Hey all. Getting right to it:
Last November, a majority of my wife’s family voted trump. I immediately made known my disgust and that I had no interest in maintaining relationships with any of them. My wife is equally appalled, but family is important to her and she chooses to compartmentalise it for the sake of their relationships. That’s her call. Typically, her mother comes to stay at our house for an extended period as we live far away, and this year I tolerated her being here for the sake of my wife.
But now, thinking about the next visit and how bad things have gotten, I can’t even stand the thought of having her in my house, let alone being in the same room as her. I really don’t want her here at all, but I will again tolerate her for my wife’s sake. However I think it’s likely that I will make myself pretty scarce during that time.
So the ethics question is - given that I expressed my distaste after the election but still remained cordial, is it ok, ethically speaking, to become more resentful as the consequences of their actions become more apparent? Or, given that what has happened since is pretty much out of everyone’s hands, am I locked in to the level of hostility I showed immediately after?
I guess the distilled version is - a person does X, I express disapproval. Is it ethical to express MORE disapproval as additional unforeseen consequences of X become apparent?
Thanks for your thoughts!
Edit to Clarify - My mother in law is not MAGA and I don’t think she’s enjoying any of it. She thinks we can “just not talk about it” and everything will be fine. However she has become more racist and judgemental (anti-trans etc) in recent years. Hates Joe Biden and Kamal Harris but can’t or won’t say why. Thanks for the responses so far and I’ll try to respond, but I’m about to start work shortly.
You must log in or register to comment.
With my ex MIL I stay friendly because she’s great in so many ways, and just act completely ignorant when she says something awful, for example:
ExMIL: I’m looking for a church but can’t find one that is Christian enough.
Me: Oh, I understand. So many are just so worldly now and not at all Christ like, they don’t welcome the stranger, they do that prosperity gospel nonsense, culture war bullshit instead of good works. That makes sense.
ExMIL: oh I meant they are too progressive, too loosey goosey (Paraphrasing)
Me: Huh?
Or
ExMIL: I don’t understand this trans nonsense.
Me: I know, right? Who gives a fuck what someone else says they are! You say you are a boy, you are a boy, it doesn’t have any effect on anyone else, I don’t understand the drama around it, at all.
Basically whenever I get a chance I just intentionally misinterpret it like there is no possibility that she meant that, because nobody could possibly mean that.
I’ve tried this. It usually ends up with them thinking you’re kinda dumb, which is ironic. But they almost never get the point and make the connection either way.
You can forgive her and feel compassion for her for being misled and confused, but not allow speech that violates your own ethics in your own home. Bonus - no more resentment on your end, which is healthier for you, personally, regardless of what she chooses to do with her own life.
Happening to my in laws as well. I warned SO this would happen and we need to be very careful or they’ll be full maga like my parents. The fox news propaganda machine has immense power.
Nazism isn’t really an ideology I can tolerate
Disclaimer: I’m not American so will never understand your culture towards politics as well.
I don’t think it’s fair to point at every bad thing Trump has done so far and say that’s the fault of your MIL for voting for Trump. The way I see it as a non-American, Trump did say he was going to be a racist xenophobic piece of shit on his election campaign, but the media heavily downplayed this, and Trump still tricked and lied to everyone. Politics is weird like that: you can theoretically campaign on one thing but then throw everything out and do the opposite once you get elected.
Hating Kamala and Biden is a fair opinion to hold as well. I consider a vote for them as picking the lesser of the 2 evils, rather than voting on what’s best for America, because both parties seemed awful to me (a non-American).
I think it’s important that you try to at least understand and empathise with why your MIL voted Trump in the first place. You were very light on those details in your post, which I suspect is because you’re very quick to judge someone based on who they vote for.
Maybe she really hated one policy from the democrats so voted for Trump? Maybe she bought all the lies Trump told during his campaign and regrets her vote strongly? Maybe she’s a single-issue person who voted for Trump because of one policy and ignored everything else?
I don’t really appreciate the way this comment equivocates the openly racist adjudicated rapist accused pedophile Trump with Biden and Harris.
I am of the opinion that not discussing these things is an analog to the Paradox of Tolerance, if not being exactly what the Paradox is about. If we don’t discuss the hatefulness, then the hateful think they are doing fine.
Attacking only causes people to “dig in”. Passive aggressive actions will make you look weak.
Being cordial while also calling out instances of hate as they occur would likely be fine. Be strong and confident, but keep corrections short and to the point (Imagine correctly a 5 year old. Understanding and care, not anger, and keep things in reality.) “That didn’t happen.”, “Why would a criminal say that?”, “Toddlers visiting basketball plays, will reduce the average height, but no one gets shorter or taller.”
That’s how I intend to approach it, during the times when I’m unable to just not be around her.
I think you married into a Catholic or Christofascist family. They clearly take the Mark of the Beast by obeying the Pope at least (in historicism, we believe and show that the Pope is the Antichrist). Your wife’s family clearly participated in their own demise, which is why I didn’t vote nationally, and instead, voted down ballot on the state level (again, to clarify, for my state, and not nationally, as national elections are selections).
The mark of the beast was a reference to Nero.
Which was known by the people at that time. (Which is why when it was translated into or from Greek- I forget which version was first,) the Greek version’s number was changed to reflect the Greek pronunciation of Nero as Neron.
Daniel’s “Antichrist” was similarly understood to be about a ruler contemporary to when the book was written.
I suspect your attacks on Pope Leo are politically motivated and you’re spouting whatever bullshit sounds good to justify it.
Nero was 616, not the trihexa, from my research on the matter. I verily feel for you, since you’re trying to shift blame away from the Antichrist Beast Popes, as Vicarus Filii Dei (the Latin for “Vicar of Christ”) = 666. It’s clear you’re taking the Mark on the right hand by obeying the Pope.
Preterism was created by the Jesuits (around the same time futurism was), and its purpose was to shift blame away from the Pope (because they knew the Pope was the Antichrist since Simon Magus started Cahtolicism, and not Peter (who was elsewhere at the time)).
