"What other option is there?" Well, you could always let them be. That doesn't have the visceral pleasure of getting them back, sharing the pain as it were, but... sharing pain doesn't mitigate its impact on you at all. It remains, like a stone.
I can't see the value in magnifying pain. I've been through it; all humans have. Would I wish it for myself? The answer is no, I'd love to have a life filled with rainbows and kittens. And I think the golden rule here applies very strongly, to do unto others as you would have done to you, and I think the urge to "traumatize them back," as expressed here, fails on every level.
So they're annoying, frustrating, even traumatizing? Well, fine: what would you like to have done to you if YOU were annoying, frustrating, traumatizing? Would it be worth it to magnify that? Would it make the world better to increase the amount of pain in the world?
I can't see it. I say, "no." Boundaries are fine; if someone's hurting you, *letting* them is self-abuse. Build walls. But to build cannons, instead? I find that incredibly sad.
"What other option is there?" was actually referring to the perseverance comment, like back to my question to my stepmother.
Perhaps the term was more your focus than my actual action? I'm dramatic, I'll certainly give you that, but if you believe me asking her to clarify what she said instead of just spewing empty words for the sake of a response, then I suppose I have some thinking to do on that matter.
I *say* "traumatize them back" because it's a growing term and the concept through humor as coping is content I enjoy.
I *mean* nothing can improve and people can't grow without being challenged. And if I know someone has(or should have) the capacity for that kind of challenge because they do it to others? Alright then.
Many people will just deal with a bad situation because the process of 'it has to get worse before it gets better' just isn't appealing. I'm growing more comfortable being uncomfortable to get to a better state, and that's how I approached that situation. Let me know if you disagree.
My error in focusing on that particular phrase - the writing on your part was clear, and I had no issue (and could have no issue) with the impulse to survive.
"What other option is there?" Well, you could always let them be. That doesn't have the visceral pleasure of getting them back, sharing the pain as it were, but... sharing pain doesn't mitigate its impact on you at all. It remains, like a stone.
I can't see the value in magnifying pain. I've been through it; all humans have. Would I wish it for myself? The answer is no, I'd love to have a life filled with rainbows and kittens. And I think the golden rule here applies very strongly, to do unto others as you would have done to you, and I think the urge to "traumatize them back," as expressed here, fails on every level.
So they're annoying, frustrating, even traumatizing? Well, fine: what would you like to have done to you if YOU were annoying, frustrating, traumatizing? Would it be worth it to magnify that? Would it make the world better to increase the amount of pain in the world?
I can't see it. I say, "no." Boundaries are fine; if someone's hurting you, *letting* them is self-abuse. Build walls. But to build cannons, instead? I find that incredibly sad.
"What other option is there?" was actually referring to the perseverance comment, like back to my question to my stepmother.
Perhaps the term was more your focus than my actual action? I'm dramatic, I'll certainly give you that, but if you believe me asking her to clarify what she said instead of just spewing empty words for the sake of a response, then I suppose I have some thinking to do on that matter.
I *say* "traumatize them back" because it's a growing term and the concept through humor as coping is content I enjoy.
I *mean* nothing can improve and people can't grow without being challenged. And if I know someone has(or should have) the capacity for that kind of challenge because they do it to others? Alright then.
Many people will just deal with a bad situation because the process of 'it has to get worse before it gets better' just isn't appealing. I'm growing more comfortable being uncomfortable to get to a better state, and that's how I approached that situation. Let me know if you disagree.
My error in focusing on that particular phrase - the writing on your part was clear, and I had no issue (and could have no issue) with the impulse to survive.