Quote from B on August 8, 2023, 8:30 pm

Hello Power Duck,

My take would be affectionate dominance:

Aunt: Don't worry Power Duck we bring the food and you let us sleep there.

Power Duck: Oh thank you Aunt you’re so kind! (With a smile and an amused tone of “thanks for nothing”, conveyed by showing some surprise together with the smile) And I’ll let you know about the “sleep there” part. (Smile)

In essence, you convey the message that you don’t need them and you don’t go along with the tasking, but do so in an affectionate and joking way.

As to your Aunt’s move

To me your aunt’s move was “dominant tasking”.

It was covered by a frame of “fake fairness” because there was an exchange, albeit the exchange was illusory as it was heavily in her favor (“food in exchange for a place”).

But note that the frame was not only “dominant tasking covered by a fake exchange”, but also that of an unrequested “kindness” on her side.

This kindness is prefaced by a higher level frame of “you need us” (she said “don’t worry”), while you had not asked for anything.

So her frame was:

- you need our help, because otherwise you won’t make it;

- don’t worry, we’ll provide it to you even if you haven’t asked

- and of course you’ll do as we say in exchange.

So her frame was “you need us, we are kind to provide you help, you’ll do as we say to repay us”.

Since she spoke in the plural, there also was some ganging up by using the “family frame”.

That’s why your father probably intervened.

Why the answer 

Your answer dealt with the multiple frames only at the level of the last frame of “do as we say”.

You refused the tasking, and that was it.

Since you didn’t address the higher level frames of :

- you need us

- we are so kind and we’ll help you

they then retreated under the cover of those frames to respond. (Well, in reality they introduced another one: you owe us).

In contrast, by using affectionate dominance you address all levels, because you subcommunicate:

- I know you are all kind to me

- but I have not asked for help nor do I need it

- and most likely I won’t accept the tasking.

But note that every one of these, in the response, is covered under a higher level frame and tone of “I like you”, “we are family”, which is essential for the answer to work.

The answer also concentrates solely on your aunt by removing the “family frame”, thus implying: “I’m responding to your joke. You made the move here.”

This makes it more difficult for others to intervene in her support.

Quote from Power Duck on August 8, 2023, 9:05 pm

Thanks Bel,

Wow. The dynamics were deeper than I thought. Didn't expect that covert frame.

About the response, I agree it does address the frames you mention. Although I'll have to further internalize this to be able to come up with responses like this in similar situations, and to understand this even better.

Frame control is hard for sure but mastering it is indeed worthy.

Thanks Bel. For me this information is truly enlightening. I now see some covert frames here that my parents often "use" against me

Cheers.

 

Quote from B on August 8, 2023, 9:54 pm

Thank you for the A2A Power Duck!

Just to complete the perspective, my answer assumes one wants to refute the /help frame altogether and is also somewhat confrontational, even if jokingly.

A toned down intermediate answer could be:

You: Thank you so much Aunt, help is always appreciated. But I’ll have to let you know about the “sleeping there” part as I won’t be alone there.

Here you show awareness of her higher level frame (“you need help”), but reframe it into something different (“I accept to receive your help”).

And still keep the boundary on the “repayment” (ie I will decide how to repay the help, not you).

Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on August 8, 2023, 10:10 pm

Some great analysis, solutions and self-reflections already, just wanted to stress how good that self-analysis is, Power Duck.

Went to the heart of the issue, focused exactly on what would be the better approach.

Personally, considering the age gap here, I'd consider these dynamics yes disempowering, but still "normal" in the sense that it's expected that the older family member act like that with the younger ones.

That is not to say you must accept, but you may consider accepting in some cases (you know better how/when).

Another answer that accepts the dynamic, while still displaying perosnal power and agency:

Aunt: Don't worry Power Duck we bring the food and you let us sleep there
You: I wasn't worrying at all, I'm looking forward. And you guys bring the food please, and if it's good as I think it will be (smile), you'll be my guests

So you keep the family dynamic of feeding/helping each other, but you set a precondition for which you're the judge.
And you maintain a "host power" as "they'll be your guests".

Edit:
I'm operating under the assumpiton that the self-invite is mostly theoretical.
Most of the times, these are theoretical (but you know better in your case).
Such as: they won't really even come there. So by telling them "no thanks" to me it feels a bit too nasty towards family considering that, in reality, nobody is going to come there to bother and that they will still support you there.

Quote from John Freeman on August 8, 2023, 10:12 pm

Hello Power Duck,

Great answer from Bel on uncovering covert frames and using frames back. Agreed that the frame they (often as you say) use on you is "you owe us". This is doubly disempowering as now you're in their debt (social debt inflating) and how are you supposed to feel about it? Probably guilty since you owe them and (they try to project) that you're not giving back. So it's guilt-tripping as well.

Ok, got it that the conversation is not supposed to be taken seriously. Still as you said what is behind the words and the jokes matter. Here is my perspective which is similar on several points as both of you:

Aunt: Don't worry Power Duck we bring the food and you let us sleep there.

Here it's disempowering as she basically invites her at your place and decide what you're going to have in exchange (food). So very one-sided. Basically your place is their place and they can come as long as they bring food. The "Don't worry" is babying. So the whole frame is: "My baby boy, we'll come sleep here and you won't have a say because we bring food". I suppose she said it on a condescending tone. So overall quite disempowering. It's one thing that she's the eldest and you're a young one in the family. She does has higher status. It's another thing how people speak with one another. And as your grandmother I think she owes you respect as well. Also using the "we" as in "the family vs you", nasty.

Power Duck: sleep in my house? Nah, I'm going to have plenty of cats and no space for people.

Here it's disempowering them back. One could say it's fair. However, I feel that it's a slippy slope to a turkey spiral: "you're nasty, I'm nasty" covertly of course. No bad words, it's all in the tone and the vibe of course.

Power Duck: sleep in my house? Nah

Here I think you were good with the first part as you rejected her frame properly and the "Nah" (already explored by Lucio) is adequate as it is a bit dismissive. So you re-empower yourself as in "No way, I'm the one who decides". However when you reject her frame you also reject them sleeping at your house. So you self-frame as a "bad son/grandson". Not what I think but what could be used against you.

I'm going to have plenty of cats and no space for people.

So here I feel it's negative self-frame you as "a loner/hermit" and a "misanthrope" as in someone who prefers to stay alone than to be with people. Having plenty of cats could be good as loving animals is a positive traits. However having many cats is often associated with loneliness, old people and/or mental illness. So not the things that are valued in our society.

Dad: we pay for your studies and that's how you repay us?

Here we go. The "you owe us" frame and guilt-tripping in one sentence.

Power Duck: well it was your decision to have kids. Plus It's your obligation to pay for our studies.

The first part is good as it's factual. However, here it feels like we're going down the turkey spiral. So far it's been a string of attacks. So as you said it would have been better to fly higher at some point or to take back the leadership of the conversation or both. Also when you say "it's your obligation" it's disempowering to him. It robs him of the frame of the "good provider father" and pushes him in the "slave provider father who's stuck paying the bills".

Power Duck: Don't worry dad, you have my gratitude. Still it depends on the food you all bring.

Here I feel the "don't worry" is disempowering to him so when you say "you have my gratitude" it feels a bit passive aggressive. When you use "depends on the food you all bring" it still falls in the GM's frame: "your place vs food".

Suggestion

Aunt: Don't worry Power Duck we bring the food and you let us sleep there.

Power Duck: Hahaha I'm not worried. Of course you're my family and I love you. You know sometimes it's better if every person has their own intimacy.

Rejects the frame. Stay in the humour vibe. Builds collaborative frame. Assertiveness about wanting to sleep in one's house alone without disempowering. Leader-like and opens a new thread: "it's better for all of us if you don't sleep at my place".

Father: we pay for your studies and that's how you repay us?

Power Duck: dad, you know I appreciate that you guys are supporting me (financially). It's not about that it's about ....(living as an adult, my own intimacy, having my own space whatever it is).

"Dad" on the tone of "Dad why do you say this you know it's not true". Light shaming but deserved. 2nd part: assertive as the real reason why you don't want them to sleep at your place (if that's the case). Otherwise you can just say: "We'll see when I'll move out" or "You'll always be all welcome at my place IF I have enough space to host you of course".

That's how I view it. I hope my feed-back is not too raw. If you feel like it is please don't hesitate to bring it to "feedback and clarifications".

Cheers.

Edit: I see Lucio's answer now which is awesome.

Quote from Power Duck on August 8, 2023, 11:32 pm

Thanks Lucio, both for the response and the compliment. Lately I'm trying to be higher power and to go straight to the point, so I'm glad it's working 🙂.

Personally, considering the age gap here, I'd consider these dynamics yes disempowering, but still "normal" in the sense that it's expected that the older family member act like that with the younger ones.

That is not to say you must accept, but you may consider accepting in some cases (you know better how/when).

I agree, in fact this made me realize certain dynamics I have with my mother, as she usually pulls teacher frames that feel disempowering to me thus I get triggered (currently trying to solve this). I think the best option here would be to power align, she's my mother and she feels that she should teach me for my own good but that's for another time.

But yeah, sometimes relatives act "magnanimous" towards me, something that I don't really like. However there are times in which one has to accept certain power  structures. In the family they are higher status than me, mainly because they're older. As long as they don't disrespect me, I think the most intelligent and high quality way of handling this would be to accept their goodwill and magnanimity and give it back, that is respecting their position in the family while showing that I'm no naive pushover.

So you keep the family dynamic of feeding/helping each other, but you set a precondition for which you're the judge.

And you maintain a "host power" as "they'll be your guests".

When writing  the post I had a faint idea /feel of something like that, however I couldn't put it into words. Thanks for pointing it out Lucio, it's much clearer now 🙂.

Cheers.

P.S:

This post made me realize another mistake I commit, that is: I feel when a frame is disempowering but cannot realize why in that same moment, hence I respond with whatever comes to mind, usually turkey level responses.

 

Quote from John Freeman on August 8, 2023, 11:44 pm

Hello Power Duck,

this is great. The “feel” of power dynamics is very important as reminded sometimes here. This is an important component of power awareness.

If you don’t mind sharing I’d like to know what is your age range please. Like early 20s, mid 30s something like that. It’s helpful to me in these family dynamics for the analysis.

Quote from Power Duck on August 8, 2023, 11:49 pm

Thanks for the response John.

To be honest your response is worth reading more than once, well, actually  the whole post is worth reading more than once too. One of the main problems I have with frame control is really well covered here :).

An important thing I realized from your response is that my way of self defense, as well as "turkey style" self defense are all about attacking the other party, and less about defending and fixing dysfunctional and value taking dynamics.  I feel that's something to take into account.

I do think your proposed responses are pretty good. However without the right entonation and body language I believe one could come across as too intense/corny specially considering this is a joking scenario, still this is less about the response and more about one's social skills. In fact if one does it well, he ends up as a high quality guy without looking corny at all which is indeed the desired end :).

I like this idea actually, to be high quality you are required to have advanced social skills in order to comunicate what you want in the way you want.

Cheers.

 

Quote from Power Duck on August 8, 2023, 11:56 pm

Quote from John Freeman on August 8, 2023, 11:44 pm

Hello Power Duck,

this is great. The “feel” of power dynamics is very important as reminded sometimes here. This is an important component of power awareness.

If you don’t mind sharing I’d like to know what is your age range please. Like early 20s, mid 30s something like that. It’s helpful to me in these family dynamics for the analysis.

Sure🙂, 19 year old here.