Your victimhood does not justify the mistreatment of others.
For some people, when they are hurt, they consciously or unconsciously begin to identify themselves as perpetually targeted. This goes beyond a mentality, attitude, or frame of mind.
It becomes a learned and fixed personality structure rooted in the belief that the quality of their life is determined primarily by outside forces. External factors and perceived perpetrators become the explanation for nearly every misfortune, and this inevitably affects their interpersonal behavior.
Now let me be abundantly clear: this does not mean these people have not been legitimately victimized. There is often an extremely valid and foundational event involving both life-threatening danger and moral injury. These are distinct experiences, but they frequently coexist.
Why am I even talking about this? Because the internal conflict created by helplessness — while simultaneously feeling uniquely responsible for breaking free from self-limiting beliefs — is difficult to cope with on a daily basis.
This is where bleeding on people who didn’t cut you happens.
It is and isn’t that deep.
It’s that deep because suffering is part of the human experience. We all suffer in one way or another. Suffering, whether perceived or substantial, affects the nervous system, and the nervous system affects how we function both individually and collectively.
It’s not that deep because threatened reactions to actual or perceived fear are natural. It is an instinctively protective design, but it is unevolved.
There is a profound difference between being triggered and being activated. A trigger says, “Protect the wound.” Activation says, “Pay attention, something important is happening.”
When people are triggered, their thoughts and behaviors often default to fighting, avoiding, or people-pleasing depending on which past experiences have been activated. When those reactions go unexamined, people can weaponize their feelings while delegitimizing someone else’s reaction to their mistreatment.
To be direct, I take issue when weaponized victimhood is used by someone in a position of power or authority to justify harmful behavior toward people who may be genuinely vulnerable through a real lack of power, safety, protection, resources, stability, or social support. Vulnerability is not the same thing as discomfort, rejection, shame, or emotional activation.
Some people insist on preemptively harming, controlling, rejecting, shaming, manipulating, or dominating others because vulnerability feels intolerably unsafe to them — all while simultaneously positioning themselves as the victim in the exchange. They would rather attempt to control the narrative than do the work of becoming empowered within themselves.
Control feels safer than vulnerability. It creates a fantasized sense of self-protection. If blame can be assigned outside the self, it no longer has to be felt within. People recruit others into identities, narratives, and roles that regulate their emotional discomfort.
I’m refusing to tolerate or internalize the pressure to become the person other people need me to be when they’re triggered.
I’m not taking it on board anymore. I will no longer subscribe to the emotionally immature thinking patterns of grown adults. People won’t like this because it requires abandoning performative niceness in the name of self-respect.
You do not have to attend every projection, accusation, or emotional demand placed upon you. Disengagement can be an act of wisdom instead of avoidance.
Next time you find yourself emotionally triggered, ask: am I truly vulnerable here, or do I just feel emotionally threatened?
If I am genuinely vulnerable, then boundaries, self-protection, or disengagement may be necessary.
If I am not genuinely vulnerable, then my responsibility is to regulate myself rather than weaponize my emotions against others.
Go in grace, go in peace, go in kindness.
Called to Parenthood 