Sharing something a friend told me

Yes, I’m only pondering it philosophically I suppose, not having anything personal embedded into my pondering. That’s why I’ve avoided talking about parents and children because peoples personal experiences do influence how they regard the whole “boundary” thing.

I think probably “If you keep offering advice I will end the conversation” is somewhere along the lines of “Trespassers will be prosecuted” to put it in another boundary context.
That is, your action will have this consequence.

In the end I still can’t help thinking that rigid boundaries of forbidding and conversely determined ignoring of another’s wishes are just the two flip sides of intolerance and a determination to have your own way. (Your is meant generally not personally )

Incidentally, although I’m partial to a pithy saying, I still don’t really get what Smarter was saying with her ‘nailed it” remark.

Strong fences make good neighbours.

"Or is it more about seeking dominance over another? Why is it not enough to refuse the advice ie control your own action?"

Missed this part. It's not enough to refuse advice, because we aren't robots. Even when we know something is objective reality, we may still be influenced by our parent's opinions (especially if those parents instilled fear, obligation, and guilt into their child). Not to mention, it's just simply draining having to hear something you don't want to ad infinitum. Especially if it's about a topic you care deeply about, maybe personal life-style choices perhaps.

BeepBoop "If you offer advice again in the future, than I will end the conversation/no longer contact you" [or answer your missives]

This is correct to me. Thank you for the proper words.

And if anyone dares to argue that that example is still controlling (since it influences the behavior of the other party with a threat), what is the alternative?

The offended party is forced to listen to opinions they do not want to or care to hear until the offender dies? That would be infinitely more controlling.

Ok I think I understand where the confusion around boundaries stems from.

Using Lathyrus3's "boundary" of "You must not offer advice" as an example of a controlling boundary. When really "You must not offer advice" is a demand.

A boundary would be:

"If you offer advice again in the future, than I will end the conversation/no longer contact you/etc."

Notice how a real boundary doesn't actually control anyone else's actions, only your own (reaction to their action).

I’m still pondering this.

Take “no unsolicited advice” for instance.

When someone says “I don’t act on your unsolicited advice” then they are setting a boundary for their own actions, which is what we should all do, control ourselves.

But when they say “You must not offer advice” they are setting a boundary for the other person to adhere to - so they are attempting to control another persons actions.

It changes then from a boundary of your own - I don’t accept that advice- to a boundary that you enforce on someone else. You cannot give that advice.

If you have the right to forbid others actions that you do not like, do they have an equal right to forbid your actions that they do not like!

Or is it more about seeking dominance over another? Why is it not enough to refuse the advice ie control your own action?

I think “setting my boundaries” is a carelessly tossed phrase, that often actually doesn’t men much more than I want things the way I like🤔

Actions you will or won't accept. End of.

Perhaps boundaries may include - no abusive behaviour, no unsolicited advice or opinions, no unsolicited "help" and no meddling.

It means different things to people CariadAgain but I wonder how much this talk of boundaries contributes to estrangements.

As I've said, in a healthy and mutually respectful relationship they're implicit. Everyone knows and understands what would or would not be acceptable as has been said by Lathyrus in the 5th paragraph of her post.

I've still not got my head round what people mean with all this talk of "boundaries" that has been going round the last couple of years and it puzzles me what people mean by it....

I suppose I’ve always thought of boundaries as something you set for yourself, as in the line you will not or cannot cross in terms of your own behaviour.
An internal thing.

External boundaries that other people mustn’t cross are a different thing, I think. Essentially setting up a boundary of this kind for others is a means of control, and deliberately going against that boundary is also an attempt at control.

So basically I think all this talk of boundaries is a bit of a red herring - pyschospeak.

When people talk about those external “boundaries” what they are really talking about is people striving for dominance in a relationship.

In equal relationships people treat each other’s needs and preferences with respect and a fair measure of tolerance for any differences. and there is no need for anyone to set “boundaries”.

Having just spent half an hour reflecting on the nature and meaning of boundaries I’m not at all sure what it is I really want to say except that people used to be more tolerant and jst accepted that they couldn’t always have their own way🤔🤷🏽‍♀️ Whichever side of the boundary they were on!

Either. Or both. That's what I thought when I read your OP Smarter but it was late, just before going to bed so I decided not to comment until now.

In my experience boundaries in healthy and mutually respectful relationships are implicit and in that situation, I wouldn't use boundary to describe them. For me, they only become explicit when there are problems within that relationship. When someone is no longer respecting the boundaries they know are there, or when someone is explicitly outlining their boundaries as a means to control.

Partial estrangement must be extremely difficult to navigate Smarter . At least when there's estrangement you know where you stand, even if you don't know why. I suppose it could be described as the lesser of two evils and for me, total estrangement is the lesser of the two.

I too am curious what boundary you consider a demand.

To answer your question about my mother (that's now estranged). I did set clear boundaries, but they were impossible (for her). My reasonable demands to not be: hit, yelled at, or insulted became impossible boundaries for her true, honest (not-fake) self. So now she's no longer my parent, with no hope for reconciliation.

I may not know your full picture, but I do know it takes a certain type of personality to vehemently question (attack) the nature of boundaries.

It seems you are troubled by partial estrangement. Think of the outcome you want and why, then act on it. Once estranged for many there is no going back.
In my case my d estranged almost everyone before me nd I should have acted, deep down I knew whatever I said would not alter her doing what she wanted. I was clinging on. She didn't want her life up to then to determine the future. She has a new one now. It's hard to face you are not loved anymore. she has one life and wanted to live it her way.

nanna8

Life is short, I wouldn’t worry about stuff like that.

I agree! But don't you think society makes us? We can't just live our lives without someone trying to analyze our intentions, actions or our feelings? When that happens with family, friends, those we love then it becomes heartbreaking. Then we can't be ourselves anymore. Lots of fake relationships out there these days. There's ones seem to break so easily. Sometimes with little warning as the outside world infiltrate. Parental alienation, grandparent alienation, elder abuse becoming more common than domestic abuse child abuse. Good yet bad. Why any abuse?

You say you’ve seen many times boundaries become demands. Can you give an example ? If it’s a true demand it’s not a boundary but I’m wondering if rather than a demand it’s a boundary after all. “We will not be having visitors after baby is born for two weeks and there will be no kissing” for example - that’s not a demand. It’s setting the conditions, the boundary is what they are willing to accept. But grandparent who felt entitled to those things may see it as a demand. It’s about perspective. “I will not visit the home of a smoker “ as opposed to “you must quit smoking “ are not one and the same but may be perceived that way to the party who feels entitled.

I completely disagree. Boundaries - respected boundaries on all sides can create and preserve healthy relationships. “ Boundaries are not the perfect answer and can go too far “. By whoms standard ? Boundaries are personal and what May feel to far for the person who doesn’t like someone else’s boundary May feel just so for the person setting it - and as they’re personal that is the only person it matters. Of course boundaries are conditions. In any healthy relationship you either choose to respect another’s boundaries or not and those choices come with consequences. Thinking you’re entitled to a say in the limits one sets for themselves is the height of overbearing. Wants can be at odds , boundaries cannot because they are for oneself. You may not like another persons boundaries. But your thinking you even get an opinion on the matter is problematic.

Shinamae

Sorry, it’s gone completely over my head 😵‍💫

Oh well I understand. To me many breakups of family happen from so little. Boundries can become demands or become ever changing to the point of not being able to know what they are anymore. When one decides to leave another, I think my friend describes that as the other no longer exists in the others life. Which I did find profound.

By no means do I think people should not have some boundries but I am seeing more and more of those boundries morph into demands and then relationships fall apart.

Oh jeez I hate typing on my phone. So many typos. Should have proofread. Apologies.

BeepBoop

“Someone gets their feelings hurt, and the other no longer exists.”

She calls this “profound,” but it's actually emotionally immature and fatalistic. It implies that boundaries = destruction, and that hurt feelings automatically justify someone being “erased.” But again—she sees this as deep, because it absolves her from self-reflection and reframes all emotional pain as betrayal by others.

In toxic dynamics, this line of thinking is common:
- “If I hurt, someone must have done something wrong.”
- “If they left, it’s because they’re cold, not because of how I acted.”

What's funny is, this could apply to you. Did you set impossible and unclear boundries for someone and when you moved the goalposts on those boundries and they could not keep up, did you coldly abandon them? Then try to alleviate your guilt, justify your actions by trying to use psychobabble to attack someone who brought up a good point? Sort of projecting your guilt onto another?

I mean if I am wrong about you, that is ok but it also means ypu could be wrong about me. See the problem with psychological ecmvalutionvos this...no study, no book, no profession can possibly look into someone's thought or really know what's in their heart.

It can be handy in some perhaps mental disorder thing...even then it's just basically a good guess based on numbers of people and similarities. But nobody on thos earth can read true thought, motivations or feelings. It's literally impossible.

Well perhaps someday people will develop brains thar can read minds but not today.

Grams2five

Boundaries are personal limits so they don’t cross over. For example. “It’s my boundary that i do not share personal medical information about myself or my children with anyone outside their father “. Grandparent “I want to know the details “ - Thea is not a boundary It’a a wants

Or “we have set a boundary that we as grandparents will not be providing child minding but are happy to visit as a family “. Child “I want you to be carers for r baby xx times a week. “. One is a boundary one is not. Boundaries don’t overlap other boundaries because boundaries are our own. They overlap wants

I get what you are saying and many boundries are ok. However it seems they are not the perfect answer, and can go too far, developing into demands as a way to control someone. Just have to be careful we do not give boundries all the power. Use when completely necessary.

Aren't you special now. No not at all. In fact the very idea negates the notion of unconditional love. Boundries ARE conditions.

Lathyrus3

Honestly I find it a bit confusing. Which one gets their feelings hurt? The overstepper who feels rejected or the overstepped who feels dominated?

Who ceases to exist?

Obviously it had a deep resonance for you but didn’t make sense to me I’m afraid.

Easy answer. Either. Or both.

Boundaries are personal limits so they don’t cross over. For example. “It’s my boundary that i do not share personal medical information about myself or my children with anyone outside their father “. Grandparent “I want to know the details “ - Thea is not a boundary It’a a wants

Or “we have set a boundary that we as grandparents will not be providing child minding but are happy to visit as a family “. Child “I want you to be carers for r baby xx times a week. “. One is a boundary one is not. Boundaries don’t overlap other boundaries because boundaries are our own. They overlap wants

Life is short, I wouldn’t worry about stuff like that.