This is important because I think the second type often gets laundered as the first type for manipulation.
Violating the first type is intrinsically very bad— making someone else’s decisions for them without permission is an example. However, violating the second type isn’t intrinsically bad— maybe the person who set the boundary claimed something unreasonable. (They could’ve claimed anything, after all!)
So if someone says, “You crossed my boundaries!”, I think this usually comes from the second thing (it’s actually pretty hard to violate someone’s sovereignty in practice, but it’s easy to cross the arbitrary boundaries someone “set”)— but I think it’s meant to masquerade as if it’s the first thing! In this way it’s used for manipulation. (“You violated my sovereignty, so now you should make up for it!” when it’s really “You did something I didn’t want, so now you should do something that I want!”)
For example, yelling implies sending high-energy airwaves, which at some point reach your actual body. And also, yelling often communicates some negative information about the person who is getting yelled at, which might be an issue if they are trying to control their narrative/reputation. People don’t tend to make the social requirements for no reason I think.
I think people impose social requirements on others when they’re unable/unwilling to take full control of themselves. I might tell someone “I’m setting a boundary: don’t insult me!” when I feel that I can’t take control of my own interpretations, and the fact that someone insulting me doesn’t mean I need to e.g. feel worthless.
It’s not that yelling doesn’t imply an unwanted state of the world, it often does, but it doesn’t require that you suffer about it. I go into this in more detail in my draft
Maybe. This comes off as severely mentally ill to me. But I guess that’s part of your point—if you don’t properly acknowledge the sovereignty issues, you’re going to be in deep trouble. It’s just that I think there exists a lot of dynamics on top of that which don’t seem to reduce to membrane issues?
There are certainly agreements that we make with other people on top of our sovereignty (for example, I “agree” (in some sense) to live in my country at the cost of having to pay taxes), but, crucially, I think sovereignty is at the bottom.
I want to point out the difference between two uses of the word “boundary”:
The «membrane» type: things that are within your unique sovereignty are within your membrane
The “I’m setting a boundary” type. For example, “I’m setting a boundary: don’t yell at me!”
See my post: “Membranes” is better terminology than “boundaries” alone for an explainer on this.
This is important because I think the second type often gets laundered as the first type for manipulation.
Violating the first type is intrinsically very bad— making someone else’s decisions for them without permission is an example. However, violating the second type isn’t intrinsically bad— maybe the person who set the boundary claimed something unreasonable. (They could’ve claimed anything, after all!)
So if someone says, “You crossed my boundaries!”, I think this usually comes from the second thing (it’s actually pretty hard to violate someone’s sovereignty in practice, but it’s easy to cross the arbitrary boundaries someone “set”)— but I think it’s meant to masquerade as if it’s the first thing! In this way it’s used for manipulation. (“You violated my sovereignty, so now you should make up for it!” when it’s really “You did something I didn’t want, so now you should do something that I want!”)
Basically the Karpman Drama Triangle
Maybe. It feels sort of fuzzy to me?
For example, yelling implies sending high-energy airwaves, which at some point reach your actual body. And also, yelling often communicates some negative information about the person who is getting yelled at, which might be an issue if they are trying to control their narrative/reputation. People don’t tend to make the social requirements for no reason I think.
I think people impose social requirements on others when they’re unable/unwilling to take full control of themselves. I might tell someone “I’m setting a boundary: don’t insult me!” when I feel that I can’t take control of my own interpretations, and the fact that someone insulting me doesn’t mean I need to e.g. feel worthless.
It’s not that yelling doesn’t imply an unwanted state of the world, it often does, but it doesn’t require that you suffer about it. I go into this in more detail in my draft
Maybe. This comes off as severely mentally ill to me. But I guess that’s part of your point—if you don’t properly acknowledge the sovereignty issues, you’re going to be in deep trouble. It’s just that I think there exists a lot of dynamics on top of that which don’t seem to reduce to membrane issues?
There are certainly agreements that we make with other people on top of our sovereignty (for example, I “agree” (in some sense) to live in my country at the cost of having to pay taxes), but, crucially, I think sovereignty is at the bottom.