The scale you are talking about should be available to use in a progressive manner to any issues you feel are important boundaries.
I made it up. Is there a more official or better scale? (I did see somewhere that you did some boundary workshop... .maybe you know off the top of your head?)
In the examples you describe they all fall under abuse. Your boundary is I wont be exposed to abuse. That is one boundary. The application of consequencies increases to maintain your right not to be exposed to it. It is still the one boundary. Disengage>walk away> call help/intervention options are all available as necessary.
Ahhh! Ok, I see your point! Thanks. The boundary is not the enforcer to the boundary... .it is the line in the sand that you communicate by voice or action/consequence.
The danger is thinking that your response is capped simply because he is "only cursing". The steps are not always that clearly demarked, and it should be based on how you are feeling. Danger= fear for yours, or his, safety, this can happen while still at cursing stage. As your level of discomfort rises the more you strengthen you actions.
I see your point re cursing. "Only cursing" is a minimizing statement. However, cursing does not bother me. Berating, does bother me... .as the purpose is to minimize me somehow.
I don't think it should be based on feelings always. There needs to be an exception to this. Especially as persons are exposed to abusive situations, they can redefine the term abuse to serve several purposes. They can rationalize that they were not feeling scared, therefore not abused. My ex raged at me, screaming off the top of his lungs berating me... .appearing impulsive and as though one tiny grain of sand extra would cause an A bomb. I sat, unmoved by his display. I literally felt no fear. I WAS being treated with abusive behavior. So when an abused person keeps moving the benchmark farther and farther back on the definition of abuse... .maybe there is another way to think of this?
A separate boundary may be I won't have my privacy invaded, which could encompass checking you phone/email etc. with a whole range of sliding enforcement too eg changing passwords> locking computer away> refusing to share a bed with someone who treats you with disrespect> whatever it takes to stop your exposure to this behavior.
This is why you have to be certain as to what needs a boundary as you need to keep upping the enforcement (all your proposed responses should be available to you) so the wall is always too high to climb over no matter how hard they try, for if they can escalate their way over the top it sets a precedents that boundaries are merely just obstacles to be surmounted.
This makes sense. Thank you for explaining this all! It sounds like I still have so much to learn.
So then what is a good and helpful approach for Max to think of things in his desire to sort out his boundary choices?
