NoTea

I don't mean to sound sympathetic in a weird way, i just see their abuse seeming mischaracterized, like called perfectly voluntary, given the f-yous of therapy commands, condescended to, not helped usually and in most cases. I'm confused how to say the gentleness and strength of it, with responsibility and blame for example. Maybe my economic limitedness is forcing me to think in this area, but it's not stockholm syndromic sympathy. Is it?, if i see they're in pain or can generalize that denial and attacking and not making sense and not being constructive, is painful? Not being constructive while not being abusive is to me, and when i did smaller versions of abusers, like snapping at people or trying to do 'comebacks', the pain was from the worst. I don't know how to distinguish those abuses either, but the point seems about constructive relationships, which seemed possible by learning and apologies, and a better not pop psy word for boundaries, like respect? (Or, uh, that word gets abused too, like when people say Rodney dangerfield's line without good humor.) So, uh, hm, does this make sense? I thought alot more clarity was needed about explaining, and idk, is help possible for the pain abusers feel? I haven't seen reliable unabused methods, so idk. In my case i thought of the bad i saw, then thought if i did it, and found ways to see how i related. Idk how better that made me, but it seems to go a long way. Getting bullied seemed to too, but that's not suggestable or ok on purpose? Or is it?, if it's the only way to feel some things? I didn't consider if it was ok til now, i objected like 'wouldn't wish on anyone', and particular results aren't guaranteed, but with the stakes of saving lives for the dependent people, is for example going to stay in homeless shelters, ethical? In some areas where there aren't waitlists, so a spot wouldn't be taken?

What can abusers do if therapists and resources are collaborating with their abuse and do abuse? The starting point that therapists require or are comfortable with, is dismissive of how abusers are being. When abuse is persistent because rarely conscious, there can seem not much therapy left for abusers who admitted everything and who can stay aware long enough, without too much pain, to talk about it and go to sessions? What's realistic? Nothing as long as most of society, or the groups/pros associated with society, are staying indoctrinatory or affirming cruelty is ok? Separating from abusers isn't realistic for victims who are dependents because disabilities, and who shelters don't treat better or for long. This kind of post seemed response inactive on the subreddit, i wondered what kinds of posts are better or similar here?

I fear shake from your private messages, and from me saying anything after, and maybe from the relaxed ish ness here, but idk how to answer or feel comfortable not answering. An answer is, people who can be flexible with developing an understanding of a person's differences and needs and aspirations, and also understand widespread disconnection/isolation means nowhere-to-turn problem

That's some of my questions, thanks, yes

Yes. The discussion helps, but feels teasing, like awareness is reached, bad things are comforting explained, and then it's like emotional blue balls maybe. That's a bad metaphor, but i mean help feels almost there, or the closest you can get without getting into the unpredictable weeds of individuals, but then given up on as a therapisty reaction, like it's not possible or tryable, or just somehow another ballgame than some ways of standing up to therapists? Idk, I wonder what more is to it, that isn't of-coursey/yes-but-not-the-barrier. if people understanding therapy culture wrongs seem defensive, who would help? Everyone being mostly unhelped in the most relieving ways, sounds like a not making sense world

I mean can people here support each other closer than forum discussion, for example with short or long term needs? How does this forum compare to others?