It all started today, my brother sending me a message saying that I'd have a nephew (that the child carried by his girlfriend and likely future wife is a boy), and I answered, because this is something I had been thinking about for a long time, that I didn't want to be an uncle. Of course, it was not true, I love children and would very much like to be a fun and interesting uncle, but it was the choice I made at the time before the choice I was to make later, as a weak distancing of myself before my own sense of righteousness brought about a reveal of my previously neglected agenda.
I sent my brother this email, translated from Norwegian (default colour) to English (in red):
He was quite blunt in his reply saying that if I thought such of him then we could end our relationship, and although I already knew he would be hurt and I would ruin his day, it took the reply to realize that I'd wronged him. I sent this reply afterwards to clean up the mess my initial offensive had made:Okay dette er veldig viktig, og jeg står fast på det.
Okay, this is very important, and I will stand by it.
Jeg har problemer med å tenke på deg som et godt menneske. Når jeg møter deg gir du meg en følelse av kulde, jeg vet du prøver å oppnå en kontakt med meg, broren din, og jeg tviler ikke på at familie er viktig for deg, men i generell betydning gir du meg følelsen av å være kald, som om du ikke har viktige prinsipper som følger med deg men at du bare gjør det du gjør fordi det gagner deg selv og det du har nært deg.
I have problems thinking about you as a good person. When I meet you, you give me a feeling of coldness, I know you try to make contact with me, your brother, and I do not doubt that family is important to you, but in general you give me the feeling of you being cold (of heart), as if you don't have important principles that follow you but that you do what benefits you and yours the most.
Jeg liker ikke sånne mennesker. Men det verste er ikke det at du gir meg denne følelsen (som kan være ubegrunnet? Jeg står åpen for det), jeg kunne kanskje ha svelget det viss det ikke hadde vært for at vissheten om at du muligens kan repitere den form for behandling av barnet ditt som den Hege og Geir ga meg og de rundt meg. Jeg finner den tanken fryktelig, uutholdelig å tenke på, og det at du ikke tar stor nok avstand ifra Hege og Geir gjør at jeg tror du, i svakere forstand, kommer til å gjøre det samme, fordi du ikke forstår hvordan du kan gjøre ting annerledes (forstår man gjør man ikke ting i første omgang), eller at du ikke forstår at det du vil alltid er like viktig for ungen som du har meninger om at det er. Det er snakk om:
I don't like people like that. But the worst is not that you give me this feeling (which could be unjustified? I'm open to that), I could maybe have swallowed it hadn't it been for the knowledge that you might repeat the form of treatment of your child that Hege and Geir (our shared mother and my father... he's my half-brother) used on me and those around me. I find this thought terrifying, unbearable to think about, and that you don't take sufficient distance from Hege and Geir makes me think that you, in a weaker sense, will do the same, because you won't understand how you can do things differently (if you understand you won't do such), or that you won't understand that what you think is important isn't always what's most important to the kid. We are talking about:
Slik som å bruke raseri som en måte å få viljen din på eller å straffe ungen din, med andre ord: skremme ungen din til å gjøre som du vil.
Things like using rage to get things your way or punish the child, in other words: frighten the kid to do as you want.
Slik som å bruke skyldfølelse og overdreven og urettmessig bruk av imperativer ("du skal...", "en må...", "man gjør...", "ikke...", "NEI!" i steden for samtaling, forklaring og forståelse, imperativer er for når tid er knapp og viktige ting skjer), for at ungen skal tvile på seg selv helt til de knuses på innsiden og gjør som du vil.
Things like using guilt or excessive and unjustified use of imperatives ("you shall...", "one must...", "one does...", "NO!" instead of talking, explaining and understanding, imperatives are for when time is brief and important things happen), to make your kid doubt itself until it breaks inside and does as you want it to.
Slik som trussler ment for å isolere ungen eller pengeinsentivisering ment for å låkke ungen til å få dem til å føle seg maktesløse eller ubegrunnet fristet (f.eks., nekte dem mat, nekte dem å delta i sosiale aktiviteter eller la dem delta men som syndebukker, betale dem for å framstå som en person du ønsker at de skal bli).
Things like threats meant to isolate the kid or money-insentives meant to lure the kid into feeling powerless or unreasonably tempted (for instance, deny food, deny access to social activities or let them join social activities as objects of blame, pay them to look like someone you want them to be like).
Slik som å tillate følelsesmessig og forståelsesmessig avstand i å utvikle seg i forholdet og/eller uviktigegjøre ungen i hverdagen... med andre ord: gi opp, eller neglisjere.
Things like allowing your emotional ties and your mutual understanding to go in opposite directions of one another or make the kid trivial in daily life... with other words: give up on or neglect.
Viss dette er ting du synes er okay eller riktig behandling av unger, så kommer du til å repetere Hege og Geir, og jeg synes allerede synd på ungen din før den i det hele tatt er født, og i så fall, ønsker jeg ikke å ha noe som helst med deg å gjøre.
If this is things you think is okay or right treatment of kids, then you will repeat Hege and Geir, and I already feel sorry for your kid before it is even born, and in that case, I have no desire to have anything to do with you at all.
Jeg sier dette nå, fordi jeg ønsker ikke å være i feil selskap med feil person og å være skyldig i å ikke gjøre mitt for at denne formen for behandling av unger blir i beste fall utryddet...
I say this now, because I don't want to be in the wrong company with the wrong person and be guilty in not doing my share of work to erase or at best eradicate this form of treatment of kids...
He exchanged words of indirect relief and called the first email "brutal" and went on in a light tone somewhat side-tracking the discussion saying "you are free to give words about yourself and things happening".Viss vi skal ende det er det viktig at det skjer mest mulig ordentlig.
If we shall end it it is important that we do it most properly.
Jeg tar tilbake at jeg har problemer med å tenke på deg som et godt menneske, selvsagt er du ikke ond eller er uten gode kvaliteter, og jeg blandet nok negative personlige synsinger om forholdet du har til hege og geir med at du ikke er et godt menneske.
I take back that I said I have problems thinking about you as a good person, of course you are not evil and not without good qualities, and I mixed up negative personal opinionating (difficult to translate, Norwegian word "synsing" is a word used not merely as opinion, but as light-minded opinion-making, describing the person as not taking enough consideration) about the relationship you have with Hege and Geir with you not being a good person.
Og det er selvsagt ikke slik at viss du noen gang straffer ungen din vil jeg ha store negative meninger om det, det er selvsagt enkelte ting som en person kan gjøre som ikke har stor betydning for individet og det viktigste er selvsagt hverdagen og hvordan den foregår og hvordan man utvikler og ivaretar personen og forholdet. Men resten får bli, skriver bare dette i etterkant fordi jeg selvsagt kan gå litt for langt og fordi små feil kan ha mye å si, selv om jeg tror fornærmelsen likevel er gjort og du vil nok være temmelig fornærmet fremdeles.
And of course it's not like that if you ever punish your kid I will have great negative opinions about it, it is of course certain things which a person can do which won't have great impact upon the individual and of course the most important is everyday life and how it goes and how you develop and take care of the person and the relationship. But the rest will stay, I only write here in the aftermath because I of course I can go a bit too far and because small mistakes can have a lot to say, even though the insult is probably already done and you will probably be very insulted still.
Det får være. Riktignok er det viktig av meg å si ifra og jeg står ved oppsummeringen min over ting som jeg finner uakseptabelt og som jeg vil kjempe imot enhver som begår.
Laissez-faire (don't know how to translate in English, so for anyone who spots the famous French liberal-economic term). But rightly so it is important for me to tell and I stand by my rundown over things I find unacceptable and which I will fight whoever commits.
My dilemma is, that even if I improved on the first message so it was more correct and not so unjustifiably suspicious about his motivations or giving such harsh words of my thoughts (which were also not very well founded) on the nature of his morality, I still feel right to have sent it (the rest I mean) and brought to the table the fact that such things are unacceptable, but they are still quite harsh and would still have an impact upon his day and ruin it as well as giving a giant blow to what little we have of a relationship and might even sour his days, and the question is; could I had made a better move that would achieve virtually the same good but less bad?
First of all, the fact that we might had cut contact might mean I would not have the chance to interfere with the upbringing of his child, my nephew, if it would turn out that he would apply some of the methods I seek to eradicate. In other words, I might have over-played my hand. The question is, is there an equally powerful way to express myself that would equally achieve the necessary "impact" upon his conscience and equally well shown my seriousness?
The most obvious method that comes to mind, is to play a secret agenda where if things were to turn out bad, I would regularly interfere as best as I could. However, what I don't like about this, is that 1) I won't have the opportunity to express an important idea that is not to my understanding sufficiently expressed in his environments, in other words the idea wouldn't had seen day-light and I would have to live in suspicion about him without getting to fully know the truth and our relationship would be based upon a lie, and 2) my interferences if necessary might sour the relationship and we might never have the opportunity to solve issues as they would never in their full nature be brought to light and scrutiny, 3) instead of a steady relationship with my nephew, I might experience a less optimal relationship where I "battle" over the kid in a fog of war that could lead to a lot of problems and uncertainty and unfavourable environments for the kid (to have his uncle and father battle over him and be at different banners), 4) the fact that I wait might make things happen that I don't want to happen, so I would start early to be sure, a pre-emptive strike so to speak, and lastly 5) the longer I wait the more emotional investment I waste or am never able to commit to, and a lot of investment will be risky and vulnerable to fluctuations in the relationship.
I find the impact and threat of cancelling the relationship to be the most efficient and optimal way because it allows for a possible good future after a cooldown while only letting go of a future that would likely be bad in almost every way, not that he would ever be fully like my parents that is improbable and it is not even certain he would be anywhere like my parents (although a little is still too much, if that would happen), the little certainty there is is mostly fuelled by an analysis that he is 1) not a very reflective person, he's somewhat conservative person and not very rebellious, 2) although he has a different father, he has only had one upbringing and it has mostly been Hege and Geir and they would be the only real experience he has with what it means to bring up a child, and 3) his environment doesn't appear to be particularly interested in dealing with such behaviour (people value friendship and relationship over morality often or maybe even mostly) and this can lead to an idea, a subconscious sneaking idea, that it is "normal", "okay", "acceptable" or even a good way of bringing up the child.
