Codependency Triangle

How come Sundays I wake up right a 5am ready to begin the day and Monday I can barely get myself up? I don’t get it. 

I worked on my church painting this morning and it’s tough. I don’t know how I’m feeling about it. I like a photo reference that I can study. With this painting I’m working from three different photos and it’s making me work harder than usual. Hopefully when I get it figured out I’ll appreciate the difficulty. 

There’s something that’s been on my mind the past few days that I want to write about. It’s one of those ideas that just eats at you until you get it out.

I first heard about the codependent relationship triangle fifteen ears ago: perpetrator, victim, enabler/rescuer. It was explained by way of a play. The characters were a mother, father, and adolescent son. The parents are home, up late, waiting for their son. They’re angry because they’ve just discovered that he has stolen money from them and lied again about his drinking and whereabouts. 

When the son gets home they confront him. He denies everything and gets defensive. Eventually, the dad gets angry and turns to rage in order to get his son to cooperate. The mom gets uncomfortable, not wanting to see her son abused, so she steps in. The dad then feels betrayed by his wife, who he thought was on his side, so he turns his anger at her. The son, fearing for his mother’s safety, starts to defend her by yelling at the father. Then the mom doesn’t like her son’s disrespectful tone and starts yelling at him.

We’ve all been there. Chaos. We’re arguing, and in the end no one remembers how it started. And all we’ve done is dance around the triangle: perpetrator, victim, enabler/rescuer. First, the perpetrator was the son, then the dad, then the mom, then the son again. The mom and the son tried to rescue each other and the dad felt like a victim when he lost his wife’s loyalty.

I feel like this is how we talk about social issues. We talk about the roles, not about the reality.

When I hear women say things like, “Down with the patriarchy!” all I can think about is this triangle. To me, women chanting this are actually going to perpetuate existing power dynamics and stay entangled in a codependent relationship with an institution they feel victimized by. It kills me. The patriarchy is seen as a thing, something that’s abusive, and the call is to bring it down, destroy it, so that we, ‘the victims’, can live in peace. 

I used to get fired up by revolutionary battle cries just like it. They were like a cattle prod to deadened soul. But now all I hear is codependency and staying stuck in the same old patterns.

To me, the revolutionary battle cry is: “I’m a victim. But I’m about to become a perpetrator!” And the reason it’s appealing is because it’s addictive. It speaks to the ego. Addiction is the fortification of the ego, the gratification the ego believes is the only solution for our shame. Self-will run riot.

I believe the alternative to “Down with the patriarchy” is “Up with me”. It’s not exciting. It doesn’t fire you up and make you feel alive. It’s a bit depressing, actually. Sobering. But it’s the only way to change. “Up with me” means raising my self-esteem, learning that I’m worthy, and discovering that I’m plenty adequate for this life. 

Fighting the patriarchy won’t change a thing. But raising ourselves up can, and would, if we did it.