It might have been harsh. However I wouldn’t call it mere self-absorbtion. If your spouse doesn’t talk much and isn’t so interested in communicating or intimacy, that might be self-absorbtion. But if this spouse wants to talk and be heard talking her/himself, we have something more complicated.
Now you’re quite right when you say that it’s consensual. But I was trying to feed back what was happening in a pretty short interchange. As I saw/felt it of course. And without what I would prefer in an interaction then I’ll leave interacting with him. But just because people consent, and continue, doesn’t mean that some kind of theft isn’t happening. A taking. I’ve seen him claim to be helping people and I don’t think that fits with what is happening. And you can have long term friendships and other kinds of relationships where one person takes more and the other(s) put up with this, often driven by a variety of motivations and sometimes values. It’s still taking even if those people are putting up with it as free adults.
I’ve worked with children a lot, had one, and I have never met one who put him or herself in the Christ position. They want to be free from control, sure, they expect their desires to be met, but generally speaking they OWN their desires. They don’t tell you they are teaching you, or that they are giving to you only… essentially telling you that you are too stupid to notice. Those of us who spend time with children are going into a relationship either for pay or because we in fact get a lot from the relationship even when the child is not giving in the ways adults do to each other.
The adult here is repetitive, taking the authority role, not being open about his needs, pretending that his getting what he needs is actually him giving to us.
And given the unique nature of his beliefs, there could be some side effects that do this. It’s a version of certain kinds of spiritualities and metaphysics I’ve encountered before. If I hadn’t and it wasn’t coupled with a messiah role-taking, it might be interesting for me.
I saw the BPD posts and reacted to that and then tried to get some kind of mutual respect, we’re two humans here talking and couldn’t get it. There were some revelations in the later part of the discussion. He doesn’t really mean what he says, it’s to trigger us towards healing with is the desire, it seems, not to exist. And I can see where Buddhism came up as a topic, though I suspect it is some something more about the cessation of experiencing rather than the release from the ego. But I don’t know.
Explicitly he called us statistics. And in context it was to make it clear of how he wasn’t viewing us, relating to us. I can’t see how he could be more explicit He also denied that he needed us in any way and in fact wanted to get away from us. We have a negative value to him. I also think he makes a lot of statements that imply he is the most human, if not the only human: in terms of suffering, kindness, understanding. Implicitly he denies our humanity, I think, by the way he interacts. He’s hardly alone in that, but that can lead to harshness on my part.
When the pattern is pointed out to him, he tells us it is for our own good. He is triggering us towards healing. Apart from not making much sense - because then it would be best not to let us in on this, it’s just so facile.
You obviously know him better. I would guess he is suffering a lot and it’s kind of you, me guessing again, to want to protect him.
I’m not going to chase him around to try to get him to admit anything - like even something so basic and I think obvious that he needs people and likely, given his life now, the people who are here. I met him, got curious, didn’t like how he related to women and then also didn’t like how he was relating to me and my posts. So, I reacted, trying to see if I could get him to, in a sense. realize there is a person behind these words on the screen. It was and is unclear how aware of that he is. He might well get it right on a test, but I’m not sure he really gets it.
I’ve pretty much decided to leave it there.
In whatever sense my being harsh could be seen as a moral failing, sure I’d see his way of relating as a moral failing.
But I’d put it like this, just to pull out a sort of analogy. Let’s say I go physically to a philosophy club. I meet people who are mingling there and there are some short conversations. One guy says something interesting that I disagree with while I am walking toward him and he’s talking to someone else. So, I join and -as seems to be the culture of this philosophy mingle - present my reaction about this. It happens to be what I would consider sexist. So, I present a short reaction. The person pontificates more and doesn’t really interact with what I am saying. It’s as if he’s responding, but actually what he says doesn’t integrate anything I asked, criticized or said. My words are triggers for repetition or more pontification of related beliefs the person has. Of course I could walk away immediately, but to be honest I am fascinated with human dynamics and also people’s self-relation, self-knowledge. So, I engage, pointing out what I think is happening in his beliefs about women and in relation to me and the other person he is lecturing (short lectures).
I think the whole batch of his OP combined with his way of interacting with people is actually pretty harsh. If he was my brother-in-law and continued interactions were pretty much a given, I’m going to maintain a pretty harsh stance in response to this - and let my sister know what’s up. But here I am in the same space at the philosophy club mingle. He’s getting a fairly honest, not too insulting response.
So, what ends up happening. He gets a response from yet another person, perhaps slightly differently, that he’s being disrespectful, both to women, in this thread, and then the people who respond to him. A number of people tell me this has been going on for years and nothing will change. That seems like the worst outcome and one that remains unchanged by getting this feedback from me.
The guy at the mingle can go on finding people to pontificate to.
And by the way my goal was not to help. I think it could possibly have made an impression and something, perhaps not him, might have reconsidered something about women and BPD or about how to interact with people or even, perhaps, that there is something going on in the dynamic they don’t want to look at. But my reaction was much more to just hold my ground in relation to someone pulling the stuff he is pulling. What happens then?
Out in the real world there are people, many in positions of authority, who engage in similar patterns that I see happening here, coming from him. I find it interesting and also useful just to see what happens: in me and in the other person, when you simply point out what is happening (as you see it). I can’t always do that in real life, and it’s especially hard if it’s a boss or a government official, etc.
But, now, my sense is it would be a broken record from here on out. So, I’ll stop interacting with good old Ecmandu. Not because of what you said. I’d already decided a couple of posts ago.
^^^^