When my brother and I were feuding—on our way to an estrangement—our mother repeatedly admonished me to “be the bigger person” and reach out to address our differences. Every time she said it, I bristled.
It seemed to me that “the bigger person” would face facts and recognize the utter impossibility of sustaining a functional relationship. “The bigger person” would wise up, protect herself, and simply walk away.
Recalling this got me thinking about the family’s deep need for cohesiveness and how this leads to members’ urging connection—even with toxic beliefs, dysfunctional rationalizations, and pat half-truths. They turn to trite appeals, invoked so often that they’re accepted as truth: mantras that encourage, even force, siblings and others to sustain relationships.
These remarks are so common, so “reasonable,” that they’re unchallenged in our collective wisdom. They’ve become mantras, injunctions whose moral power approaches that of the Ten Commandments.
Typically, these exhortations assume a reciprocal commitment that empirical evidence simply doesn’t support. They minimize the impact of the aggressor’s behavior, absolving the wrongdoer while preying on the empath’s guilt and willingness to accommodate. Their use demands the endurance of unacceptable behavior we wouldn’t tolerate from anyone else, as if all norms of functional relationships should be suspended in the service of family unity.
Many families want to maintain the perfect family image, so they shut down dissent, avoid confrontation, and dismiss or ignore complaints with statements like these:
1. “Blood is thicker than........© Psychology Today