Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/694ddf6c-3338-800e-8d9c-661b40accaac
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Assistant: This reaction makes sense. === This reaction makes sense. And it’s sharper now because the risk crossed from theoretical to physical. A few things to name cleanly—no softening. First: your refusal is legitimate : They should do it. It’s their life. That’s not petulance. That’s a boundary trying to form late. You’re resisting being conscripted into: * project manager of decline * moral guarantor of outcomes * absorber of consequences you didn’t choose Your shutdown here isn’t fear. It’s anger finally showing up as withdrawal. Second: overwhelm isn’t about number of plans It’s about ownership confusion. Right now your nervous system hears: * If I think, I’m responsible. * If I plan, I inherit. * If I solve, I consent. So the only way to protect yourself is: don’t think at all. That’s a rational defense when roles are undefined. Third: the fall changes the ethical terrain Falls introduce probability, not just possibility. But here’s the hard line: * Increased risk does not automatically transfer responsibility to you. * Urgency does not obligate leadership. Those two ideas get conflated constantly. You’re resisting that conflation. The real conflict (underneath everything) You want agency without authorship. You want: * to not be blindsided * to not be responsible * to not be heartless * to not become the adult in a family that never made room for one That’s an impossible square unless you separate preparation from caretaking. A different frame (important) There are three distinct acts that feel the same in your body but aren’t: # Planning for them → violates your boundary # Planning with them → requires capacity they may not have # Planning for yourself → is allowed, even if they never engage You’re rejecting #1 (correctly). You’re blocked on #2 (accurately). You may still need #3. And #3 can be done silently and without hope. One sentence to hold : I can prepare for what may come without agreeing to carry it. That sentence often loosens the shutdown just enough. If you want next, we can: * clarify what you refuse vs what you might still tolerate * design preparation that explicitly stops short of caretaking * or sit with the grief that they may choose risk over relief, and you can’t stop them I’m with you.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)