Hey Squeak,
This is an off-topic question, but what's your policy on cutting people off? I've got a few friend-type relationships in my life that are probably going to terminate fairly shortly, and I think it's probably for the best, but it's making me think about what circumstances are appropriate for letting a relationship go versus trying to confront & clear the air. What do you think?
What you propose could be a pretty high risk behavior. I'm glad you're thinking things through carefully.
To actually cut people off is to decide that there's no such thing as a safe and enjoyable distance: that person is a predator, you're a target of choice, and the predator has a history of using even the smallest social contact to not only engage in predatory behavior toward you but to manipulate others into setting you up for further abuse. I've done this myself only once in my life but it was a family member. On the whole I'm not a fan of the technique. It's very extreme and there are side effects in your community that cause people to line up in support of the predator while actively attacking you. I've got an e-book out on Smashwords and Amazon called "7 Servants of the Toxic Emperor" that explains why toxic communities behave the way they do. In a nutshell, the people around you won't necessarily see what provoked your reaction, but they will see your reaction. Cutting a person off completely is a very extreme behavior, so if they don't see any provocation they recognize as equally extreme or inappropriate
for that person, there's a good chance you'll be the one tagged and punished as the aggressor.
My preferred technique, which I'm going to discuss in my next book on social warfare, is to find and maintain a mutually safe and enjoyable distance. Sometimes-- as in the case of the vinophile couple-- it involves occasional contact or conversation on social media, but no in-person meetings unless it's by accident. What they did was asshole-ish, but not actively predatory.
I'm more of a fan of letting relationships either die a natural death or gravitate toward the level of contact we both find mutually safe and satisfying. I increase the distance until I hit a point where the other person's actions no longer affect me one way or another. For an incurable gossip-- to use an example-- I dial the contact back to holiday cards, social media (where I never publish anything I wouldn't want to appear on the front page of the newspaper), and occasional public contact where we make small talk. This means that I can't use that person as a sounding board for ideas, I can't "vent" to them to release tension, and I can't interact with them in any situation where I might slip up and tell them what's really on my mind. Martini evenings, for example, are right out. But that doesn't mean I won't exchange hospitality with them or even give them a wedding gift if they commit matrimony.
This process involves some experimentation. Can we exchange hospitality, for example? Can we share transportation? Can we share a meal? Can I treat the person to coffee? Can we meet in passing at someone else's big social event? Some of the answers will be "yes" and others will be "no". Cherry-pick the kinds of interaction that leave you both feeling happy, and stick with that. If you find yourself feeling used or frustrated, it's a sign the interaction isn't working for you.
Generally I let friendships that aren't working die a natural death by turning my attention toward other people. I try forms of interaction that stand a chance of working, and back off until further notice if it doesn't work.
The only time "clearing the air" works is if there's an actual misunderstanding or a situation where an unintentional boundary violation has occurred due to lack of communication, but both people want to keep the relationship structure they've got (such as a marriage). In most cases there's a serious misalignment of interests or at least one person' needs have changed to the point where restructuring the relationship makes sense.
Did that make sense to you?
I don't go for a binary either/or solution to a relationship. Generally I consider the source of the problem, and whether it's an actual misunderstanding or isolated incident versus a larger pattern. If I see a larger pattern at work, I look for whether there's a salvageable relationship where the up-side for both of us more than compensates for any down-side.
I'm not a fan of cutting people off unless it's absolutely necessary. As to whether to confront and clear the air, you have to consider a few things.
1. Will the result of the conflict create the kind of improved closeness and understanding I want, or is it just something I want to do to s
and they've demonstrated that even with minimal contact or an honest good faith attempt to
they're still assholes. My philosophy is that unless you're dealing with an absolute sociopath, there's almost always a
mutually safe and enjoyable distance. Your job is to find and maintain the safe and enjoyable distance with each individual in your life. They will be doing the same with you.
The person who makes a horrible roommate may be a good tenant or a great social media friend. The cousin who always hits you up for money in private might be perfectly worth socializing with at a family gathering.
