Your Goal Is To Make Your Abusive Parent(s) IRRELEVANT.

[MMX2010]

*hands fire up across the FDR listenership*

 

But David, I've moved across the country to never speak to my abusive father.  Doesn't the obviously count as making him irrelevant?

 

David, I haven't spoken to my bitch mother in four years.  Surely that counts as making her irrelevant!

 

No and no. It's not enough to never contact them; you have to make them irrelevant. 

 

My family dynamic is that my father had (and still has) these large emotional needs that he magically expected his entire family to fulfill.  Since none of us could ever do so, particularly not my mom, he would routinely explode in anger.  By watching these explosive episodes over and over again, I've generated a list of actions, (some of which I'm not even conscious of), that I should never do because then I'd be "exactly like my father". 

 

For example, I've told myself that I should never smoke cigarettes. 

 

The first problem with this is that it's inaccurate.  I definitely shouldn't smoke cigarettes over a long period of time, because that would make me significantly less healthy as a person.  But that doesn't mean I should never smoke a single cigarette in my lifetime. 

 

The second problem is that refusing to smoke cigarettes because I don't want to be like my father renders him RELEVANT.  He's still influencing my decisions.  Worse, he's influencing my self-perception.  And so he's still affecting my freedom. 

 

If I smoke one cigarette today because I want to and have a good reason to, I'd be thoughtful and free.  If I smoke one cigarette today because I want to and have bad reasons to, I'd be anti-thoughtful and free.  If I smoke one cigarette today because I want to and no have reasons whatsoever, I'd be thoughtless and free.  But if I refuse to smoke one cigarette today solely because I don't want to be like him, I'd be NOT-free. 

 

Some time soon I've decided to enter a convenience store, wait for the first person to buy a pack of cigarettes, and tell him, "Hey man, I'll buy your pack of cigarettes if you let me keep one of them.  My therapist told me it'd be a great idea, and you can get a pack of cigarettes for free."  Then I will smoke that damn thing, being open to whatever feelings I have.  But the most important feeling I'll have is, "You smoked a cigarette.  Guess what?  It didn't come close to making you just like your father.  :D" 

 

Hope this was helpful for y'all. 

[cynicist]

Unless you have amnesia you will retain the memories of over a decade of experience with your parents. You will always be influenced by them, but that doesn't mean they are controlling you or that you will become them. If I said something like, "I don't want to hit or yell at my kids because my parents did that to me", would you say that this is bad since the parents are still relevant?

 

That stuff aside, I think it's great that you feel free of your parents now and that you can do things you would previously deny yourself.

[MMX2010]

 If I said something like, "I don't want to hit or yell at my kids because my parents did that to me", would you say that this is bad since the parents are still relevant?

 

 

It depends. 

 

The statement, "I don't want to hit or yell at my kids because my parents did that to me." can either be a compulsion / resolution devoid of self-knowledge and scientific research OR a compulsion / resolution backed by self-knowledge and scientific research. 

 

When people are compelled to never hit their kids, but never either research why spanking is bad or come to a scientific conclusion as to why their parents spanked them, their primary concern is making themselves feel better by never hitting their kids.  But it's not enough to never hit your children.  You have to never abuse them.  And that includes: don't yell at your children, don't send them to daycare, don't use timeouts, don't take away precious toys in rage, learn to negotiate, and so on. 

 

A compulsion / resolution devoid of scientific research and self-knowledge is much more likely to produce a parent who both believes time-outs are really effective AND is extremely resistant (often with obvious agitation and bullying during conversations about time-outs) to scientific research explaining why time-outs are bad.  That resistance is the most obvious sign that their no-spanking compulsion is self-centered, rather than child-centered. 

 

There's also sub-conscious, non-obvious absolutism, "Every parent who has never spanked their child is a good parent!  Any parent who has ever spanked their child is a bad parent!" rather than conscious negotiation-based absolutism, "Any parent who has spanked their child was acting badly while doing so, but with self-knowledge and scientific-research on all forms of abuse, including spanking but especially on abuses-that-are-NOT-spanking, every parent can become better - regardless of whether they spanked or didn't."   

 

The information in this topic ( https://board.freedomainradio.com/topic/41658-powerful-series-of-posts-excellent-journaling-opportunity/) was very helpful for me. 

 

Specifically, the definitions of secondary inferiority, overcompensation, false idealized self, and narcissistic injury. 

 

Secondary inferiority: "As an adult, it's my job to never spank my children.  That's all I need to do." 

 

Overcompensation: "Since I was hit as a child, I will never, ever hit children.  Hitting is the only bad way to parent." 

 

False, idealized self: "Once I learn to never hit my children, I will become the patron saint of parents.  Because of this, I will acquire boundless love and devotion." 

 

Narcissistic injury: "FUCK YOU!  What do you mean I'm a bad parent because I use time-outs!?!?  You're unempathetic and arrogant! How DARE YOU suggest I do scientific research!?!?  I don't need to do that! My instincts and experiences are enough!!!!!!"