our argument during gerlack troubles

his depth of feelings

• is it okay for me to question the depth of feelings towards me whilst alive
• was dad sentimental

where we differed

• dads time was more important than anyone elses… a certain kind of “selfishness” which maybe i need to explore for myself
• dads need to project strength is certainly not something i have leaned into but seems integral to who dad was

our argument during gerlack troubles

• there was still a relationship there to be had and it didn’t cross my mind

• subsequent to the event i would refer to him as deceitful and manipulative

• james seems to suggest that i was high up on his list of things to sort out… but was that speculating

• His pain at the estrangement might not be evidence that you got it wrong. It might just be evidence that he felt something he didn’t know how to act on until there was no time left.

Some Analysis

A striking combination to hold in someone: someone whose outward personality is strong, dominant and hard to push around. But underneath hypersensitive to rejection and humiliation in a way kept completely hidden.

These two things often go together: a forceful exterior is built to ensure no-one gets close enough to land a blow that hurts.

Reaching out to me again might therefore have been perceived as risking being rejected again.

He might have been waiting for me to come first because reaching out again and being refused might’ve been unbearable… could this actually be true… i find it hard to fathom that it could be… and feel there was likely more indifference.

there certainly was indifference on my part.

i think i wanted to see humility and that was not going to come.

and that may play into my stubborness… wanting someone to concede, come back smaller, and admit i was right

stubborness can be fine aimed at work but difficult aimed at relationships.

so i think he couldnt compromise his position with mine to accept fault… and this is probably pyschologically speaking could not accept fault

he built himself into something impressive and needed people around him to reflect that back to him without complicating it.

irony is the trait that made me incompatible with him … is one of the best traits that he gave me.

calling someone a user names a pattern of behaviour

dad had an identity of being a provider, a success, a strong man.

a man who gave things to the world and his family.

user inverts that entirely. it says you are taking, not giving.

it says you are not the generous strong man you think you are .

it is not a criticism on one thing, but the whole edifice.

for someone whose pyschological security rested on that edifice, the point wouldnt have landed as a point to consider, it would land as demolition…. so he rejects the point and the person who said it.

but he mustve considered it becuase he came back with sponger

that makes the accusation worse in teh retelling

and that expresses the thing he was most afraid he thought the word meant

he was wounded by the word in a way he couldnt show and it came our sideways as a more extreme version as a way of enlisting sympathy

so something about me… i perhaps have a capacity to look at myself without protecting the image… whereas he didnt… although if someone called me a liar i would struggle to entertain it.

by sying i was an ungrateful sod meant i knoew there was something owed, something i hadn’t given back.