Does there need to be more than one? Does a person need to feel abused more than once for it to be valid? We're talking about this conversation, the errors in this moment and time, there is no need for anything else to be brought up on my end.
The definition of abuse is pretty clear. You can Google it, and the definition of this type of abuse was already stated and ignored. And the things being mentioned fit that type of abuse perfectly. It's called discounting.
When Hunter said he didn't want to hear "whatever guilt trips" that Jude had tonight, he was implying that Jude is a person that does that. That guilt trips. As far as I can tell, he isn't, and the things that Hunter was referring to were his feelings-- feelings that he shared in regard to his relationship and Hunter's presence within it. Nobody has a right to tell Jude that his feelings are guilt trips. Do you know what those words do to a person? They tell a person that their feelings are toxic and harmful, that they shouldn't talk about them or try to do things when they're hurt because it's just emotional abuse. Guilt trips are emotional abuse, plain and simple. Having emotions is not emotional abuse, and having emotions is hard enough without being told that they're guilt trips.
When Jude tried to explain why his feelings were valid, Hunter replied with, "whatever stories you've made up in your head." Now. If you had just told someone about how hurt you were and they called them stories that you had made up in your head, you'd be hurt too. Because that's abuse. The reasons he had for feeling hurt were right there, explained pretty thoroughly. It wasn't like he was saying that he was hurt and not backing it up. To call his explaination of how and why he was hurt a story is abuse. That is saying that it isn't true, it isn't real. To tell someone that their feelings aren't real is terrible. It tells people, much like depression tells people, that their feelings aren't real- that they don't really have a reason to have any emotion- and that they're really silly for thinking that they did.
Why those two phrases are verbally abusive is incredibly clear to me and if you'd like further words on it, I'm more than willing to do so. I don't think I should have to though. The fact that someone said they felt abused and your reply was to discount them says everything. You're incredibly in the wrong here. To imply that this was just a misunderstanding, or that it only happened because we're lawless, is to remove blame from people. Hunter is at fault for his words. End of story. Nobody but Hunter has any changes that need to be made in order to stop Hunter from being abusive. If you don't see how your part in this is terrible, I'd be willing to expound.
But you're an abuse supporter right now, whether you want to be or not. Your words are abuse support and the way you think this needs to be handled is abuse support. It's like saying girls should cover up more to avoid being raped. It isn't difficult to be a decent human being and not abuse other people. Just throwing that out there, plain and simple.
