sarah.is.trying :
One of the cohosts of the view was recently defending the Cornell 7, and naturally she faced a lot of backlash. I saw an interview where she said Cynthia Erivo, who she is friends with, called her and said, “I understand you are trying to give information about the law. But you need to lead with empathy, before anyone wants to hear about the law.” And I think the same thing applies here, and in some of the other stories you share. You tend to go straight to trying to get the injured individual to understand the person who inflicted harm. The advice constantly seems to be, “You, the injured party, need to be more understanding.” I realize the parents and in laws etc aren’t the ones who are asking for advice, and you’re trying to share advice to help the injured party understand the dynamics at play, in order to try to seek resolution. But you need to spend more time delving into that, into first validating that harm was done, sharing the advice you would give to the people causing the harm, and THEN, say that IF the person wants to maintain a relationship with the person that has harmed them, here’s how to look at it. Sometimes a good boundary is simply, “If you treat me so poorly, you don’t get access to me.”
2026-10-07 20:04:55