Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
A podcast at the intersection of psychology and culture that intimately explores the human experience and critiques the counseling profession. Your host, Stephanie Winn, distills wisdom gained from her practice as a family therapist and coach while pivoting towards questions of how to apply a practical understanding of psychology to the novel dilemmas of the 21st century, from political polarization to medical malpractice.
What does ethical mental health care look like in a normless age, as our moral compasses spin in search of true north? How can therapists treat patients under pressure to affirm everything from the notion of "gender identity" to assisted suicide?
Primarily a long-form interview podcast, Stephanie invites unorthodox, free-thinking guests from many walks of life, including counselors, social workers, medical professionals, writers, researchers, and people with unique lived experience, such as detransitioners.
Curious about many things, Stephanie’s interdisciplinary psychological lens investigates challenging social issues and inspires transformation in the self, relationships, and society. She is known for bringing calm warmth to painful subjects, and astute perceptiveness to ethically complex issues. Pick up a torch to illuminate the dark night and join us on this journey through the inner wilderness.
You Must Be Some Kind of Therapist ranks in the top 1% globally according to ListenNotes. New episodes are released every Monday. Three and a half years after the show's inception in May of 2022, Stephanie became a Christian, representing the crystallization of moral, spiritual, and existential views she had been openly grappling with along with her audience and guests. Newer episodes (#188 forward) may sometimes reflect a Christian understanding, interwoven with and applied to the same issues the podcast has always addressed. The podcast remains diverse and continues to feature guests from all viewpoints.
[00:00:00] Noelle: We all need to have a healthy, functioning immune system that can identify and expel things that are threatening. But what I think is happening with the phenomenon of no contact driven by politics and ideology, it's more like an autoimmune disorder wherein we no longer can distinguish between what is [00:00:15] dangerous from what is merely difficult.
And so we wind up kind of attacking ourselves and our flesh and blood and the things that we actually need that are really vital for our flourishing and survival.
[00:00:24] Announcer: You must be some kind of therapist[00:00:30]
[00:00:30] Stephanie: Today I have the pleasure of welcoming to the podcast Noelle Mering. She is a fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and the author of the recent book, No Contact: How a Seductive Ideology Broke Families and Friendships, and How We Can Repair [00:00:45] Them. She has also written Awake, Not Woke, and co-authored the Theology of Home book series.
Noelle's work focuses on family, culture, and the forces shaping our relationships. Noelle, so great to have you here. Welcome to the podcast.
[00:00:59] Noelle: I'm delighted to [00:01:00] be here with you. Thanks for having me.
[00:01:02] Stephanie: I think the title of your book is very timely and will probably, sadly, unfortunately resonate with a lot of our listeners.
So let's start off with how or what [00:01:15] inspired you to write a book called No Contact.
[00:01:18] Noelle: Yeah. Well, I'd been going around the country. I wrote, uh, Awake, Not Woke in 2020. So the last five years I've been going around the country talking to people about that, and I just started noticing at Q&A increasingly, there'd always [00:01:30] be at least one person who would stand up and just be super heartbroken and wanna talk about an adult child who maybe had gotten really woke and if they were religious, oftentimes had left the faith or, um, had a really strained relationship with them.
They found that they could no, no longer kind of [00:01:45] have normal conversations or navigate conversations well, and sometimes even, um, they've been entirely fractured in their relationship. And so I just started noticing this was happening more, more often, um, driven by politics and ideology. And so initially I was just gonna write about [00:02:00] a book called The Politics of Estrangement, you know, what happens when we are estranged from each other over ideological differences.
And then, um, you know, the rise of no contact, that phrase started go- all of a sudden was kind of everywhere as I was starting to write it. So, um, it seemed like a cleaner [00:02:15] and s- uh, simpler, more compelling title. Um, so and I think I've always just been interested in how to navigate well, good relationships despite deep disagreements.
I've always had those relationships, both friendships and family, and ideas are really [00:02:30] important to me. You know, what I believe in, I tend to believe in strongly and want to kind of have-- I like debate, I like to argue, but then I also don't want to alienate anyone and so I like to have good, strong relationships.
And so th- I think that intersection is really important to me, and so it sort of a- was a natural [00:02:45] fit for what I was already doing anyway.
[00:02:47] Stephanie: I remember like 10 years ago in therapy working with people with all manner of, you know, abuse and neglect in their backgrounds, making decisions as to how much contact [00:03:00] to have with an abusive or a neglectful family member, and I don't think I could have ever imagined back then how language would be redefined so dramatically, right?
How things would be recontextualized. So maybe [00:03:15] let's start off with sort of the devil's advocate position because when, when I first heard the phrase no contact, um, it was in the context of, you know, someone making a very difficult decision [00:03:30] to not speak to someone after a lot of history. Um, in your research, did you encounter some of those edge cases?
[00:03:41] Noelle: Yeah. Um, so I, I'm trying to make it very [00:03:45] clear because understandably, people who have had to go no contact for important and necessary reasons don't want to sort of be, it to be projected upon them that they are pulled into some sort of trend or phenomenon or something that, um, [00:04:00] isn't the case. And so a couple things I, I wanna say about that.
One is that I think it's actually the no contact movement, the people who are proponents of going no contact more casually than I think is warranted. They oftentimes tend to conflate serious reasons [00:04:15] with what I would think are unnecessary reasons. So for example, Cosmopolitan had an article about no contact, and this is very common.
It's not just in this article. But they'll talk about someone going no contact over an abusive father, and then in the second paragraph, someone else went no contact [00:04:30] because their parents were conservative and Christian, you know? And those are very different experiences and very different reasons and justifications.
And I think in not highlighting there's, that there is some sort of s- m- that those are on a totally different spectrum, um, you're sort of conflating [00:04:45] the justifications. You know, the reader comes away with the impression that, you know, these are all sort- sorts of parts of abuse that we can just kind of, um, and once we see them, then we can make a courageous and liberatory act to go no contact.
So I think int- you know, it actually [00:05:00] gives more gravity to the people who have had to go no contact to say, "No, these are not the same, and your reason is very serious." And I think the, the lack of doing that is actually, um, giving less credence to those serious reasons and sort of catastrophizing the people's [00:05:15] situations that were not as serious.
So, uh, um, I think making those distin- these distinctions are important. So one of the ways I think that it, um, can, can... There's an analogy that I make that I think can help clarify. One is that it's sort of like an immune system, that we all need to have a healthy, [00:05:30] functioning immune system that can identify and expel things that are threatening.
But what I think is happening with the phenomenon of no contact driven by politics and ideology, it's more like an autoimmune disorder wherein we no longer can distinguish between what is dangerous from what is merely [00:05:45] difficult. And so we wind up kind of attacking ourselves and our flesh and blood and the things that we actually need that are really vital for our flourishing and survival.
Um, so I don't know if that helps, but yeah, I do think it's important to kind of c- clear the throat and, you know, make those distinctions 'cause I have, I know [00:06:00] people in my life who have had to go no contact, and I think for very grave reasons, and so I would never want to kind of lump them in with something else.
[00:06:07] Stephanie: I love the autoimmune disorder analogy. I think it fits a lot of what we see in culture. And you compared two different [00:06:15] categories, so a parent who was abusive, and by that we mean, you know, things that are objectively definable, such as physical abuse, um- Uh, you know, violent fits of alcoholic rage that some people [00:06:30] grew up with or neglect of their most basic needs.
Um, you know, when you're saying that it, it actually gives more weight to the things that we should be taking seriously to make this distinction, and you said that that has [00:06:45] been conflated with someone having religious or political differences with their family. But it seems like maybe there's an ideological component to equivocating the two.
In other words, there's a belief system that [00:07:00] if someone's parents are, like you said, conservative and Christian, that that equates to violence. Can you walk us through that ideological component of how people sort of brainwash themselves into [00:07:15] equating things like severe physical, tangible abuse and neglect with ideological differences?
[00:07:23] Noelle: Yeah. Brilliant question. Um, there's so many layers there, but, you know, I think w- maybe, like, the umbrella w- way we can look at [00:07:30] it is through what I'm sure you're very familiar with, but Bowen family systems, high differentiation versus low differentiation. And maybe your audience knows that well, so I don't wanna bu- b- uh, um, go to, la- labor it if it's, uh, well-known.
But, um, it, basically the [00:07:45] rundown is I think progressivism leads people or induces in us a low differentiation mindset, where we are taught that the things that somebody else believes that are different from what we might believe are actually really threatening and, or we're self-censorious, so we don't feel that we have the confidence to kind of say [00:08:00] what we believe in when it's warranted to and, and when we know that we might be in a room or in company with people who might disagree So we're not able to, in a healthy way, dis- differentiate ourselves and remain who we are, but still be in unity with other people.
So I think what [00:08:15] that does is it collapses unity into sort of a false contrivance of unity, which is uniformity. So we think that we, in order to have any sort of unity, we have to have sort of social conformity or social uniformity. Um, and I think, you know, it's in some ways a reflection [00:08:30] of a lack of a deeper principle of unity that kind of comes with a transcendent maybe understanding or perspective on the world.
And so I think progressivism, insofar as, well, one, it tends to not acknowledge the pr- the transcendent. It tends to be a utopian ideology, [00:08:45] so the idea being that we can, through technocracy and experts and social engineering and re-engineering, we can kind of arrive at a more perfect and, um, uh, social state, and that the people who are not on board with the program [00:09:00] are not people to be persuaded, but they're actually obstacles to the collective flourishing.
And so they need to either be, you know, converted or concluded in some way. You know, they, they have to... They are an object- obstacle to, to, um, society's [00:09:15] happiness. And so, um, I think it te- leads people into a lot of coercion. You can see it certainly in, like, gender ideology. So in gender ideology, somebody will say, "You know, if I'm mispronouned or deadnamed, then that's equivalent to a genocide.
You're eradicating my existence." And so [00:09:30] that leads somebody into very understandably, uh, highly anx- anxious, uh, um, perspective on the world. Because the danger in your life is not just through someone breaking into your home, it's from somebody, you know, states away or even the, across the globe who has access to you [00:09:45] on digital media and can, you know, mispronoun or deadname you.
So I think that that's something that's really common. Another thing that happens is that, and I think pundits have really played into this, so there will be, I think it's ubiquitous now in the lead-in to Thanksgiving most years, where pundits will [00:10:00] say, you know, "Do you have to go home to those relatives that voted differently than you do?
You shouldn't have to subject yourself to that," you know? There's countless examples of this that I profile in the book. Um, you know, then there were various administrations where they would have even [00:10:15] campaigns before Thanksgiving dinner, "Here's how, here are the, the Biden administration talking points," or, "Here's how to talk about abortion," or something, you know, pass the potatoes.
And I think the idea was that, you know, we're going to leverage family division at, you know, a t- a moment where this is, where [00:10:30] the point is unity. Of course, people have always fought around the Thanksgiving table. I'm not saying that that's new. But I think that there's become a more institutional leveraging of creating a, using that wedge and exploiting it for the sake of a political end.
And I [00:10:45] think one of the ideological things that that reflects is that we have somehow let our political tribe cannibalize our familial tribe. So insofar as we've, um, you know, one of the big ideological drivers here is the family's a social construct, that [00:11:00] it's not a pre-political institution. Um, it sort of was invented by people for the sake of perpetuating power dynamics, that the family is inherently nested in power differentials.
And so it's perpetuating things are, that, that are keeping society in a [00:11:15] point of inequality And so the idea is if it's a social construct, well, then we could deconstruct it, and then we can re-perform family in different ways. So this is where you see, like, people talking about chosen family, um, that, you know, there's something beautiful and [00:11:30] innocuous about making friendships like family.
But I'm talking about something more radical. It- chosen family ideology is reflected in the idea that we can deconstruct the family as we've known it to be, and construct it, and that's emanating out of our autonomy. So it's not [00:11:45] the people who are given to me through life or through God or through providence or what have you, it's the people that I choose.
Who I choose is a more preferential relationship than the person who's just been given to me through my sibling, my sibling or my parent or a cousin or what have you. There's no special [00:12:00] obligation there. In fact, those relationships tend to present more constraints on your, your liberty. And so they're actually in some ways less preferential, and the chosen families are more courageous.
So I think that leads to an attenuation of our understanding of familial obligation. And then in that [00:12:15] attenuation, I think, you know, the human person needs to feel like they belong. They need, they want to feel like they have a shared history or shared, shared ties or what have you. And so I think our politics gets really intensified.
Um, and then when there's political disagreement within the [00:12:30] family, your gr- the greater claim on person- a person's loyalty and belonging is going to be the political one once you've successfully replaced that familial tribe, usurped it through the political tribe. And I think that's what we're seeing.
It's understandable in some ways. I think politics are, you know, there's [00:12:45] 24/7 media, cable news. We've got our phones and we've got, you know, doom scrolling. You know, anyone from any pr- perspective on politics can get obsessed with politics and can get sort of addicted to the outrage, you know, that there's some sort of pleasure in feeling [00:13:00] outraged, um, at half the country.
But that's difficult to metabolize. It's really difficult to, you know, sit with a diffused kind of generalized outrage of 50 million people. But if there's some, your annoying uncle that you can target it towards, then that's a lot easier. Now I've got someone [00:13:15] I can take this out on. And I think that's really given us an unhealthy place, um, and weakened our relationships really deeply, all those elements.
[00:13:23] Stephanie: Wow, you said a lot.
[00:13:25] Noelle: Yeah.
[00:13:26] Stephanie: That was great. I, I was taking notes on, uh, so many good points [00:13:30] you were making that I wanted to circle back to. Um, first of all, I love that you led with, uh, Bowen family systems and the concept of diff- differentiation, and this is why I teach about differentiation in my course for parents, my course for parents of trans-identified youth.
Um, [00:13:45] and, you know, I think we could look at how you've explained the concept of differentiation in, from a couple of angles. So the, the emotional differentiation between family members in a household or between households, but be- [00:14:00] between people, right? Lack of that, we could call that enmeshment, um, and that, that can result in, you know, things like Um, projection, entitlement, boundary issues.
Um, and then we can look at sort of the lack of [00:14:15] cognitive differentiation in the ideological stuff that you were talking about, and, and, um, I would call that a conflation, um, when, when we lack cognitive differentiation between two different things. And that can lead to, like you were saying, paranoid [00:14:30] ways of thinking.
So for example, you, you gave the m- one of the more extreme examples, which we see with gender ideology, the idea that you are trying to eradicate my existence, right? So I would say there's a lack of differentiation in [00:14:45] that statement. Um, and if we really try on that lens, though, and this is something I do in my parent coaching, trying on that lens, what happens if we look at the world that way?
Well, if you truly believe that this is the definition of who you [00:15:00] are, uh, this is the definition of what it is to respect your existence, and if someone doesn't see the same way, then they want you gone, they want you dead, they want you to not exist, right? Like i- if you truly believe that stuff, then the feelings that flow from [00:15:15] that are warranted, right?
To, to feel paranoid, to feel afraid for your life, to feel like I have to protect myself from this person, isolate myself from them, take- put as much distance between us as possible. I can't afford to be around [00:15:30] someone who wants me dead. Um, I mean, all of that flows from these ideological pre- presuppositions, but the problem is the ideological presuppositions, like you're saying, they, they lack that differentiation.
They, um, they conflate very different things, right? Not [00:15:45] believing that it's possible for humans to change sex or not believing that a man can be a woman. Um, you know, I think you and I would say that that is not denying someone's existence, right? We see the person, um, and, and we value the person, right? We [00:16:00] just can't en- engage in that same belief system.
Um, but So I, I, part of me wants to kind of explore that thread and, and what further insights you can share about this ideological component. But [00:16:15] then you went on to say so many other beautiful things about, you know, family as a social construct and the concept of chosen family. Because from reading your Substack, I got the impression that you've seen some, some really painful ways that this has backfired on people.
So I'm [00:16:30] also thinking kind of ahead to the future, right? If we have this generation of young people all kind of puffed up on ideology, believing that they're these righteous, entitled victims, believing that they're truly being harmed by people like you and me and, you know, by [00:16:45] their parents who might share our views.
Um, thinking down the line, right? What happens when these people enter their 30s and 40s and the real world hits and, and the chosen family isn't working out the way that they had hoped it would? [00:17:00] I don't know if either of those threads is more interesting for you to explore.
[00:17:03] Noelle: Yeah, no. They're both, um, yeah, I think they're both important.
So I'll start with the second one, which is that, you know, oftentimes it doesn't work out well, the chosen family model, because it's, you know, it's sort of hoist on its own [00:17:15] petard, that if you are grounding your, uh, relationship in choice, then you can just as easily be unchosen. And so, so one man I profile, he, he, um, he, he was really on the cutting edge of this.
He did it years and years ago. And he's looking back now and he's saying, "You know, it worked out [00:17:30] really well when I was young, fun, handsome, had some money. Um, but now I'm getting older, I'm having some health issues or financial issues, you know, I'm not as fun as I used to be, and I sort of need some people who are obligated to me."
Um, other people I [00:17:45] profile in the book, they'll say things like, "You know, I thought my chosen family was really gonna be there for me." And then it turns out, you know, some of them went off and started families of their own, and she just became sort of an ancillary character in their lives, whereas for her, they were everything to her And so [00:18:00] she's, you know, you know, still looking at through kind of, sort of this lens of power.
And so she's like, "There's a power, massive power asymmetry here that they, you know, you ch- you chose them, but they don't need to necessarily ch- choose you. In fact, they never need to choose at all," you know, it's the way she puts it. But, um, [00:18:15] and so, you know, what winds up becoming sort of a repeated source of abandonment ongoing throughout their lives is just trying to land on what they didn't have or either didn't have or rejected, um, initially, or maybe it was an imperfect family that then, um, [00:18:30] they catastrophized.
Um, so but then the, regarding the differential, uh, differentiation, yeah, I think the interesting thing is that oftentimes, like you said, there's different types of differentiation, emotional and then the, the ideological. But the- [00:18:45] oftentimes I think there is some element where there can be a real need to differentiate that is proper, and the adult child isn't...
They're doing it in sort of maybe a clumsy or sometimes even kind of cruel way, but they are kind of seeking something important. [00:19:00] Um, and because of that, I think, you know, it's oftentimes important for parents to... And you, you, you count. You're a parenting coach, so you pro- you know far more about this than maybe I do.
But, um, to not express sort of a neediness in the advent of that rejection, [00:19:15] that they're not either trying to exert control or trying to show how upset they are just constantly like, "I was up all night crying," or you know, that, that's just giving them more reason to kind of want to differentiate, you know?
That, um, and so yeah. So that I think is an interesting dynamic [00:19:30] too. But the, it, the, the tricky thing about it is it really is there's oftentimes a tangle of experiences happening here. I interviewed so many families, and there was such a variation between, you know, really kind of healthy, normal families and maybe a kid got kind of pulled into a wrong crowd or [00:19:45] had some sort of core wound that they were trying to address through ideology, then they got really militant.
But then there's also I think sometimes where people are sort of already kind of, um, emotionally unstable, and then politics gives them something to kind of present that [00:20:00] instability through. Um, so it, it's so many, there's so many dynamics happening throughout it. But, um, yeah, I guess those are my first thoughts about chosen family and differentiation in response to what you're saying.
[00:20:10] Stephanie: And on that latter note, that's why part of my framework is that we have [00:20:15] to look at the Cluster B personality traits- Yeah ... that are part of the social contagion. Not to say any given individual does or does not have a particular Cluster B diagnosis, but that the social contagion of this woke ideology, it, it [00:20:30] contains Sort of cluster B ways of thinking and, and perpetuates them, right?
With that, the poor boundaries, the enmeshment, the emotional instability, the entitlement, the narcissism. But you bring up a good point that there [00:20:45] is a real need that many people are trying to express through this thing that ultimately, in some cases, sadly, ends up in no contact. And the parent coaching work I do is mostly with parents who aren't estranged, but who do [00:21:00] have reason to fear that estrangement could be coming.
Because as you know, gender ideology is very radical, right? It, it teaches these very extreme ways of looking at things. And so a lot of families are [00:21:15] understandably worried that they're on that trajectory. Usually, if they come to me for coaching, um, any threat of estrangement hasn't gone very far. There's usually still, um, a dependency there.
What, what you made me think of when you talked about [00:21:30] people, uh, you know, getting older and not feeling so, uh, so sexy anymore is, um, that really there's this very narrow window in our young life, if we play our cards right, where we're actually truly independent. [00:21:45] And, and gender ideology chips away at that too, right?
Like, like, it doesn't actually help people grow up and individuate and become independent and financially successful. It certainly doesn't help them be healthy enough to stand on their own two feet. So there's only a [00:22:00] small window to begin with, and young people who haven't yet achieved that independence They have fragile egos for that reason, because they, they don't feel a sense of security in their autonomy.
And I think you're right to point out that [00:22:15] there are common mistakes parents can make that aren't helping, um, where the, you know, maybe the parent- parental neediness or their kind of emotional spillover, or their desire to be their kid's best friend, or their martyr complex, whatever it is, right, [00:22:30] can kind of get in the way.
And that's where I think it's just important to kind of constantly be upgrading your, um, read on where your kid's at and what they need from you, because they grow up so quickly, right? And, and this is a [00:22:45] conversation I'm having with parents in their 40s, 50s, and 60s all the time, just reminding them that, like, one year in our time doesn't feel very long to them.
They feel like a whole different person in a year. So, you know, if you're acting out of habit by [00:23:00] referring to your kid's dependency on you in a way that wouldn't have triggered any resistance a year ago, well, now it's triggering this intense resistance because of that drive to individuate that's showing up so intensely at this age.
So it's not [00:23:15] a, you know, a criticism of the parenting necessarily so much as just a reminder that they're growing so quickly, right? And especially during those teenage years, where I do a lot of coaching i- ideally between 13 and 17. I do a lot of coaching [00:23:30] after that as well, um, but if I can help parents while their kids are still in their home, um, while they're kind of early in the trans social contagion process, I like to Um, and that's, that's just the parental differentiation process, kind of [00:23:45] refining your skills, refining your language for, you know, maybe treating something as a choice that your kid gets to make independently rather than weighing in if, if your opinion isn't needed in that small decision or things like this.
But what's really sad to me is that so [00:24:00] many of these kind of minor missteps, you know, speaking in an undifferentiated way when you could speak in a slightly more differentiated way, they come at such a high, high cost if we live in a culture where going no contact is so normalized. [00:24:15] And that's where it puts parents in a double bind, right?
Where it's like, I wanna be able to work on these things. I, I'm willing to give you more freedom in age-appropriate ways or to adjust how I communicate about certain things, but if I'm living in fear that you're gonna cut me off, [00:24:30] then the-- that's so anxiety-provoking that, uh, I don't feel like I can relax enough to, like, learn or to try new things or to see if we can get this right together.
[00:24:43] Noelle: Yeah, there's sort of a [00:24:45] mercilessness to it, you know, that, uh, you can recognize it. I think, you know, one of the things I think cultural revolutions do is that it turns each member of the family into his or her opposite. So men tend to become sort of weak, effeminate, you know, not w- not as, um, not willing to endure [00:25:00] the art- things that are arduous for the sake of the good.
I think that's what licentiousness does to men. Um, it makes women, tends to make women harder because I think the The woman has a nature that's too valuable and vulnerable to endure sort of the traumas of sexual, the sexual [00:25:15] revolution, and so like a callus, they kinda create a hard shell around themselves.
But I think what it does to kids is it makes them like the parent, but not a good parent, an authoritarian parent . You know? So you can imagine, like, a kid rai- being raised, um, by a parent where they had to st- walk on eggshells, where [00:25:30] they felt like they could get kicked out of their lives at any minute.
And, you know, obviously p- kids are more vulnerable than parents, so this is not a perfect analys- analogy. But, um, I do think you can see immediately that that's an authoritarian relationship. That's not a healthy relationship. And similarly, parents whose, who feel like they're under [00:25:45] constantly, like, the threat of do- the sword of Damocles, that they might come down on them and they might be go- be cut off, that's sort of an emotional blackmail that's tried to kind of, um, sort of inher- inherently coercive.
Um, and I think, you know, there's an interestingly, um, there's [00:26:00] something ex- ex- parents, I think for a transgender adult, young adults or teens, the parent is always gonna be an existential threat to an identity that just won't die. You know, because I have, we have, as parents, we have, I have a canon of memory of my kids that they don't have [00:26:15] for themselves.
I remember them when they were newborns, when they were one, when they were two. They don't remember that. And so there's a, your, their identity is, like, deeply ingrained in the parent. And in fact, for moms, even physically. You know, the, the, the cell, at a cellular level, the mother kinda carries the cells of her, [00:26:30] some, in some aspect of the cells of her children.
Um, and so, you know, obviously you can take that and run with it in a way that's not healthy. But it, but the idea being that there is some way in which it's really hard, you know that your parents know who you are. And the transgender identity [00:26:45] is an unstable identity because you're trying to convince yourself of something that at some point you always have a cognitive dissonance that it's not true.
And so the most offensive thing you can say to someone is the truth that they're trying to conceal to themselves and the truth they're trying to squash down. And [00:27:00] so I think that's in part why it tends to be so merciless, is 'cause they're desperately trying to clamp down on that truth that they can't help but kind of be aware of on some level.
And so the parent will always be a reminder that this is not really fully true. And even very progressive parents that I [00:27:15] interviewed that had ch- you know, they w- were affirming Um, they found that they were still always under threat, and it, they, it's almost like they can't do enough. You know, it's this one, uh, c- uh, set of parents, they, at first they said they were very affirming of it [00:27:30] in general, but then when th- they got ha- these hesitations about the physical changes and were nervous and not moral hesitations, but physical hesitations.
And so they said, "You know, we're not gonna pay for it." But then the, they just kept getting kind of emotionally blackmailed that, "You don't [00:27:45] really care about me." So then they wound up paying for it. In other words, they c- the goalposts kept moving further and further in order for them to maintain that relationship, and I think insofar as they were keeping that as their highest priority, they were always going to be k- kind of vulnerable to that.[00:28:00]
Um, and so, you know, sometimes I'll say, you know, you, you have to will the good of the other, even if it's not going, even if it's at the expense of your relationship with the other, right? That that has to be a higher goal, 'cause that's really the demand of love. To love is to will the [00:28:15] good of the other.
It's not to affirm anything that they think. It's to will their actual good. Um, so I think parents are always kind of threatened by gender ideology in that way, you know, that, um, we represent something that is an existential threat to a, a adult [00:28:30] child or teen who's going through this. Um- Yeah, so, uh, it's interesting.
I mean, there's even one woman I interviewed who's a gender researcher. She, she talked to, to parents who, they would get a-- They said that their adult or their [00:28:45] child would get a chip, you know, almost like an al- Alcoholics Anonymous, that they would get some sort of, "This is how long you've maintained your estrangement," or, "You've gone no contact for one month."
You haven't, you haven't backslid, you know, in another way, uh, for two months now. Um, and I think, you know, part of what is [00:29:00] sort of keeps them reinforcing their own narrative is that, um, you know, I think when you're creating a found tribe, a new tribe, I f- I find that there's often sort of a almost a ceremonial kind of sharing of their stories of [00:29:15] trauma, kind of like how evangelicals share their testimony.
You know, "Here's how I can bond with you. This is what God's done in my life." And I think in a lot of the gender ideology groups, they tend to have, say, you know, they have something similar, but instead of, "Here's how God's, what God's done in [00:29:30] my life," it's like, "Here's how the history has harmed me," or, "Here's how normalcy in America has harmed me," or, "Here's how my parents have traumatized me."
And so it creates this real incentive to sort of bond with this new re- these new relationships, cement those loyalties through kind of [00:29:45] finding and identifying toxicity in your past, and I think the parents are always gonna be a natural place to put that or project that. Um, and there's also, simultaneously, I think just culturally, we have given a currency to the victim, you know, that there's sort of an epistemic [00:30:00] authority that you have if you claim a history of trauma or if you c- claim a victim or grievance identity.
So we're incentivizing these things at the same time that we're, um, kind of cr- attenuating, you know, those relationships that we need. And so I think [00:30:15] that combination leads to parents who are very vulnerable, particularly when it comes to gender stuff.
[00:30:19] Stephanie: So you made a good point about the nature of the beast of gender ideology being so insatiable, always upping the ante.
You've spoken with parents who were maybe further [00:30:30] along in affirming the identity than the sort of parents that come to me for coaching, who are usually a lot more skeptical. But I find that no matter where a parent is in the process, no matter how conservative or liberal they've been on the [00:30:45] issue, um, no matter how permissive or restrictive they've been with social or medical transition steps, that that same dynamic that you described is always in play.
The kid is always pushing for the next step. And it's one reason that when I work with [00:31:00] parents who are struggling with setting boundaries, we talk about sort of the, the trap, right? 'Cause the, the temptation is to give in on this one thing to keep the peace or improve the relationship. And, you know, there's a lot of emphasis in parent circles on the [00:31:15] relationship, and I think that's important, but it also gets kind of misunderstood by people who tend to be, you know, conflict-avoidant, people-pleasing types, right?
The idea that to keep the relationship necessarily means to keep the peace or to always give the other person what they [00:31:30] want. And once you r- recognize this pattern of insatiability, of constantly upping the ante, um, then that, that changes the calculus, and I think it's very much kind of embedded in the, the Cluster B dynamics at, uh, that are part of [00:31:45] the ideology.
[00:31:46] Noelle: Yeah, I think that's right. I mean, uh, you know, uh, reading queer theory, you really get the sense... Insatiable is such a good word. I've used that too, just in the nature, like I think of sin as being the, an, uh, having an insatiable nature. Why? Because... And I think transgressive. [00:32:00] Once you lionize transgress- transgression as being something liberatory, you create an insatiability.
Why? Because, you know, I think part of queer theory is that the normal is oppressive. Just normal society is oppressive, so you have to... Queer, you know, queer theory is distinct, distinct from, you know, just [00:32:15] someone being gay or something. You know, queer theory has got a political, ideological edge to it. And so the way that you sort of invert the power structure of normalcy is to be always tr- um, transgressing.
Transgressive behavior is the way you defeat it. [00:32:30] And so once you elevate transgressive behavior, then, you know, I think most people have the experience of trans- transgression becomes boring. Once it becomes normal, then it's all of a sudden you have to move on to the next thing. And so it creates this sort of constant, uh, as you said, [00:32:45] insatiability, um, that there's a n- like a, you have voraciousness to it, that you have to keep finding ano- the next, um, horizon to, to push beyond.
[00:32:53] Stephanie: You had the patience to read queer theory for this book. I admire you for that. You had
[00:32:59] Noelle: to read what, [00:33:00] two books? I read some of, a lot of it during Awake, Not Woke is when I first started doing some of it. But yeah. And there's plenty I haven't read too, but yeah. It's, um, I just wanted to wrap my mind around what, what it was because there's tends to be, um, in a lot, a lot of times when you, um- [00:33:15] You can look at something from the outside and it seems sort of, there's the language is ambiguous enough that it can seem sort of innocuous.
And then she really, I find you really have to a lot, oftentimes, like engage more deeply into what these writers are saying in order to understand, like, oh, okay. This is, you know, there can be a [00:33:30] Trojan horse aspect where it's like we're gonna do something for the sake of this, and this is how we convince, you know, normie mom and pop and society to kind of embrace this.
But actually it's far more subversive than it seems like at first blush.
[00:33:41] Stephanie: Trojan horse is such a good word to describe it [00:33:45]
[00:33:45] Noelle: So th- that's interesting. So in your experience, you're t- you're dealing with parents who are, um, maybe still, they're, they're oftentimes still in a relationship, I'm hearing, but they're kind of just dabbling into, the kids are stepping a foot into the gender dysphoria or-
[00:33:58] Stephanie: Yeah, so my story in a [00:34:00] nutshell for yourself and anyone who's not familiar with it, is I sort of entered the public discussion forums a- about five years ago with my concerns about, um, wokeness and gender ideology in the counseling [00:34:15] profession.
And, you know, immediately became some sort of pariah, got like mass reported to my licensing board by online activists. And, um, then it, it just became this sort of, there was a snowball effect of [00:34:30] being one of a handful of mental health professionals in the world publicly speaking out about this issue.
And so, um, between all of the attention, both negative and positive, that I got for that, and health problems restricting my, my [00:34:45] energy and availability, I decided to narrow my focus to coaching the parents from around the world with trans-identified youth who are coming to me, um, looking not necessarily for therapy, but just someone to talk to who made sense on [00:35:00] this issue, and there just weren't that many voices.
And so, um, I developed sort of a specialized approach to coaching where I took my whole counseling background and everything I knew about adolescent and developmental psychology, everything I knew about family systems, and started applying it to this [00:35:15] issue. And out of that was born ROGD Repair, which is my self-paced program for parents.
And so my sort of ecosystem of my career at this point looks like I have this weekly podcast where I get to talk to people from a [00:35:30] variety of backgrounds and, um, sometimes it's closer to the subject I spend the rest of the week talking about. Sometimes I'm branching out 'cause I just, I wanna hear what this person has to say on some other topic.
Um, so I have this weekly podcast, but the rest of the time I'm doing coaching of [00:35:45] parents of trans-identified youth. Um, and then ROGD Repair is sort of self-sustaining. I add a new lesson when I have time, but I'm a lot busier than I was when I first built the course a few years ago. Um, and so yeah, this is like the main thing [00:36:00] I do, right?
The m- main thing I do is talk to parents of trans-identified youth, and I would say the youngest kid any of them had is a, I, I'm not gonna say the age, but very, very young. [00:36:15] And, you know, we're dealing in that case Um, in the, in the youngest cases, we're dealing with the parent coming to me not because of anything the child necessarily came up with on their own, but because of other people influencing that child, and the parent needed help with the dynamics around that.
I'm [00:36:30] just gonna put it that way. The oldest, the oldest situations that I've dealt with have been, um, you know, people concerned for a loved one in their 30s. Um, but the average is teens and 20s. So [00:36:45] I do talk to a lot of parents, uh, where the kid is somewhat launched away at college or living on their own, usually somewhat still financially dependent.
Um, although there are times when the kid is completely financially independent and there is [00:37:00] division over this issue, but they haven't gone full, you know, contact. Or I'll have the parent come to me where there is estrangement with the trans-identified kid, but they're worried about another kid. And I've had, um, you know, through this, trans is usually the issue, but there are a [00:37:15] lot of adjacent issues.
So everything that ever connects to a family affected by gender ideology is something that I deal with in my practice.
[00:37:22] Noelle: Yeah. And- No, that's so important. Yeah
[00:37:24] Stephanie: And I wanted to say on that note, Noelle, that I've met families where there [00:37:30] was estrangement or a threat of estrangement Uh, on behalf of, let's say, a sibling that was not trans-identified.
Yep. And they were, you know, thr- the, the ally sibling-
[00:37:44] Noelle: Right ...
[00:37:44] Stephanie: threatening to [00:37:45] cut off the parents as part of their sort of allegiance to the trans-identified sibling.
[00:37:50] Noelle: Yeah, absolutely. No, I find that the allies are sort of, they, they're not paid as much attention to, but that is an enormous driver in, I think, why there's estrangements.
And [00:38:00] one family I covered, they were able to maintain the relationship with the trans-identified child, but the, the sibling as an ally decided to cut them off and which they weren't expecting. But I mean, that's the nature of kind of no contact in general, is that there tend to be cascading effects, that it's rarely that this stops at [00:38:15] this one relationship.
You know, they're siblings or people feel put in the middle, or they have to feel like they have to choose sides, or there's the whole branch of the family tree that now is not gonna know their aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, um, because of the decision of this, at this one [00:38:30] moment. So it, it really does tend to cascade out and down, which is so heartbreaking.
[00:38:35] Stephanie: One part of the issue I wanna understand better from your perspective is the, the trend of this becoming increasingly popular when gender ideology is not part of the picture. Because in [00:38:45] some of those edge cases where it was a sibling or there was some other dynamic at play, um, I have gotten the impression that even when there's no gender ideology necessarily in the picture, um, [00:39:00] that amongst Gen Z, cutting off their parents over really minor differences is increasingly common.
And that's the part that I don't see, 'cause those, those people aren't coming to talk to me unless, unless there's a trans issue. [00:39:15] So, um, what can you say outside of the gender sphere-
[00:39:20] Noelle: Yeah ...
[00:39:20] Stephanie: about the rising prevalence of people going no contact and the sort of cultural trends behind that, the narratives?
Yeah.
[00:39:27] Noelle: I mean, I think there are three main, the most common [00:39:30] three categories I saw were the gender stuff, but then who you voted for. There are a number of, you know, I've interviewed this one father, you know, this story that his daughter was so upset because he voted red, and she said, "I don't wanna hear why you did.
I don't wanna hear a [00:39:45] defensive," right, or get in an argument about it. "I just want you to tell me that you're wrong and that you're gonna do better," basically. Um, so voting, um, sometimes they'll, you know, people will maintain a relationship, but they'll say, "Our relat-," they're, they're sort of effectively say, "Our relationship now is held [00:40:00] hostage to what happens in policy."
So this one man I profiled, he, you know, he's for- he's still in a relationship with his red-supporting relatives, but he's saying, "But if, if something happens, if, you know, abortion gets outlawed in my state or if something, uh, a [00:40:15] gender-affirming carer gets, you know, reduced or something, then I, I'm gonna reconsider this, these relationships."
You know, so now y- the person and the people in the relationship really have no power over, no internal agency or locus of control. Um, the third most common reason, and, you [00:40:30] know, may- this will probably likely be retreating now, but a lot of... I cover several families who go in estranged over COVID stuff. In fact, two whom, um, they-- it was at their wedding, this, the adult son or daughter's wedding, that they drew [00:40:45] a line, um, that everyone had to have the shot.
And, you know, s- one particular case, the c- parents offered to test, to isolate for two weeks, you know, tried to do all the things. And, um, so, you know, obviously, that was a really heightened time for a lot of people, and it [00:41:00] sort of was, um, uh, you know, became kind of a moral litmus test, I think, uh, maybe on both sides or something.
But, um, certainly there was, you know, there were headlines. I mean, Los Angeles Times had a headline during around that, around that time that these cut-offs were happening, which was [00:41:15] 2021, 2022, around then. Um, but, you know, LA Times had an article headlined something to the effect of, "Is it time to start mocking the deaths of the unvaccinated?
It sounds sort of ghoulish, but this might be a way to socially, you know, affect change for the [00:41:30] better." Um, I cover another memoir that a man wrote, and he did an adaptation of it for New York Times, David Litt, and he was talking about how He had become friends with his, um, brother-in-law and how different they were politically, but you know, they enjoyed each other.[00:41:45]
Um, and then he, uh, he, you know, it was during the, the sort of the years after COVID that he thought, "This is a way I... This is a sort of a, a social responsibility. I have to start shaming him. And so if I can, you know, basically if I can use my le- [00:42:00] leverage of my relationship to kind of correct this person and to make them do the right thing, then that's kind of what we have to do."
And he's writing this memoir now with the advent of a couple more years under his belt and seeing like he wound up reconciling with him because he wanted to learn how to surf, and the [00:42:15] brother-in-law, who was conservative, was really good at surfing. And he, the way he describes it's fascinating 'cause he's saying, you know, in the water he was the elite, but like in society basically this guy thought he was the elite.
He worked in, you know, a very prestigious white collar career. His brother was like a mechanic or something, I can't [00:42:30] remember. Um, but the r- the elite status was reversed in the ocean in the world of surfing, and it sort of made him respect him again. And it's a fascinating thing to me about that story in particular.
I think it's, you know, probably replicated in ma- many other s- um, examples of relationships. But that, [00:42:45] that it sort of preys on this kind of dynamic that people are, that they're in groups and out groups, and it's almost like a, a high school girl's lunch table. You know, like who can sit with me that that desire to be on the in group is going to be so compelling that you can correct [00:43:00] people's behavior and deeply held beliefs because they want nothing more than to be in that in group.
Now in some ways I get it because it's very primordial in all of us to want to feel like we have belonging. But I think that, I think that that calculation underestimated how much people, especially over the last six [00:43:15] years, like your, your own journey, were kind of starting to see that their lies were getting too big, you know, in some ways.
You know, gender is a partic- was a particular linchpin for a lot of people in saying like, "Yeah, we're not, I'm not gonna buy this anymore. This doesn't make sense." Um, [00:43:30] and that, that social in group pressure and coercion simply was not enough to get people to keep quiet about what they saw was happening and what was really destructive.
So, um, th- those tend to be the main, the main, um, [00:43:45] drivers that I'm seeing. I mean, uh, really heartbreaking stories, uh, of a father who was left on his death bed because of political differences and disagreements about COVID policy and, you know, just really heartbreaking things. And then A mother, uh, who was shamed, [00:44:00] um, you know, uh, and then cut off f- uh, by an adult son over a vote she'd cast.
And she, you know, these... The thing that was striking to me is that oftentimes these families would say, "I'm not even that political. I don't talk about politics. This has never been a thing in our family. We don't argue about [00:44:15] politics." But all of a sudden, you know, that the, they, you know, there's this kind of hunting out of the heretic, kind of, you know, they would have a family member saying like, "Who, did somebody in, in here, did somebody in my family vote this way?"
You know, then, you know, you need to reckon with that, or I need to reckon with that or [00:44:30] separate myself from you. Um, so those have been very, the very common drivers in the ideologically driven estrangement.
[00:44:36] Stephanie: When you gave the examples of people cutting off family members for voting red, I was thinking again about this issue of [00:44:45] conflation when there's a lack of differentiation, and I'm thinking what is, what is the logical sequence that leads from point A to point B?
'Cause I, I know it's in there somewhere, even if it's not thought through consciously, right? There's... [00:45:00] Because i- if, if you look at some of the hysterical things that far left ideologues have to say, they really do believe that voting red means you're a, a Nazi, right? [00:45:15] That it means that you want Black people dead, or that you, you know, that you, you're genocidal, right?
They, they have these really hysterical, grandiose, hyperbolic things that they believe. [00:45:30] And, and again, part of my job is helping people put on different lenses and see what the world looks like through those lenses. So yes, if it were true, right, if it were true that voting Republican actually meant [00:45:45] that you wanted people dead based on their skin color, or any of these other hysterical beliefs, um, then that might indeed be a reasonable basis for something like going no contact, right?
[00:45:58] Noelle: Yeah.
[00:45:59] Stephanie: But [00:46:00] the, the, the what really gets to me is that there are so many people with these far left ideologies that just take it hook, line, and sinker, and they're so sure, right, that because you voted red, that [00:46:15] means you are hateful, you are violent, you are misogynistic, you are this and that. And they don't stop to question Is it possible that I'm the one getting this wrong, right?
Is that, is that actually what I know about this person's character? [00:46:30] Is there anything else in this person's character in how they've treated me or my loved ones for the past 20 years that I've known them, or whatever it is that, you know, makes me so sure that I've got the correct read on this situation?
Or could I be making some leaps? Could, could [00:46:45] my team be wrong? You know, I remember in 2020, like really the first time coming out of the haze being like, "Wait, what if my team's wrong?" Like, I'm just in this massive game of telephone where people tell me, "These are the bad guys, and you don't listen to them, and they have, [00:47:00] you know, such toxic, destructive ideas."
And like, you know, and I just assumed the whole time that, like someone had done their research, right? And that like these opinions were based on something, and I was just like, oh yeah, 'cause of course the people I get along with, the [00:47:15] people in my proximity are, uh, you know, the, the people I like. So we all agree on who the bad guys are and why they're so bad.
And it just It's, it's absurd and it would be something to laugh at if the, if the consequences weren't so [00:47:30] tragic, right? And, and I think, I think about what's in the way of just stopping to question, "Wait, am I actually sure that, you know, that this decision that this person made or whatever this [00:47:45] affiliation they have really is evidence that they're so hateful," right?
Like, am I actually sure about that or could I be wrong? And I think it's, it's ego, it's sunk cost, it's, you know, we don't wanna feel [00:48:00] humbled and remorseful. We don't wanna face all the things that are in the way of, you know, to like, to use like popular Reddit speak, like the am I the asshole moment- Yeah.
that I think so many people would really... Like society would be better off if we [00:48:15] all just periodically asked ourselves like, "Am I the asshole?"
[00:48:18] Noelle: Right. Right. Well, I think that there's sort of a natural way in which virtue and vice become abstracted through ideology. You know, I mean, it's like that, that line in Brothers Karamazov, that it's [00:48:30] really the more I love mankind the less I...
The more I hate the person in front of me or something. Mm-hmm. I'm paraphrasing it greatly there. But basically that, you know, it's easy to feel like I love the globe. I'm a global citizen. I love everyone. I want everyone to be happy, but then like I freaking can't stand this [00:48:45] person next to me and I can't be kind to them.
Um, that love is particular. You know, you- real love is like you, requires knowledge. You have to know someone really to love them. You can't abstractly love. And I think insofar as we've made virtue and vice abstractions, you know, we [00:49:00] don't have like the habits of character, um, have been so attenuated. And I think, you know, because of things like the elevation of the transgressive and wanting and feeling like any sort of having a sort of a moral understanding of how a human person ought to live seems moralistic [00:49:15] or seems too judgmental, and so you don't wanna be those types of people.
Um, and though then what, where does, where do you relocate those kind of moral impulses? I think we tend to relocate them into more of an abstract way that, well, what do you support? Do you support the right causes? You [00:49:30] know, I remember when, I brought this up at maybe in an interview or two before, but when Harvey Weinstein, you know, when he was revealed to be sort of a predator, one of the first things he said publicly was, "Well, I'm gonna give a million dollars to fight the NRA."
And I thought, gosh, that seems like such a non-sequitur. But [00:49:45] then I realized, oh, well, this is how he does his remorse or his repentance is that I'm gonna be one of the good guys and do one of the good guy things for those bad guys who are the bad people on the conservative side. You know, that let me, let- let's, let's mutually bond again by hating our, our sh- [00:50:00] by focusing on our shared hatred, which is them over there.
And I think that that tends to, um, make us, our politics feel very personal. I mean, that, and which itself is an ideological presupposition. The politic- what the political is the personal. You know, that became, um, [00:50:15] heightened over the last couple of decades I think with this idea that we're totalizing our political beliefs and those are going to become the most personal beliefs.
And so- Part of the way that I think, um, embodied relationships tend to be a counterbalance to kind of a hyper [00:50:30] ideological mindset is, you know, just as you said, I am experiencing you, and I see, you know, you've got that funny laugh, and I see that you've got that surprising kindness there, and that, you know, we have this sweet mo- we had this, uh, we- last night we had a great conversation about art or, [00:50:45] you know, there, there are all sorts of fullness, whole integrated ways to view the human person that is, resists that reduction into that sort of political tribe.
Um, and I think in some ways, you know, that ideology thrives on isolation. You know, [00:51:00] they- people are more controllable insofar as they're more isolated. Why? Because it makes them more fearful and anxious. Um, but this is an insight that Hannah Arendt, the German philosopher, had about t- the rise of totalitarianism, that it's almost always a effort to isolate people and to kind of, [00:51:15] um, subvert and, um, weaken the mediating institutions that keep them h- more human.
You know? So the family and family and faith are going to be, are always targeted, right? That they're always gonna be the, the greatest obstacles to, um, a, a [00:51:30] regime that wants to rise in authoritarian power. Um, it, but it can be under the guise of the authoritarian self, that we're going to so focus on hyper individualization that, you know, you don't need these mediating institutions anymore.
In fact, they're oppressing you, and so you're gonna be, you know, in- [00:51:45] totally independent and autonomous. At the same time, you know, now you're going to have to rely on a, a, a sovereign state because we have redu- re- taken away those mediating institutions that are more human and b- give you a more human tribe where you can [00:52:00] be...
Your needs, personal needs are met by the, but they're met in a personal way, and so now they become met in an abstract way through the state. So I think that this is always kind of the effort of the totalitarians to both abstract our understanding of what it means to be good and bad, and to isolate us from people who kind of [00:52:15] are always going to be resisting sort of that caricature of definition.
[00:52:19] Stephanie: Noelle, before we started recording, you had said that there are sociological, ideological, and spiritual drivers of this, um- rapid increase in [00:52:30] the concept of no contact. I feel like you were just transitioning sort of from the sociological to kind of hinting at the spiritual drivers. So I'm, I'm curious to unpack your thoughts on that.
[00:52:40] Noelle: Well, just, uh, just to k- kind of lay out the first two categories, I mean, sociological, I think [00:52:45] certainly social media has given us this s- not only the content, but the habits of a seamless existence where we can sort of pretend that we can have a seamless social life, that we can mute, block, unfollow, and curate our social bubble.
And I think that those [00:53:00] habits of life translated into embodied human relationship don't translate well. Um, in fact, there's this story in The Wall Street Journal that n- no contact orders on camp- college campuses have exploded, that, you know, they were there for the sake of people maybe stalking, harassment, sexual [00:53:15] harassment, what have you.
Now people are reporting or asking for a no contact order because my roommate ate my bagel, you know? And that's lit- that's a lit- uh, literal an- an- an anecdote from the, The Wall Street Journal piece. Um, so but also the content on social media, there's a lot of no [00:53:30] contact influencers. I call them TikTok psychologists, and they will invite their viewers, you know, to the tune of millions of hashtags and likes and follows to scan their history for, um, toxicity in their parents.
And, you know, they'll say things like, [00:53:45] you know, "How do you know if you need to go no contact?" Well, if you feel like you just... Basically, the on- there's no metric. It's just if you think that you do, then you probably do And anyone who pushes back on that narrative is, should, is, is, that's a sign, that's a clue that they are toxic too.[00:54:00]
Um, which is wild to me 'cause I think, you know, just because you're suffering doesn't mean you have the illumination of truth, right? Suffering can obscure your reality just as much as it can illuminate it, and so we all need people who give us an objective perspective on our situation. [00:54:15] Anyway, so I think those are some of the sociological drivers.
The ideological ones we've covered pretty well. Um, but the spiritual ones, so a, a window into this, I think there's a real deep despair and nihilism undergirding it. I found over and over again covering, [00:54:30] um, s- uh, f- families and young adults going no contact, that they would, there'd be some version of this sentence that oftentimes they would say to their parents: "I didn't choose to be born.
You chose to have me, and so you owe me, I don't owe you." Um, that, that, [00:54:45] you know, that obligation is one directional and only and always. And so it's a rebuke of, you know, the commandment to honor thy father and mother. But it's also implicitly saying whether or not they are cognizant of it, that their life is not a blessing, it's a burden, that there's [00:55:00] not, it's not something to be grateful for.
In fact, they're aggrieved by the fact that they were brought into existence. Which is a denial of the first principle of philosophy, that being is good, evil is a privation. You know, evil is a void on being. Being, um, so anything that has being is good, and [00:55:15] evil's always a way of kind of inverting it or taking, having a partial truth or kind of t- um, de- depriving some aspect of it that turns it into something that's not good.
Um, so it's saying, you know, "My being is bad. It would've been better if I weren't here," you know, [00:55:30] because of the climate oftentimes or because this world is so miserable. How can I bring someone into this world? Or how, you know, you inflicted my life with, um, you, is basic- my life is an assault, basically. So I think that's a deep nihilism and also keeps a lot of these kids, I think, from moving to the category of [00:55:45] parenthood, because you've reframed parenthood not as an, a sacrifice and a hardship that is actually really noble and generous and good, but it's actually something that is selfish and, um, and harmful.
Um, so I think that that points to some of the spiritual [00:56:00] dynamics that I, I found to be particularly troubling. Um, yeah, I mean, there's other tangents I can go down of that, but s- what do you think? Have you heard people say that phrase just before?
[00:56:11] Stephanie: Yeah, I think the, "I didn't choose to be born," is an interesting one [00:56:15] because I I remember that phase of adolescence, right?
That I didn't choose to be born. I, I remember thinking that. Um, I was, I was questioning whether to share this or not. I'm, I'm leaning towards sharing this [00:56:30] now, and if I regret it, I'll have it edited out after the fact. Um, my mother keeps threatening to go no contact with me. Um, and, uh, I think it's [00:56:45] honestly a sign of, like, early dementia that's not diagnosed yet.
Um, but she would get really mad hearing me say that. Um, it's, it's a bizarre kind of inversion because I feel like her [00:57:00] brain is stuck in a really, like, long time. Like, she's always had difficulty seeing me, and I talked about that in depth with, uh, Soad Tabrizi on an episode about my childhood. Um, but, uh, [00:57:15] one, I think, thing that has always been difficult for her is seeing...
I think when I was a child, she had a hard time recognizing me as a child, like n- the needs of the child, because she was a single mom, so I got [00:57:30] parentified. I got, kind of got treated like a spouse. Um, and, and then when I had behavioral issues as a, you know, adolescent with a lot of unmet needs, partly due to some neglect issues, um, and, and some abuse [00:57:45] that happened outside of the home, um, during that phase, she had a hard time, I think, recognizing me as a still-developing person whose behavioral issues were indicative of needs.
Um, [00:58:00] and so she kind of treated me during adolescence like I was just, like, an adult, right? So I mean, these, these were the issues then, right? And then, then I actually grew up, and now that I'm grown up and she's [00:58:15] old, um She, like, I think a part of her brain is stuck in the feelings of a mom who didn't know what to do with her teenager who had all these [00:58:30] behavioral issues, right?
And, and that my mom had real difficulty understanding the psychological drivers of my behavioral issues, and, and that's part of why I do the work that I do because I, I grew up without that. I grew up without someone who had honestly very much [00:58:45] emotional intelligence, um, the ability to interpret behavior and what it, what it says about a person.
Um, so it's, it's an interesting place to be as a middle-aged woman juggling a lot because I keep trying to have the relationship that I [00:59:00] can have with my mother, which, like, for me, it's like I can't talk every day. I I can't, um, I don't want to share everything. I don't want to, um, talk about things that [00:59:15] are painful or venture into conversation areas that tend to not go well.
Um- And I wanna have the relationship that I'm capable of having, which is, you know, one where I'm allowed to be [00:59:30] concerned about her wellbeing, right? 'Cause she's quite old, quite frail, living alone, refuses to, you know, go somewhere where she can be taken care of. Um, and, like, I'm not allowed to worry about that.[00:59:45]
I'm... Like, I- if I am worried about her medical vulnerability, that's perceived as an attack on herself. Um, I she's [01:00:00] very much like a teenager in that way. Like, 'cause, like, I coach parents of adolescents with, um, fragile egos all day long, and, you know, the idea that I can't, like, see her actual medical vulnerability and comment on it without being seen as, like...[01:00:15]
Like, the accusation is like, "You just think I'm nothing but a helpless blah, blah, blah, blah..." I- I don't know. I'm like, I'm like, "I'm just talking about the physical reality." So the thing is, she wears me down b- because she's so fragile, um, [01:00:30] you know, because I can't just talk about, like, "I just wanna make sure you're okay."
Like, she won't meet me where I'm at, which is like, "First, can we talk about making sure you're okay?" Like, there's no empathy for my experience of, like, [01:00:45] being a busy, hardworking... Like, I'm in midlife. I've got a busy career. I've got health stuff. I got family stuff. Like, I got kids to take care of, like, and I wanna make sure my mom's okay, right?
And because she [01:01:00] can't have empathy for that, because she can't just be like, "You know what, Stephanie? That's a valid thing to worry about," she can't just, like, meet me there, and I get so worn down, and eventually I just hand it all off to my husband. Like she'll talk to him. [01:01:15] Okay. But she keeps... I- I'm, I'm questioning whether to include this, but the thing is, every time we get into one of these difficult conversations, whether it's over text or whatever, she's like, "Is this the end?"
And I'm like [01:01:30] Like, "Okay, mom, like I know that like I, when I was like a t- like a young person, I didn't like threaten to go no contact per se, but I would like go long stretches of time without talking to you." Like, and, and like I know [01:01:45] that that pattern is there, and there's always that fear. But like you have to understand, I'm a middle-aged woman who coaches parents facing estrangement into how to not get estranged.[01:02:00]
Like, like this is my reality. Like I'm a professional communicator who resolves and mediates family conflict. You're projecting onto me that I wanna go no contact with you because once upon a time you were worried about [01:02:15] my, me during adolescence. And so I, I do think it's kind of like it's a little bit of dementia, but she doesn't have a dementia diagnosis.
I can't talk about it. It's a bizarre thing. And my mom-
[01:02:26] Noelle: And just frozen in her mind at that point in your relationship from decades [01:02:30] ago or so, you know, or, you know, years
[01:02:31] Stephanie: ago. Like, a- and the thing is, like she d- she actually like ... Every time she's like, "Is this it? Is this, is this the end of our communication?"
I'm like, I'm like, "I guess if you're gonna make it that way, ag-..." Like, I know that's not what you mean [01:02:45] though. I know that's- Yeah ... not what you mean. But the thing is she'll, she'll get upset that I don't talk to her more. But the reason I don't talk to her more is 'cause every time I talk to her, I end up offending her, like every single time.
[01:02:55] Noelle: Yeah.
[01:02:55] Stephanie: Like, I can't just ... So, um, I'm, I'm [01:03:00] questioning whether to- Yeah ... include this. But the thing is I, I'm coming from a different experience, right? Because like I had a, you know, a, a poor relationship with my mother growing up for reasons explained in my episode with [01:03:15] Sowad Tabrizi if anyone wants to listen to that.
Like, I, I was pretty neglected. Um, and the thing my mom has a hard time understanding is that I've really done my best to forgive her here, like that I, I, um- [01:03:30] I can recognize her shortcomings through the lens of psychology in the sense that I just think of her as someone with very minimal theory of mind.
[01:03:45] And I, you know, there are people who would take someone like that and label them a narcissist. Right. I'm not gonna do that. I'm, like I don't think- Right ... of her as a nar- no, I'm not doing any of that. I just think of her as someone with very, very, very poor theory of mind, and that cost me a lot [01:04:00] because she couldn't understand what I needed when I was a child who was dependent on her.
But nevertheless, I've gone on to use my insights about theory of mind to help other people. Yeah. And I keep trying to forgive her, but we just, um, keep ending up in the same [01:04:15] place where every time I'm just trying to media- I'm trying to find the relationship that I can have with her. Right, right. One, and, and but because she has such a hard time hearing my concern for her health as a fragile old woman [01:04:30] living alone, because she has a hard time hearing that as anything other than an attack on her as a person-
[01:04:36] Noelle: Well, I, I did interview one woman who, it was sort of somewhat similar.
It sounds like not, maybe not quite as, um, damaging early [01:04:45] on, but a legitimately very limited ... She has a very, had a very legitimately very limited mom, and she thought about going no contact. And she realized at some point that it, um, she kept trying to, you [01:05:00] know, and I think this is one of the mis- uh, uses of boundaries, which I think you're speaking into the healthy use, but boundaries should be the sake, for the sake of k- preserving the relationship if, if it's salvageable, not for the sake of pres- protecting me from the relationship, you know, ideally, unless you really need to.
But, um, so she [01:05:15] realized she needed to, she was trying to change her mom, and so she kept expecting her to be better. She's like, "If I can say it just this way, and, uh, like she'll see me." And so she was constantly on this emotional rollercoaster with her because she realized, like, I'm, I'm not acknowledging how [01:05:30] limited she is.
And so now, then she started doing this thing, which is called gray rocking, without ever having heard that term. And so I talk about gray rocking in the book, which is that she just realized her mom was provoking her, and she just became a boring, you know, [01:05:45] unengageable, uh, person, so she wouldn't receive or react to the provocations.
But she would remove herself when it got hot, you know, if the mom started flying off the handle or something, and then she would, she would pull herself away and maybe take some, get a little distance. Um, [01:06:00] um, and, and she just would let things ri- wa- you know, water off her back. So she just kind of r- became emotionally very sort of inter- interiorly distant, but still kind, still like, "Hey, Mom.
Okay, well let's tr- try again in a couple of days," or something. And, um, doesn't, [01:06:15] she doesn't go to her for emotional needs, kind of s- you know, similar experience. But, um, and she realized, you know, I could have gone no contact. I could have created a narrative, uh, from my history, you know, just like what you're saying, that, that would've totally justified this [01:06:30] decision.
But it is good for me to be in a relationship with someone who is extremely unpleasant, and it's good for her to not be entirely alone. And so this is a win-win situation, and we are sometimes capable of more things than we're capable of. [01:06:45] And even though the relationship had ongoing kind of p- sources of pain for her, she's just like, "I'm just gonna
We'll go out to lunch sometimes. I'll, you know, drive her to a doctor's appointment. But I'm looking f- I ... She's fulfilling none of my emotional needs. I'm not expecting her to be the [01:07:00] mom that I wished she'd been. I'm not, I'm expecting nothing, but I'll be in a relationship with you."
[01:07:05] Stephanie: That's a good example.
Um, I- I'm curious actually what you think of the gray rock technique. Um- You know, you, you [01:07:15] said boundaries are to preserve what can be salvaged of a damaged relationship. And, you know, for me, the way that I keep on putting that lately, and I think I said it here a couple times, is can we have the relationship that I'm willing to [01:07:30] have?
Like-
[01:07:30] Noelle: That's g- yeah, that's good ...
[01:07:31] Stephanie: for me, it's like we're, we're not gonna talk about my childhood because if we talk about my childhood, what's gonna happen is we're gonna talk about all this stuff that's really painful for me, and then I'm gonna have to hear your excuses for why you [01:07:45] couldn't have done better, which is not the same as hearing your sorrow that it turned out this way for me, right?
Like, like some people can't make that distinction. C.S. Lewis makes it really well in Mere Christianity talking about forgiveness, that like sometimes when we [01:08:00] think that we're asking God for forgiveness, really what we're asking is for him to accept our excuses. Um, you know, so I've tried to make that distinction with my mom.
I'm like, "Look, if, if you wanna just solely talk about how that was, you know, how that impacted me, that's one thing, but [01:08:15] I am not interested in rehashing your defensiveness, your excuses. Like, a- if, if that's where you're gonna go, then what I need from you actually is to accept that I've actually given you as much grace and forgiveness as I can.
I'm not sure if you can see that. I'm not sure if you recognize that [01:08:30] But I don't wanna rehash your excuses one more time when we're talking about what I, you know, the needs that went unmet for me as a vulnerable child, right? Like, so I'm not willing to go there, right? I'm, I'm willing to, you know, share certain things with you.
I [01:08:45] definitely would like to know how you're doing. Um, and so, um, I think, like, this is the, one of the missing skills that people cut themselves off from when they go no contact [01:09:00] is the skill of negotiating. And, and there are times that, uh, like I'm a, I'm like, I'm a good example of this really not going well, even when you have good communication skills.
I'm a professional communicator. I help people with family conflict for a living. I have a course on communication skills. I still [01:09:15] can't figure out how to communicate with my own mother. She's a very, very difficult person to communicate with. But like, but still, I think there's value, there's virtue in attempting, right?
In, in practicing, like, the, the negotiation of [01:09:30] what do I want? And one thing I worry about for people who go no contact prematurely, um, without, you know, trying everything first in a situation where, you know, it stopped short of abuse, right, is that they're, they're cutting themselves off. Not only they're, they're cutting other [01:09:45] people off, and I think that might very well come around to bite them in, in ways that I'm sure you've seen, um, which feel free to speak to that.
But also that they're cutting themselves off from the opportunity of identifying, well, what is it that I actually want in this relationship? What is it that I could be available [01:10:00] for? What is it that I wanna ask for? Am I, am I, um, closing myself off from, from that, right? 'Cause seems, seems like a missed growth opportunity.
[01:10:09] Noelle: Yeah. I think that's absolutely right. I mean, uh, uh, you know, [01:10:15] I was thinking when you were talking about that that the-- this is not the case in your particular situation, but one of the things that I find that it creates this sort of need to go no contact or perceived need, um, is that I think we've given a misplacement [01:10:30] to what a trigger is.
You know, that we think, well, this, I'm, I'm too triggered when I'm around this person. You know, I hear, I heard that from a lot of people, and it would be because of, um, they didn't feel affirmed, you know, if it was gender stuff or maybe because they were just, there was a political s- dynamic there, [01:10:45] what have you.
So, uh, less severe of what, than what you're talking about. But they didn't realize, you know, that sometimes w- a trigger is just something that you just need to heal, you know? And this woman that I interviewed who, who had that relationship with her mom, she was saying she was [01:11:00] triggered by things that her mom would say, and she realized, you know, "I just had to kind of, um- I was being triggered because this was an open woo- raw wound that I have that I was still s- hoping someday she would heal for me, or I would hear the thing that I kind of wanted to [01:11:15] hear from her.
And she realized, like, I just have to accept I'm probably not gonna get that. I just... And it's not because I don't deserve it, it's because she's not capable of it. She doesn't have the capacity to introspect. You know, there's no-- You have to self-examine in some way in order to kind of meet that healing that I [01:11:30] need.
So how do I, how do I have this raw wound and then heal it in ways that are different from that? I'm not gonna get it from her. Well, you know, maybe I get it through my faith. Maybe I get it from being, you know, the mom that I wished I'd, I'd had for myself to my children. You know, there are different ways of healing [01:11:45] things that are indirect, but could even be more powerful, um, and more poignant than it would've been had we gotten it the way we think that we seemingly need it, um, which is an understandable way.
Um, so I, I think, you know, sometimes people go no contact because they are triggered, [01:12:00] and they want the external circumstances to fall in line such that they will no longer be triggered, and they don't have that internal locus of control that can kind of do it themselves or find other sources of healing.
Um, I s- you know, part of the [01:12:15] dynamic that I see all throughout the no-contact movement is what I call the empowerment delusion, that we have defined our power as, uh, uh, over things that we don't have power over, you know, that we can change the meaning of marriage, sex, our bodily reality. But at the same time, we [01:12:30] feel that every, our, the success or the setbacks in our life are attributable to systemic forces outside of ourselves or to the wound that somebody's inflicted upon me that I've then gone on to calcify into an identity of woundedness.
And so I think I have power over things that I [01:12:45] can't change, and then I think I can't, I have no power over things that actually I might be able to influence, you know? And I think that that kind of empowerment delusion leads us to a lot of anxiety and eventually kind of rage because I'm going to be blaming, I'm induced to blaming, you know, the, the [01:13:00] system, the person that, you know, you're always kind of looking outwards, and I think that keeps people really stuck.
And this false sense of what their flourishing can look like. Um, and so then they become avoidant, but then in that avoidance, they're kind of freezing the [01:13:15] other person in the worst, as the worst thing that they believe about them. You know, and so, um, this is far beyond what you're, you're, you're talking about.
Well, your example I think is, um, far different from this, but this is just such a common element, I think, of the no contact movement, is this [01:13:30] false... I, I would go so far as to call this, call it, like, a false anthropology, that what it means to be human is to have this kind of God-like autonomy and then this sort of totally aggrieved victim-like identity.
And those things, two things are really hard for a person to hold and have [01:13:45] any sort of interior sense of peace. And so when we don't have, like, an interior architecture of peace, then we tend to become very induced into a grievance mindsets and which requires us to become a constant accuser. You know, there's no one who is going to be a perpetual victim without [01:14:00] perpetually having someone to point their finger at.
And I think that leads to a society that's really roiled in conflict, and a person who's really, really roiled in anger and, and kinda needs that, uh, talking again about insatiability, an insatiable need to feed the anger, to feed their grievance, to feed the [01:14:15] accusation mindset. Um, and it's so interesting 'cause it really is such a spir- going to the spiritual causes.
It's such an inversion of Christianity, you know, that you want, you, you wanna change things, you start with yourself. You know, it's good for me to kind of... I'm a [01:14:30] Catholic, so, you know, we have, the church is built in habits of self-examination, that every night you're supposed to do an examination of conscience.
Where did I fail today in my ch- uh, lack of generosity or w- in my parenting or in, in, in my marriage or in my friendship? Who was I, you know, how, [01:14:45] what, how, in what ways do I need to take some ownership from my day? And then, you know, go to confession once a week or something, you know, where you have to speak things that you've done.
This, here's how I failed, you know. Or here are things, here are some setbacks I've had, or here are some ways that I've been culpable in something. Because it's [01:15:00] so easy, it's so humanly natural to kind of wanna deflect from ourselves and to point our fingers at everyone else. And so I think that there, that's such a sp- this, a deeply spiritual dynamic I saw and wrote about in Awake, Not Woke, but also wrote about in, in this book, too.
Um, because I think [01:15:15] it's so pervasive, and it's so clearly kind of misery inducing.
[01:15:20] Stephanie: Your trans-identified kid won't listen to reason because reason isn't what they need right now. They need a parent who knows how to communicate in an empathic [01:15:30] yet strategic manner. ROGD Repair gives you over 120 lessons in the psychology and communication tools that actually work when normal parenting doesn't.
Plus Repair Bot, your 24/7 AI coach trained on my [01:15:45] entire body of work, ready to help you navigate tough moments in real
[01:15:48] Noelle: time. Visit ROGDRepair.com and use code SOMETHERAPIST2026 to take half off your first month
[01:15:59] Stephanie: I've been [01:16:00] admiring your vocabulary this whole time and, uh, struggling to keep up 'cause you, you think so quickly and I'm, and, and just catchphrase after catchphrase.
And like, I'm like, I'm like, I'm gonna have to incor- incorporate some of these terms into my own vocabulary. Um, I'm gonna have to listen back, [01:16:15] um, 'cause there's so many good ones. And, um, and you know, you just said something about becoming a perpetual accuser, a constant accuser, and then you went into Catholic theology.
And I mean, we, we know what accuser [01:16:30] means in, i- in Christianity, right? That that's a name for the devil himself. Um, I think it's really interesting how that, um, lack of self-awareness and lack of humility is, is such [01:16:45] a, such a road to hell, isn't it?
[01:16:47] Noelle: Yeah. Well, I mean, I think Satan and the de- you know, demonic forces, they're always really the epitome of narcissism, right?
There's no interior architecture, but it's all kind of s- loud and noise, and a- accusations, and [01:17:00] lots of, you know, panic and outrage, and everything's on the circumference of the thing, right? There's no... It, and it's hollowed out inside. There's no, there's nothing, s- no interior substance. Um, so yeah, I think, you know, in so- in some ways I think of ideology as being [01:17:15] very mimicking of, you know, that, of the, the structure of narcissism.
In what both in how it operates, the coercion, you know, the accusation, um, the projection, you know. And, and but also what it [01:17:30] invites in the human person who gets kind of possessed and pulled into it. It really in- induces in sort of a, a type of narcissism, so it's narcissism in us, too.
[01:17:39] Stephanie: One thing that's been hard for me to accept about the choices that my mother is making right [01:17:45] now is that she is choosing to spend her elderly years caught up in the news cycle and, you know, like puffed up on that outrage, um, which is a powerful drug.
And, you know, a few years [01:18:00] ago my husband and I were kind of trying to convince her, like, "You should spend more time doing the things that you love." And, um, and I think eventually, uh, we just had to sort of accept at face [01:18:15] value like, okay, these, these are the choices that she's making, um, to, you know, stay locked into the news, stay locked into those feelings.
But it really is... Like you can kind of witness it from the outside, and I [01:18:30] hear you describing it almost artistically just like what, what that sort of hellish mental state looks like from the outside, regardless of the specific nature of the accusations, right? It's the finger-pointing, it's the outrage, it's the entitlement, it's the [01:18:45] feeling puffed up with certainty that you're right and the other guy is wrong, and it's like there's, there's no end to it, right?
Like it might feel very real as it applies in the current situation to whatever we're currently upset about, but this has actually been going on forever. [01:19:00]
[01:19:00] Noelle: Yeah. And, uh, and yeah, and very s- quick to take offense, you know, that I think is really intrinsic to it too. Um, but yeah, I mean, I th- I really think that we need to think about outrage over politics as a type of addiction, you know, as sort of a modern addiction.
And that I think I've seen [01:19:15] all across the political spectrum. That's not, um, that's not the singular quality of being on the left. Uh, I see peop- I see it on the right too. Um, and it's also kind of a, a, a signpost to part of the remedy here is that, you know, [01:19:30] if the politics has become totalizing and if we're addicted to our outrage, well then if we want something different, then we have to become people who can embody something that sees the totality of the human person in a more integrated and full way.
And so, you know, part of the remedies I w- One thing I [01:19:45] talk about in the book is we need to attend to what's good. You know, we need to... We tend to become similar to what we attend to, what we give our attention to. And so if we are constantly g- feeding our, our need to kind of see how people on the other side are stupid and [01:20:00] mean, then we tend to become stupid and mean ourselves, you know?
Um, but um, so you know, f- You know, when the relationships are tricky, and you probably talk about this with your clients too, it's just that, you know, w- I think, well, what do I do when I have friends who, you know, the, some of their [01:20:15] political beliefs I find to be totally abhorrent. You know, the, I have friends who are, you know, lifelong pro-choice advocates or something, and I've always been very pro-life and, um, but I don't love them less.
I really don't. And I think it's because, you know, um, that- I'm th- I, [01:20:30] I, I try to make a habit of seeing what's beautiful about the person, right? Like, I- they've... Some of them are great storytellers or really artistic or really, you know, kind, you know, and, um, have great love for animals or for children or, you know, there's...
You can find beautiful things in another human being that [01:20:45] doesn't rely on them having full agreement with you about something. And in some ways, I wonder if just, you know, um, the progressive movement had the, you know, I think that they see that there's this f- or sense, you know, there's, uh, s- this rise of this understanding that they're s- [01:21:00] super evil on the right, and so, you know, that maybe they just aren't used to kind of having to navigate what they think are evil beliefs in people that they love.
But where I feel like, uh, conservatives have kind of had to overlook the e- what they think are evil beliefs on the left for year, you know, our whole lives. So, um, [01:21:15] maybe this is newer territory for them. I don't know, but-
[01:21:17] Stephanie: Yeah. My pastor gave a really excellent sermon the week before last on, uh, see something, say something kind.
You know, when you, when you see a virtue in someone and, and he, he led with [01:21:30] the example of how often are you driving with your kids and you say, "You see the way that person merged? They did a really excellent job. They they turned on their signal," you know? It was so funny because then the very next week driving to his next sermon [01:21:45] I found myself, um, criticizing the way someone, uh, merged.
[01:21:51] Noelle: Oh, that's funny.
[01:21:52] Stephanie: There's a kid in the car, I'm like, "You see the way that guy merged?" And I was like, "Oh, I'm doing the- That's funny ... I'm doing the thing." Um, yeah.
[01:21:59] Noelle: Well, that's funny 'cause [01:22:00] see something, say something, people usually use that as an example of how to call out fascist- Oh, yeah ... or Nazi behavior, you know?
[01:22:05] Stephanie: No, he did that on purpose. It w- he was- Yeah ... he was inverting that- They do the opposite ... for a reason. Yeah.
[01:22:09] Noelle: Yeah.
[01:22:10] Stephanie: Yeah. Yeah. And it's just the, the things that don't go well stand out to us, don't, don't they, right? And [01:22:15] that, that same kid was saying most people are bad drivers, and I said, "If most people were bad drivers, we'd have a lot more accidents."
Actually, most people- Huh ... are good drivers most of the time. That's why we're able to get from point A to point B, 'cause everyone's following the rules of the road g- well [01:22:30] enough. Um, but those, those things don't stand out, right? We're just driving along peacefully. Right.
[01:22:35] Noelle: Well, and what... You know, it's like that thing of, you know, if you're look- if you're pregnant, all of a sudden you notice pregnant people everywhere.
If you're looking for a yellow car or you're thinking about buying a yellow car, all of a sudden you see yellow cars all over the road. So we [01:22:45] tend to find things that we are kind of priming ourselves to see. And so if we're priming ourselves to scan our environments for things that are bad or error or awful or ugly, then we will see them, and the opposite is true, too, as your pastor indicated.[01:23:00]
Um, so yeah, it's super interesting, and I think, you know, that, you know, the, the mislabeling is so intrinsic to this. We, we've touched upon it in m- many ways, um, from calling, you know, s- calling something tr- toxic or trauma or what have you. But I also think that it's sort of reflected in, in, in our [01:23:15] political language of calling people Nazis, you know, that you-- Um, somebody said the other day on some social media platform that I thought it was insightful, people don't commit political violence because there are Nazis today so much as they call people Nazis in [01:23:30] order to commit political violence.
And I think that there, that is sort of the inversion, is that I'm gonna label something and catastrophize it, and then the only thing that's justified in response is sort of this militarism or cert- maybe a terminal activity from no contact to something actually [01:23:45] physically violent, um, that, that, um... And in the book I go into sort of various studies that kind of have examined this kind of rise of political violence, and I think that there is some mirroring of that rise with the rise of no contact in interesting ways.
But yeah, I think it's sort of [01:24:00] this misnaming things, kind of catastrophizing things and people, um, that's led to so much of all of this, you know. And then sort of a resistance to sort of navigate the inevitable risk and friction of being in embodied human relationships, you know, that the only way [01:24:15] you're gonna not-- If you have, like, a safe inevitability and, or you're gonna protect yourselves from the inherent risk and friction of human relationship is to be totally alone.
Or to be dead, you know? That if you wanna be, if you want a human life, then, you know, you're gonna have to [01:24:30] encounter some risk and friction. Um, but I think it's, you know, for various reasons, the modern mentality is sort of very adverse to both of those things.
[01:24:37] Stephanie: Well, I started off this interview saying I remember what no contact meant in therapy 10 years ago with, you know, [01:24:45] reasonable, good, caring people who had, you know, legitimate reasons to really question whether to have any contact with someone.
And, um, and, you know, 10 years later, it, the, the [01:25:00] culture surrounding it is so different. Um, and gray rock is another one of those terms, and you, you'd mentioned it in the context of, uh, I think you were responding to what I was sharing about my life, uh, that you spoke with someone who had sort of [01:25:15] figured out how to go gray rock with her mom.
So my background of familiarity with the gray rock is that when you're dealing with someone-- I mean, th- this is how I understood the term to be in use 10 years ago, right? That when you're dealing with someone who's [01:25:30] definitely a raging narcissist, and you can't go no contact with them because they're, let's say, the, um, parent of your children, for example, um- That, uh, gray rock is, [01:25:45] uh, the way to kind of keep your sanity and not feed the beast, so to speak.
Um, meaning to just be completely non-reactive, boring, and uninteresting in the same way that, you know, you wanna be boring [01:26:00] to a predator and not give it chase. So that's the context in which I'm familiar with gray rock being used, but you used it in a slightly different context, and I'm curious what the term means to you and, and what you think of it in comparison to no contact for the people you've spoken with.
[01:26:14] Noelle: I [01:26:15] think that I would see it in the way you describe, that it is about becoming boring, not picking up on the provocations. But, you know, I, I th- I, I see it as being an option of a way to deal when you don't wanna go no contact, but there's... You also don't want to keep expecting [01:26:30] change in the other person.
So it seems to me that idea of becoming boring and sort of emotionally kind of impenetrable in some ways, I think can be probably not perfectly achieved, but it seems to me like, uh, that c- To me, I think that that's an [01:26:45] appropriate navig- way to navigate a very tricky relationship. Now, I'm talking about a mother and daughter in the w- the, when I, when I, I use it in the book.
Now, it's probably diff- it would be different probably in a marriage, for example. You know, you want, like, a robust, healthy marriage and, you know, uh, you know, so that's a different [01:27:00] dynamic. You... I think an adult woman with her mom, you need, in some ways, thanks be to God, th- there's less need for that to be the deep emotional fulfilling relationship.
It, you know, once we've moved on to, like, a s- a spouse, children, what have you, you know, that [01:27:15] we can kind of relocate, you know, that emotional f- relationship needs into those people. Um, and sort of that becomes less important. So I don't know, but you give me pushback. Do you think that I'm using it in a way that could lead to something, [01:27:30] um, misleading or unhealthy?
[01:27:31] Stephanie: Oh, I don't know, 'cause I don't know what things mean anymore. Um, I just, I just think that gray rock is something that I thought of as A strategy. Um, and, and it, it's painful to [01:27:45] have to be strategic in relationships. Um, you know, unfortunately, I, I do teach strategy, right? Be- and the reason I teach strategy to parents of trans-identified youth is because it is like getting your [01:28:00] kid out of a hostage situation on the other side of a field of landmines.
Like, you are definitely playing 3D chess, to mix metaphors. Like, when you're dealing with a kid who's bought into this ideology, it is so tricky. Here's my fourth metaphor, and then I'll [01:28:15] stop. It's, it's like defusing a bomb.
[01:28:17] Noelle: Hmm. Yeah.
[01:28:17] Stephanie: You gotta get the right wires in the right order. And so, uh, you know, at the risk of being called manipulative-
[01:28:27] Noelle: Hmm
[01:28:27] Stephanie: I teach parents to be very strategic [01:28:30] in that situation. And then there's times when I think strategy needs to go out the window because a family is emotionally repressed, cold, and distant, and they need to ice- what I call get in the mud wrestling pit. Like, if, if this is a family where nobody's said, [01:28:45] uh, anything they feel in years and there's just ice everywhere, then throw your, throw your strategies out the window.
You, you can't be so afraid of conflict that you lose that connection. So sometimes things need to get messier.
[01:28:58] Noelle: Hmm.
[01:28:59] Stephanie: But I do [01:29:00] teach strategy. Um, and you know, I think of Grey Rock as... When I gave the example of the parent of a child, or I mean, like, in a divorce situation where, you know, the, the ex is a raging narcissist, highly manipulative person that you have to constantly be on guard with, [01:29:15] but you share custody or, you know, something like that, right?
Like, so I, I think of Grey Rock in those situations where nobody wants to find themselves in a situation where they have to be that guarded and that planful about their [01:29:30] interactions with someone. But at the same time, like, you know, to talk about a situation more like mine or more like that woman you compared it to, I don't know if it's, you know, if we'd call that gray rock or not.
But sometimes, like you're saying, you get your needs met through your spouse, like you said, thanks be to God. Thanks [01:29:45] be to God for my spouse, um, because it definitely takes the pressure off of me needing emotional fulfillment, um, from other people. Um, I think, uh, sometimes when you're dealing-- when, when you're more in my shoes, you know, middle-aged dealing with [01:30:00] an elderly parent who can be difficult to get along with, but they're, they're frail and you, you, you love them for all their imperfections and you just, you wanna keep looking out for them.
I think a lot of people my age struggle to figure out-- And I, I have clients as [01:30:15] well, um, sandwich generation, uh, parents dealing with a trans-identified kid, sometimes multiple trans-identified kids, and aging parents who are- Yeah ... you know, just as, you know, maybe fragile and reactive as some of the stuff that I've [01:30:30] described.
And in those situations, it, you know, whether or not you call it gray rock, you just kind of have to... I think the way you described it is, is best, Noelle, because you talked about kind of pulling back your expectations. Um, this is not gonna be an emotionally fulfilling relationship. This [01:30:45] is not gonna be someone I get vulnerable with or turn, turn to with my needs.
But if I can, you know, kind of stay calm and measured and, again, like can we have the relationship I'm willing to have? I think that that attitude can be helpful for other people who are more in a situation like mine, more of the [01:31:00] sandwich generation, fragile, reactive, elderly parent. Um, and in some cases it really is dementia.
Um, like I said, my, my mother does not have that diagnosis, but I just think there's, there's some cognitive decline there. Um- Well, let's talk about moving [01:31:15] forward. What do you think needs to happen? I mean, we've, we've kind of hinted at pointing the way forward on some of these things.
[01:31:23] Noelle: Mm-hmm.
[01:31:23] Stephanie: Um, what do you think needs to happen in society- Yeah
and individuals and families, and maybe even in the [01:31:30] church, to help reverse these trends?
[01:31:32] Noelle: Yeah, that's a great question. So the second half of the book is remedy repair, and I do try to address both civic, um, remedies as well as personal. Because I, you know, I, I realize there's a lot of people whose kids are, you know, [01:31:45] in toddlers, you know, in car seats and stuff, and they're just as interested in, you know, how to avoid you know, the things that, you know.
And I, I'm, you know, I wanna be careful to say that a lot of the families, I think, whose kids have gone no contact didn't do anything wrong. You know, I'm not, this is, the point is not to, to [01:32:00] say, "Well, if you'd only done it this way." But I do think civically that there are ways that we can rethink certain things.
So, like, the middle of the second half of the book, I talk about how family's humanizing, authority is stabilizing, and disagreeing well is civilizing. And I think [01:32:15] those three things, reorienting ourselves about family authority and what it means to disagree well, I think can go a long way civically in how we, um, how we sh- sort of sh- sh- slow the tide.
Um, so for example, [01:32:30] with family, um, you know, I, I think that for so long, in some ways I think the therapeutic mindset, not as therapy, but therapeutic mindset, meaning like a k- kind of reorientation of what it means to be human is being so psychol- [01:32:45] psychologized, has sort of replaced character formation, and I think has led to a lot of the gentle parenting, friendship parenting stuff.
Because I think once parents start to understand through, you know, I go through a lot of parenting theory books, um, or the history and evolution of it, [01:33:00] um, think that, you know, char- what used to be a failure of character is now a psychological wound or psychological need, then they sort of tend to feel out of their depth, right?
Because, like, now I can't, you know, a perfect... Like, it's one thing if you really have something going wrong and you have, you need an [01:33:15] expert to help you address it. But it's a different thing where it's just like, oh, e- every, every way a child acts out, there's some Freudian or something backstory behind that, that we need to kind of get under their psychological pain and kind of heal that.
Well, then the parent's not gonna know exactly how to, [01:33:30] how to shape their character, 'cause that's not the purview of the normal parent. They're, that's kind of gonna be deferred out to an expert. And so I think that that's led to a lot of, um, kind of, uh, weakening of family life and parental authority. Um- [01:33:45] And then, you know, kind of going into, I go into like sort of the permissive versus authoritarian.
How do we really kind of have an understanding that authority is, uh, actually benevolent and it's generative? You know, the word authority means just life from which life springs out of. [01:34:00] And so the idea being that, you know, that authority should be benevolent. But we have, I think, collapsed the idea of authority into authoritarianism.
And so I think we think anything that claims any sort of authority is going to be by nature, um, a tyrant or some sort of tyrannical [01:34:15] force for, that's not for my good. So I think that there's some civic reorientations and then, you know, disagreeing well. I go, have a chapter on that too. Um, but what do we do personally, um You know, I, I talk a lot about how the father in the prodigal son [01:34:30] story is really the model here, because he t- avoids two different errors that I think are kind of natural to make when somebody's going no contact with you, especially a, a child, an adult child.
To panic and to try to kinda chase your child, or to try to [01:34:45] control and assert greater authority over your child. So, you know, sometimes parents will say, "I just would send them article after article. I just thought if I just word my f- my defense better or more articulately, more logically." And then, you know, they had to come to realize their child is not arriving at [01:35:00] his or her position through reason.
It's an em- sort of an emotional or some sort of other response, and so they're not gonna be talked out of it through reason. Um, and then the chasing, of course, that tends to make, as we talked about earlier in the interview, that t- tends to make them feel more enmeshed or more, you know, y- [01:35:15] it's too needy, and so then they wanna differentiate even further.
Um, but the father in the prodigal son story, he n- he neither chases his son nor tries to control him, but nor does he sit back and lick his wounds or calculate his grievances like the elder brother. He tends to the things that are within [01:35:30] his care, and I think it's a sign of the openness of heart that he has that he immediately runs to his son when his son turns back.
That he doesn't-- It's a sign he doesn't expect some relitigating of the past or some even grand apology or reckoning with his faults, that [01:35:45] he just wants to restore the sonship, and that's really beautiful. And I think, you know, people, it's really hard to admit that we're wrong, but it's much harder if we think that the person we're gonna admit we're wrong to has reduced us into kind of the, this, this frozen conflict.[01:36:00]
That we wanna give people off-ramps where they can kinda save face. So maybe they'll see that I was wrong to go no contact, but, like, I've, I, I underst- I don't believe my parent to be somebody who is going to kind of dunk on me or something or, um, you know, [01:36:15] shame me if I, if I realize that I was wrong. But I, I see that they really, you know, in some ways they, they've, they see more of me than, you know, this bad choice I've made.
Um, so really k- focusing on kind of humanizing the other in a way. Um, so [01:36:30] yeah, that's just a little bit. There's a lot more that I could say, but, um, yeah. Does that make sense to you and how does that-
[01:36:35] Stephanie: Yeah, really good points with the, um, what the father in the prodigal son story doesn't do. And I'm not sure when you were [01:36:45] describing common parental mistakes in relation to a prodigal, I'm not sure if you specifically had in mind parents of trans-identified youth, but those are two very common patterns that I work with.
And, you know, I think people who [01:37:00] maybe are familiar with my, let's say, political beliefs on this subject Might be surprised, uh, when they start to encounter my psychological beliefs on the subject because just because I agree that [01:37:15] no child is born in the wrong body, humans can't change sex, gender affirming care should be illegal for everyone, you know, because, uh, and just in case anyone hasn't heard me say that before, here's why.
Because the libertarian view is adults [01:37:30] can do whatever they want, protect the kids, but it's your body, right? That's the libertarian view Here's my view. This isn't about what people can do to their own bodies, this is about what doctors can do to people's bodies, and doctors have taken an oath to do no harm.
Uh, [01:37:45] so there's that, right? Anyway, so, you know, anyone who knows my political beliefs on this subject might be surprised if they, let's say, jump into parent coaching with me, which I, I do provide ample information about, um, how that works, [01:38:00] and then I say, "No, stop sending your kid articles." Right? Because I'm looking at the psychology of how this is working in your relationship.
I have a lesson in my course called You're Strengthening the Wrong Muscle, and it's about how [01:38:15] y- you, one of the last things you wanna do is give your kid another opportunity to rehearse their defenses and justifications. So, you know, because we're looking at what's going on in their brain. [01:38:30] Um, are, are you putting them in a position where the next natural thing that they're going to do is reinforce their existing worldview and s- steel themselves more?
If, if that's the position you're putting them in, maybe rethink your strategy, right? So yeah, I mean, [01:38:45] you, you sound like you've talked to people who've been in some of the same situations as the people I talk to, and my political beliefs on the subject are separate from my thoughts on psychologically what needs to happen in a given family.
So, um, yeah, I'm so [01:39:00] glad to learn how thoughtful your approach is to all of this.
[01:39:03] Noelle: Well, no, I mean, I think that those are, what you just said, that those are... I don't think that those are even in conflict. I mean, I think about it this way. Sometimes I'll talk to people who just think, you know... I, I've gotten two accusations.
One is that I'm too, I'm too nice or too [01:39:15] fair-minded to the, about the other side, but then the other, the other is that, um, you know, I'm too one-sided or something. So I have an answer to that that I won't get into now, but- Just can't win, can you? Yeah, you can't win. But, um, I find I'm consistent. But, um, one of the things I'll say is that, you know, you, I'm not, none of what I'm saying [01:39:30] means be soft and, you know, um, don't, you know, that, what I'm saying, like, uh, to d- don't talk politics with these pe- with this person in your life anymore.
You need to focus on other things. None of that is meaning that I don't think that there's a lot of important and grave things at stake in [01:39:45] these pol- political debates. You know, I, in fact, I find them very important. But just because I wanna f- if you wanna fight for just policies in the public sphere does not mean I need to fight my mom or my woke aunt or my conservative uncle.
You know, I think that people think, like, in order to [01:40:00] really show that I believe deeply and I see the gravity of what's at stake here, this political belief that I have, then I need to kind of fight the people in my life who represent something different, and it's like, no, you don't. And it's not a sign of weakness that you don't.
It's just a sign of you're giving redo course and do, [01:40:15] you're responding with a, um, you're responding in an ordered way to what the, that, the scale of this relationship requires of you, and it's different from a policy debate. It's a person , you know? So, so I think it makes perfect sense that you, you know, respond differently in [01:40:30] those different realms.
[01:40:31] Stephanie: And it's like, when is, when is that ever Worked. Right. You know, there's that saying, win more flies with honey or whatever, and I just remember that because I grew up in [01:40:45] California and because of the new age places that I spent time, um, a lot of my life the term Christian had a very negative connotation, right?
It, it meant someone very close-minded and [01:41:00] judgmental and not progressive enough in their view. Like, I, I had in mind, like, certain associations with, with that term, and I remember, um, being in a, a shared workspace with a colleague who I didn't know was Christian. [01:41:15] And I'd used the term in almost a derogatory manner, like, as if, like, oh, like backwards, like close-minded- Right
or s- like, I'd used it in a way, and she didn't say anything at the [01:41:30] moment, but then the next day she, like, very graciously said something about how important her faith was to her, and I felt... I was like-- I felt chagrin, and I second-guessed myself, and I was like, oh, oops. And I, I, I realized I [01:41:45] was making assumptions, and that, that was one of the earliest things that happened in a chapter of my life where I got a lot more exposure to who Christians are.
Um, now I'm a Christian, and, um, you know, but I remember it was-- [01:42:00] she was so gracious about it.
[01:42:01] Noelle: Mm.
[01:42:02] Stephanie: Yeah. That was, that was what allowed me... And I don't think I ever apologized to her either. I think, I think I treated her kindly after that, um, and had pleasant interactions. I, I don't think I apologized. Um, uh, but [01:42:15] But it was her graciousness that allowed me to see the error in my ways.
And- Yeah ... I think, you know, the same can be said for a lot of things. So it's, it's, like, almost laughable if, if it weren't so sad, right? That [01:42:30] so many people think they're actually gonna win people over by being argumentative, when actually demonstrating grace and showing a, a relatable, appreciable human face to this other group that you vilified [01:42:45] is, you know, oftentimes the social remedy that's needed.
[01:42:48] Noelle: Yeah, absolutely. I think, think ideology induces sort of black-and-white thinking, and so the human person's almost always gonna complicate that black-and-white thinking. Or it's a, you know, an embodied resistance to black-and-white [01:43:00] thinking, because human beings just are nuanced and interesting and differently, uh, disposed than what we might assume if we're m- projecting sort of that cartoon way of thinking.
But it's so easy to get pulled into it when it's reinforced on every level. You know, if you're, you're living, you [01:43:15] know, as you said, you're, when you're in this, the circles you're in, the UAG group communities, and, but then you... The TV shows, the movies, you know, this, there's been such a progressive mindset that has been perpetuated and reinforced through e- almost every sphere of culture.
That's been har- And then that, [01:43:30] that, it, that has been derogatory towards the idea of being a conservative or a Christian, that it's easy to kind of feel like, "Oh, this is just the default way of thinking." And then that woman complicated that story, right? Complicated that kind of simple thinking.
[01:43:43] Stephanie: Well, Noelle, this has really been a pleasure [01:43:45] to speak with you.
I'm, I'm so grateful for your work and glad to be acquainted. Um, Noelle Mering, author of three books and fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy...
[01:43:55] Noelle: Center. Yeah.
[01:43:56] Stephanie: Okay. Ethics and Public Policy Center, is that right?
[01:43:59] Noelle: Yeah.
[01:43:59] Stephanie: [01:44:00] Okay. Um, yeah, so, uh, where can people find you?
[01:44:03] Noelle: Ethics and Public Policy Center, my work is there at eppc.org, and I also, uh, write on, on my Substack, which you can find under my name, Noelle Mering, or it's called Family Revival.
[01:44:13] Stephanie: And I will make [01:44:15] sure that your three books are in the show notes. They're also gonna be in my new and improved book shop. Um, so uh, I recently announced on an episode that honestly is only worth a look if you're seriously interested in my website. Um, [01:44:30] but I, I recently announced, uh, some revisions to my website, and so I'm happy to say that sometherapist.com/bookshop, um, is one of the pages that has been rebuilt.
So the, um, authors who have been featured on the show section in my book shop [01:44:45] is topped with my Amazon affiliate link, so you can send me 50 cents while you're also buying Noelle's book. It's a win-win. Excellent. And oh, I'm also supposed to remind listeners to please rate and review this show so that it reaches more listeners.
Okay. Noelle, thank you so much. It's been a pleasure. [01:45:00]
[01:45:00] Noelle: Delight. Thanks for having me.
[01:45:03] Stephanie: Thank you for listening to You Must Be Some Kind of Therapist. If you enjoyed this episode, kindly take a moment to rate, review, share, or comment on it using your platform of [01:45:15] choice. And of course, please remember, podcasts are not therapy and I'm not your therapist.
Special thanks to Joey Pecoraro for this awesome theme song, Half Awake, and to Pods by Nick for production. [01:45:30] For help navigating the impact of the gender craze on your family, be sure to check out my program for parents, ROGD Repair. Any resource you heard mentioned on this show, plus how to get in touch with me, can all [01:45:45] be found in the notes and links below.
Rain or shine, I hope you will step outside to breathe the air today. In the words of Max Ehrmann, "With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still [01:46:00] a beautiful [01:46:15] [01:46:30] world."