

Since my father plays this card fairly regularly, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that this is your mother speaking through you. Look, an apple doesn't stop being an apple when you set it next to a banana. Not even if you were to toss it into an entire crate of bananas. We're not talking about the good things that she has done. We're talking about her choosing men that are dangerous to her children. She could cure cancer tomorrow and it wouldn't change the fact that she exposed you to somebody that could assault you.

 

Which is a good enough segue into the last point I wanted to make. You're talking about degree of abuse when what is more important is the presence of abuse. If we were comparing stories, then degree might be a useful point of data. However, in the discussion of whether or not your mother is morally responsible, what matters is whether there was abuse or not. Whether she owns the abuse or not. If she was exposed to an abuse level of 90 and dials it down to 10 with her own children, she doesn't get points for that. Because either the dialing down was incidental or she understood the importance of eliminating it and stopped before doing so.