December 19, 2009
A dichotomy of paradoxical paradigms
“What a bitch…” I muttered to myself as, eating my breakfast, I scanned the content of the email that had arrived in my inbox.
“Try not to have a view that is so dichotomous?…these paradigms are paradoxical?…what?!”. I laughed at the pretentious language my ex-wife had used and called Penny over to have a look. Eva’s unsuccessful efforts to look intelligent and educated took the edge off the usual menacing content and extreme unreasonableness of her message and made it seem ridiculous. How we laughed.
We tried really hard to handle her very carefully, sometimes taking days to write her a letter or email. And it wasn’t as if we had no compassion for her, she was clearly unhappy. Yet freely laughing at her was incredibly liberating and therapeutic right then, given her tendency to abuse us and undermine our relationship with Sam.
I’m sorry to hear your narrative of the events.
It is your interpretations of the events that you: 1.“can’t trust you to give me reliable information” and 2.“that you don’t care whether our plans are spoiled or not.” It is not surprising that you feel upset. Try not to take it so personally or have a view that is so dichotomous. Maybe in the future you could tell me what you are intending and inform me that it is important to get the dates.
I would like to point out that you are not the only person that is accommodating to a change in arrangements and there is no evidence of your second statement bar your misinterpretation.
Also, you and your wife pay a tiny amount of money toward Sam and I continue to stay in this expensive country which benefits you and your relationship with Sam and not me. Based on this we will not hesitate to move to another country as soon as we can and since you don’t help pay towards boarding school and it is apparently a lifestyle choice for me to work (according to you) I will take Sam with me.
You see Liam, I too have my views of your and your wife’s behaviour. I also have opinions about who behaves like a Dad to Sam.
I tolerate your relationship with Sam for his sake but if he drops you again in the future I will not help to repair your relationship as I have tried in the past only to receive correspondence that is contrived and distorted in a similar vein to this one.
Your beliefs and dramas about being hurt in these paradigms are paradoxical.
Almost ten years had passed since we divorced. All hope that she would settle down and genuinely cooperate had faded. Eight years of training to be counsellor did not seem to have significantly enhanced her self-awareness, although she had learned some big new words. Perhaps she could learn what they meant.
Perhaps most ironic of all was her reference to a time when Sam had struggled to accept Penny in his life (as so many children struggle to accept step-parents). Instead of supporting us or working with us to form a united front on parenting, she had upheld his perceptions of unfair treatment at face-value rather than challenging them, and had thus amplified and reinforced them, leaving Sam alienated from both Penny and me. Eva then ambushed us with a sort of ‘kangaroo court’ where we were made to answer to such alleged crimes as ‘insisting that he eats his vegetables’. In spite of our polite criticism of her behaviour then, she still apparently believed that she had helped us. (More about that another time.)
Well, one thing more ironic or hypocritical perhaps would be her reference to the reasonable and polite email I sent her as ‘drama’ – given her reaction.
Unreasonable Behaviour 