The Brainwashing Behind Going No Contact

elopement was in most cases the nail in the coffin for an AC/parent relationship too.

It was in many cases a means of escaping ones family, which gladly women dont need to resort to today as they can "just" go NC and stand on their own two feet.

Elopement wasnt all romeos and juliets sadly. It was a "way out" of ones family (but tragically for many ended in an "out of the frying pan into the fire situation )

You did not make an illustration Soontobe. Your post of 19.10 began with my name. It was to me so yes, when you posted "a success story that is slapped away and treated as if it burns your skin and insults you" was taken as it was directed; a personal insult.

Perhaps you should take another look at the quote you have used from one of my posts GranfromDownunder. No where have I said that things don't and shouldn't change when your son marries. I said that parents are not only an extension.

"Your son doesn't need his mummy anymore" well that says it all doesn't it.

We seem to have raised an intolerant generation.

well, as they say, if you don't like someone (or a whole group of someones) you cant expect them to like you!

Some people geniunely "lost contact" as a consequence of movement/war/marraige/calling. By others it was by design.

Like my DHs great grandmother who never spoke to her family after marraige. We know this because her grandchildren and until recently, children, are still alive today to confirm it.

And Moire's example from her family!
Sure, some were devastatingly never reunited after war, but others took the opportunity to gladly make a clean break!

Fairydoll, you believe the young generation to be "intolerant" because they are intolerant of controlling and manipulative behavior as I've witnessed here? Do you believe grandparents have the right to behave however they choose without consequences?

My mother lost contact with her large family of siblings after WW11. There was no deliberate NC but they became scattered about during the late 1940’s after their mother (my maternal GP) died. It wasn’t usual in those days to have your own transport or telephone, not amongst working class people and it seems they were all too busy keeping poverty from the door to think about writing letters. I don’t think any of them missed each other, they had other priorities.
NC today is different in many ways. Like Smileless, I too have seen NC actively encouraged during a brief foray into Mumsnet - never to be repeated. I saw the phrase, ‘Your parents are bastards, cut them out’. This from someone presumably not even acquainted with original poster or her parents!
That is the difference between historical and modern day NC, in my opinion. And of course less tolerance of human frailties and more inclination to toss away something that doesn’t quite fit in with our lifestyle or perhaps annoys us.
It’s a good job I’m getting on a bit as it makes me rather sad. We seem to have raised an intolerant generation. But perhaps our parents thought that of us...

plenty of prominant Romans and Egyptions and ancient greeks went as permanantly "NC" with family members as is possible to go (chop chop)

War of the roses
English civil war
Abdication crisis
The fall of the Prussian empire
Napolian

Families have stopped speaking to each other for as long as families existed!

"Who has said that things don't and shouldn't change when your son marries GranfromDownunder? I haven't, and I haven't seen a post from any other GN that has said so."

You, yourself, have said:

"The vast majority of parents do recognise that their adult children make families of their own, the fault often seems to lie with those they've chosen to make their family with in that they do not want their in laws to be a part of that new family. We don't cease to be parents to our children when they have partners and children of their own, we remain as parents, become in laws and grandparents and are not "only an extension"."

You are only an extension. And you are parent only in a way in which to describe your relation to one another. Your son doesn't need his mummy anymore. They are a family. You are not inside their family. That's what happens when you marry. I can only imagine if when I had married my DH if his mum thought she was a part of our immediate family. My sons are in my family but I am not in theirs. As I said before, our relationship now is much more akin to a friendship. And if I'm not a likable person to be around, then they won't sacrifice their sanity to make the relationship work as this new generation isn't interested in doing things just for the sake of tradition or societal expectations.

@smileless2012,

"What a horrible thing to suggest Soontobe that your success story burns my skin. To even suggest such a thing which I regard as a personal insult says a lot more about you than it does about me."

Its a horrible thing to tell you that you treat my posts and my suggestions and appeals to have a bit of empathy, as if it burns your skin?

Really? That is how your reaction makes me feel. Like it is unwelcome, dismissable, unwanted...as if they were burning your skin by even reading them and you just want me to shut up and go away.

I think it very interesting that you chose to take my illustration as a personal insult, rather than try and understand where I am coming from...and then just go right on ahead and insult me personally with your comment, 'says a lot more about you than it does about me'. What does that say about you?

Kingdoms have been divided and maps re-drawn by relatives saying "Im not speaking to you any more" and drawing a great big literal line in the sand!!

I mean whole bloody wars have been faught because some family members went "no contact"

Dickens, while ficticous, is considered historically important as it describes life at the time, particularly in the lower classes, as this group were often missing from written histories

And people turning their backs on their old lives and backgrounds behind and going effectively NC was not unheard of.

It is not new. Im sorry if you take this statement as an attack, I understand it may be a useful defense mechanism. But it is not true.

you seem unable to understand that some P's have been CO through no fault of their own.

I have never said otherwise
In fact I have said it can be either or or both.

But your determination to read otherwise into my posts suggests that perhaps it is you that is spending too much time in an echo chamber?

It is interesting that the same posters toutinv the dangers of milleniums using echo chamber style websites, are themselves regulars on a very "echo chamberey" thread themselves!

It would certainly explain your misreading of my posts if you have decided that my genetation has a "party line".

You are doing what you are accusing younger generations of doing, dont you see??

Well notanan Dickens had characters as you've described them but not chatacters. But his works, albeit based on the society in which he lived, were works of fiction.

There's nothing fictitious or remotely entertaining in living with estrangement and there's nothing vague or mysterious about my back story.

Dickens has chatacters with vague / myserious back stories and no families (and fake / new names)

Vitriol explains nothing notanan I am not vitriolic toward my children's generation and I am not vitriolic toward those who have found that cutting out is the only solution.

I understand that for some this has been the only course of action, and TBH I'm tired of having to repeat myself. But you seem unable to understand that some P's have been CO through no fault of their own.

We are not responsible for our estrangement, it is not our fault. Perhaps you find it convenient to scapegoat those who are estranged. Regardless, you are way out of line to accuse me of dehumanising my son and belittling his emotions because I recognise NC as a new trend.

It is a new trend with sites on the internet not only encouraging NC but giving steps in order to achieve it.

Sadly for us he has followed his wife and taken the least line of resistance, and as his mother I am qualified to say so, and as someone who knows nothing about me or our situation, you are not qualified to say otherwise.

What a horrible thing to suggest Soontobe that your success story burns my skin. To even suggest such a thing which I regard as a personal insult says a lot more about you than it does about me.

I hope your last post is read and taken on board Fairydoll as it is an example of estrangement being the result of issues from those estranging and not those who have been estranged.

Like in GrandmaMoire's example, there have been people who left their old lives and familys behind gladly whenever opportunities to do so arose.

It was always hard for women (who even now are disproportionately villianised if they walk away Vs men (oh its cause of his wife etc). But times like war, economic booms/depressions etc have always some people FORCED away from family, and others glad of the excuse/way out!

Not all emigrants wrote home and looked back fondly.

Im pretty sure there are some examples of people gone "NC" in Call the Midwife!

And throughout literature and history.

I don't disagree with anything you've said there Fairy.

I just disagree with posts that would suggest that your DIL is in the first generation to ever do so to a significant degrees.

People who have "their own issues" often push people away (who have done nothing wrong) because for whatever reason they are at the time struggling to deal with relationships.

but this.is.not.new!

For example, some people joined "silent orders" due to genuine calling or piety, but others did so to "escape" because they werent coping with real life.

I life in cloth was a way to go "NC" for some, for others the lack of contact was a sacrifice not a motivator to join.

Ah notanan. Your attempts to rationalise NC are over simplified.

Of course there are reasons for NC but sometimes they are totally irrational, and the person on the receiving end cannot figure out, however much naval gazing they do, quite what went wrong. It happens. My DIL went NC with me for almost three years but is now in touch again. Apparently, it was more to do with her own issues, rather than anything I did or said.

it is convenient scapegoat/cop out/distraction though

and possibly in some cases self preservation to explain it away as a "generation issue" rather than replaying the hurt to find reason..

Look, NC is the extreme result of a relation ship break down between A & Bs

Sometimes the As will be fully at fault
Sometimes the Bs will be fully at fault
Mostly it'll be a bit of both in varying degrees.

Now if an A decides the NC is in fact a result of Bs being Bs... they are attempting to remove themselves completely from the equation and putting up a wall against any sort of insight into the cause AND the solution....
....and unwittingly explaining why the B decided that resolution was futile

and.....well you're just wrong.

There are enough examples of it just in mine and my DHs family tree alone to show that it really cant have been that rare... unless its an extraordinary coicidence that we ended up together, the two only examples of people whose family tree contain examples of NC from pre-milleniums... I somewhat doubt that!

You are dehumanising your ACs and belittling their emotions by ratinalising NC as a "new trend" they are following like sheep.

If this is your stance then there will have been no hope for reconciliation, as you cannot talk your problems through with someone who denies your problems could possibly genuinely exist.