spent the 1/2 half of the article reading about "Amy". Her story is sympathetic, but so also is her families'.
Then we get the the abrupt turn: "One woman had spent much of her twenties coming to terms with sexual abuse from her father" and "Several described a family member as a classic narcissist or as toxic."
wait. wtf? are you comparing flat out sexual and mental abuse with "i'm liberal and my parents/siblings are super religious conservative"?
in the former case, sympathetic or not, you have selfishness and egos on both sides.
by the end of the article, "Amy" begins to appear to me to be about the most self-centered narcissist herself.
in the case of actual toxicity, abuse, etc. it's easy. short of that it would seem to be more a case of "it takes two to tango".
also, how many more parents reject/abandon their kids for similar or lessor reasons? plenty for sure. doesn't make that right either.
I think this was the subtextual point of article: estrangement is the expected outcome when narcissism is involved (regardless of who's narcissism it is).
agree with that. it's just interesting as the story expands to see in the Amy case, there's definitely two sides to that one.
btw. too late to edit, but i think i mixed up 'former' and 'later' in my comment. anyhow the point there was i don't like the article spending soo much time on the Amy's of the world and equating and brushing off estrangement due to the real abuse. probably more common than anyone thinks.
Or self-centered pampered snowflakes that were told from birth by delusional people that they deserve a life free from interpersonal conflicts. So any conflict, no matter how minor, that arises is hopelessly "toxic", and they shouldn't have to interact with anyone that deviates from their naive world view and poorly preconceived notions.
There is no extra credit for participating with people you don’t want or have to.
> and they shouldn't have to interact with anyone that deviates from their naive world view and poorly preconceived notions.
You might have to tolerate coworkers and/or a manager, but that’s it. Anyone else can be blown out the door, interpersonally speaking. To provide poor behavior an audience is to empower it, so you simply don’t provide an audience or interaction. For sure, actors who had an advantage are upset the power dynamic and asymmetry is breaking down at scale (hence this piece).
Then we get the the abrupt turn: "One woman had spent much of her twenties coming to terms with sexual abuse from her father" and "Several described a family member as a classic narcissist or as toxic."
wait. wtf? are you comparing flat out sexual and mental abuse with "i'm liberal and my parents/siblings are super religious conservative"?
in the former case, sympathetic or not, you have selfishness and egos on both sides.
by the end of the article, "Amy" begins to appear to me to be about the most self-centered narcissist herself.
in the case of actual toxicity, abuse, etc. it's easy. short of that it would seem to be more a case of "it takes two to tango".
also, how many more parents reject/abandon their kids for similar or lessor reasons? plenty for sure. doesn't make that right either.