GENERATIONAL ABUSE
A case study of Narcissism as family dynamic.
What happened with Girls Mother from Guys perspective is he set a boundary which Mother, fair play to her, respected to his face. But she did not like it. So she lied to the family and claimed Guy had said things he had not said (1 mention of heroin, 2 calling her ‘unwise’). It positions Mother as vulnerable needing caring attention and positions Guy as nasty for having upset her by saying those things.
1 He did not say those things.
2 He is allowed to establish boundaries.
3 He not responsible for Mothers reaction.*
*This is interesting because in the overall situation Guy is claiming how Girl is responsible for bullying him and for her ignoring the boundary he set to protect himself and their relationship from the bullying. Guy has described that as ‘Girl not listening to him’.
At cursory glance it appears to be a double standard on Guys part. However;
Guy has repeatedly asked Girl to be responsible for her own behaviour.
1 to stop bullying him,
2 to respect personal boundaries.
To go to other people to gripe about someone behind their back is not respectful of that person, it is both disrespectful and sneaky.
To lie about what a person said is also disrespectful, is also manipulative.
That this issue has been festering, repeating, causing ongoing damage for so long without being resolved is because Girl has not accepted what Guy is saying to be valid.
Girl simply ignores that Guys ‘questionable behaviour’ is a reaction to her bullying, so she does not have to take accountability for her own behaviour. Girl does not acknowledge it all, so Guy is unsure whether Girl is aware she is doing it despite his attempts to communicate with her about it.
It has come to a head now because of Girls Mother’s involvement.
This has exposed the same behaviour seen in both Girl and her Mother. Now we recognise from where Girl has learned that behaviour.
Transactional Analysis reveals it is the classical narcissistic cycle of abuse.
1
To bully someone (by applying pressure and insults, coercive and controlling behaviour),
and then when the person reacts by setting boundaries,
2a
to ignore those boundaries,
thus pressuring them further toward a more extreme reaction,
2b
and/or;
to say that the reaction is abuse and the person is abusive, *
3
to deny accountability for bullying them in the first place by denying and ignoring that had happened at all,
by technique of dominating the narrative to keep it focused only on the targets reaction, not on the cause of that reaction,
4
to outright lie about what happened (manipulation),
5
to get attention = energy from anyone who will listen and support the bully who is now in vulnerable mode claiming to be the target,
*2b
In this case, the target has gone into ‘Flight Mode’, needs time-out to stabilise. This is not the same as ‘avoidant attachment’ although by repetition it can cause it.
This is also characteristic behaviour of autistic overwhelm.
6
Accuse the person who needs ‘time-out to stabilise’, as being emotionally and mentally unstable, unsupportive and emotionally unavailable.
7
to play ‘poor-me’ for being in a relationship with someone who is mentally and emotionally unstable, unsupportive and emotionally unavailable.
The narcissistic cycle of abuse is characterised by maximum yield of sympathetic attention energy for the person who stirred up the drama, through non-accountability of their own behaviour, projecting at their scapegoat target.
CONCLUSION:
The dynamic is understood very differently based on one critical factor;
Who has the dominant narrative?
This depends entirely on recognition of the targets perspective of the experience being valid or not.
This involves holding the bully accountable for their own behaviour which originally created the drama cycle, instead of whitewashing that to focus instead on persecuting the target for reacting how our biologies and psychologies are designed to naturally react.
No comments:
Post a Comment