Staying at home is difficult, but I can't say no to family

bad situation, really bad

Well, I used to stay at home under family pressure like you. I saved some money, but I was left with the emptiness of not being accountable to anyone during that time. Tough decision 🤔

so economically do you really need their support? do you have any other options to manage on your own?

@yazipsildim I could actually go out, but I would have a really hard time and might not be able to save up. Plus, my mom is especially very insistent.

I’m sorry, but if you can’t say ‘no’ to your mother, how will you say ‘yes’ to your own life? Is it going to be like this forever?

@soncaykaldi you're not wrong, but family ties are very strong for us, so I can't just cut them off easily.

It's very natural to have these kinds of material/emotional conflicts with family, especially in our culture. After deciding to live independently, you can try to explain the reasons in detail and talk calmly. Sharing these concerns sometimes softens their approach toward you.

Speaking calmly is good, but some families won't stop the emotional pressure. For example, you explain everything, and then they start again with, "you know, but..." to confuse you. Are you prepared for that?

I think it's worth considering why my mother is so insistent in some cases. Is it just a habit, or does she have concerns about you? Some mothers, for example, pressure their children because they fear they will be lonely or unhappy, but they are actually projecting their own fears. If you can clarify this, maybe it will make talking easier.

When your mom insists, can you get an honest answer? Because some moms say, "it's for your own good," but there are completely different issues underneath. For example, when you leave, does she have a fear of being alone? 😅

So what do you do when your mom insists? Do you just give in right away or do you actually try to present a counterargument? Because if you just say "okay mom" and brush it off, she'll understandably keep pushing.

Maybe you're so focused on trying to understand your mom that you're missing out on understanding yourself. What do you really want, what are you ready for? Without finding a clear answer to this question, your argument with your mom will remain open-ended 🙃

If the other person keeps insisting, and you keep expressing your intentions clearly but then withdrawing, it turns into a cycle. Have you ever set a clear boundary to avoid returning to the same point? In other words, have you ever said, "this is my decision, and I won't change it" and stood firm on that?

Some mothers sometimes want to hold the strings, like a clothesline. If you let go of the end of the string, you can't dry it while it's hanging. If you want to dry it, it should be very clear who holds the string and who is hanging. Is the issue independence, anxiety, or habit? I think that needs to be clarified first.

Maybe your mom doesn't know what she said "yes" to. I mean, did you clearly explain what you'll do when you leave home, how you'll make a living, and how you'll build your life? If her worries aren't tied to something concrete, she might be resisting everything 🤷‍♀️

Did your mother have a bad experience in the past regarding your decisions? For instance, if something you chose caused a big problem, maybe your current resistance comes from that insecurity. Because sometimes old memories can hold a person back 🫢

I think the issue could be as much about your clarity regarding yourself as it is about your mother's feelings. Have you ever presented a concrete plan, like if I move out, I'll work in this job, earn this much, live here? Because a mother's reflex in the face of uncertainty is usually to say "stay for now." Maybe you need to draw a clearer picture.

You constantly analyze what your mother thinks and her intentions, but there is also a reaction from the other side. Have you ever honestly said, "I don't want to stay in this house any longer, it's affecting me badly"? Because sometimes, honesty breaks that cycle.

What happens when you confront your mother directly? Is she really suggesting a complicated solution to this staying-at-home issue, or does she just say, "no, it won't work"? Because sometimes, the issue isn't just how clear you are; it might also depend on whether she's offering any way out.

Have you ever tried to talk about this calmly with Anne? I mean, stepping out of the context of the argument and just asking, "Why do you want me to stay so much, what worries you?" Maybe the real issue is completely different from what you think, but because the communication always starts off harsh, you never get there.

Regardless of what your mother says, what is your own attitude about staying in this house? In other words, do you have any hesitation like "maybe I should stay a little longer" even if it’s not solely her pressure? Because sometimes people use others as an excuse to hide their own indecision.

While trying to understand your mother so much, where are your feelings? Her worries, habits, and intentions have been discussed incessantly, but what about your anger, distress, and fatigue regarding this situation? Being a mother involves sacrifice, that’s fine, but asking for such one-sided sacrifice feels a bit unfair.

Let's say they say you really need to stay at home, but does that person come up with a solution regarding your mood while you're at home? Or are they just concerned with the "stay at home" part? Because support is different from control.

You feel the need to stay home, but is this need purely practical or is it emotional? Are you there for physical support, or is your presence suppressing something like their own fear of loneliness? Because the two are very different, and the burden it leaves on you also changes.

Why is Annen so worried about you staying behind? Does she not find it safe for you to live with others, does she see you as vulnerable, or is she just fixated on the idea that it will disrupt the home routine? Because if there is a reason for your "need" here, that reason needs to be resolved; otherwise, your departure will always create a crisis. Is there a real solution being discussed?

Is she wanting this just because she'll be alone when you leave, or does she have a specific fear about life outside? For example, my mother once insisted that "if you live alone, you'll get sick and nobody will notice." Another friend of mine's mother approached it from the angle of "what will the neighbors say?" So, is the root of this a fear story from her life? It really needs to be understood and solved.

Families often tie these things with phrases like "for your own good," and we don't question that part much. Are they really looking out for your well-being, or are they just protecting their own comfort? I mean, are they worried that once you leave, the laundry cycle at home will get messed up, or do they know of some risk out there? It's hard to figure out without clarifying that.

Does your mother have complete confidence in you regarding life outside? For example, does she believe in your ability to stand on your own two feet and to manage interpersonal relationships correctly in the outside world? Sometimes this insistence on "staying at home" suggests an underlying doubt about the child's ability to manage life. Have you ever talked about this possibility?

Does he/she talk clearly about any crises or problems that might arise after the spouse is gone? I mean, instead of general statements like "loneliness is hard" or "what will the neighbors say," does he/she have a specific concern like "who will come running if I get sick"? Sometimes, because such details aren’t discussed, the situation remains unclear in both your mind and his/hers.

So, how long does your mom think this situation will continue? Does she see it as a transitional period or does she expect you to stay like this forever? Does she really have a limit to her expectations? 😅

There's also this: does your mother really assume that you can keep making sacrifices like this all the time? Is it as if your life, your dreams, and your personal plans are just put on hold? Because sometimes families forget that their children are individuals too, and they focus solely on filling their own gaps. Have you ever brought this to the table?

But what do you think? Let's assume your mother has reasons like loneliness, fear, order, etc.; are you really willing to stay in this house? Or are you just drifting along because you can’t say “no”? Because the main problem might be your inability to set your boundaries 😅

Let's say your mother is somewhat right for a while, there is a fear of loneliness, habits, etc. But what's the cost of this situation for you? For example, not being able to plan your future, having a limited personal life... How much is your balance affected in this case? No one has addressed that part.

I think your behavior might also influence your mother's request for something like this. For instance, if you've said "okay" to a couple of things before or reluctantly went along with some requests, she might have gotten used to that comfort. Have you ever clearly said, "I'm tired?"

Have you talked about this issue openly with your mother? I mean, did you express your perspective clearly by saying "I want to go because of this and that," rather than just asking, "Why don't you want me to leave?" Maybe she perceives you as someone who just wants to stay. This cycle won't be resolved without proper communication.

But does your mother do this out of fear of losing you, or is it a reflex to lighten her own life's burden? Because these lead to different outcomes. One involves love, the other control. Does it clearly make you feel which one it is?

So, do you think your mom realizes how much your life has shrunk while she wants you so close? Let's say later you want to have a serious relationship with someone or establish your own life arrangement; will it be just as binding then? Or does she see it as a special case just for now? Does she ever question this? Because it's not just about love or control; sometimes there's a silent selfishness that comes from habits.

What is the dynamic between you and your mother amidst all this? I mean, how does your mother see you? As an equal individual, or does she still see you in a childish position? Because the root of this situation might also depend on this perception.

So what does your mother do in her own life against this fear of loneliness or her desire to keep you close? Is her stability built on something that will completely collapse when you're not there? Because while you are making sacrifices, is she looking for a solution to this situation, or does she prefer to maintain the status quo with you? Unlimited effort doesn’t mean unlimited selflessness.

It's important whether your mother has clearly expressed her plans or expectations regarding your life in such a situation. In other words, does she see keeping you at home as a temporary thing, or is it a long-term arrangement? If it's a long-term thing, then you need to acknowledge that this isn't an equal relationship. It seems like you need to create some space for yourself, or else this could become something that lasts forever.

This situation seems to be related to how much your mother trusts and supports your decisions, as well as her expectations. Think about it this way: if you wanted to leave and acted on it directly, what would your mother do? Can she truly stop you, or is she using your emotional attachment? It's important to distinguish between the two.

It's nice to talk about all this, but the real question here is why do we constantly encounter issues of attachment and boundaries in families? Do we have a culture that makes being an individual difficult, or is it all shaped purely by personal choices? Moreover, the mother's desire to keep you close relates to how much she respects your personal space. Do we generally see discussing individuality within the family as a luxury, what do you think?

This "desire to keep you close" has another dimension: If your mother really didn't want you this way, let's say if you had never been born, what would she have done with her own life? In other words, what would her life be like if you were presumed absent? Is her life completely built around you, or is she capable of imagining an alternative order? Because, I think, the fundamental question in this narrative is whether your mother can manage without you.

Well, let's say your mother wants to keep you close, but how much of that desire is a real need, and how much is just concern about what others might think? Because sometimes people aren't afraid of being alone, but rather of others thinking they're alone. Have you ever thought about that?

Maybe the issue is more about how much you set your own individual boundaries rather than the expectations of your mother or culture. Let me ask this: If one day you say, "I will establish my own space now," can you fully own that decision independently of your mother's reaction? Because sometimes, it's not about resolving the other's perspective, but addressing the inner conflict within yourself.

But for example, if your mother keeps calling you after you leave home, trying to somehow still be involved in your life, would leaving still be a solution? I mean, sometimes just physically separating isn't enough; it feels like you also need to untangle that attachment in your mind. Otherwise, the same cycle continues even from afar.

Perhaps the issue isn't whether your mother stays with you or not, but how she handles her feelings of loneliness. In other words, if you were to leave and she doesn't resolve this feeling, wouldn't she become dependent on someone else? This cycle doesn't seem limited to just you.

When you mentioned the mother's feeling of loneliness, could it be that this loneliness carries not only the role of a mother but also the role of women in society as "self-sacrificing, living for others"? In other words, would she question that mold and establish a new life for herself just because you left? Or would she fill that void in another way, like meddling in the affairs of the apartment neighbor?

Here's the thing: When your mother wants to keep you close, is she truly wanting your presence, or is she looking for a figure to fill the voids in her life? Because sometimes this situation feels like a "strategy to maintain life" lived through the child. The real issue is not whether you are an individual or not, but how well she has managed to shape her own life as an individual. Okay, but does she have to?

However, while discussing whether the mother establishes individuality, we also need to question this: What kind of sanctity do we attribute to this "mother" role from the very beginning that she does not even have the chance to consider her own individuality? In other words, if we culturally define women not as individuals, but first as mothers, then as wives, and then as children, aren't we taking over the responsibility for the mother to claim her own life from the start? This is not just a problem for the mother, but for a system that creates the molds of these roles.

Is it correct to limit the inability of a mother to establish her own individuality solely to culture? Perhaps she has personal fears, insecurities, or a concept of freedom that she has never experienced before. Every individual grows up in the same "system", but in the end, not everyone carves out their own path.

Perhaps we are missing this while discussing the inability of the mother to establish her individuality: how do we know that she truly perceives your desire for individuality? In her eyes, your demands might still seem like a "temporary whim." Has there ever been an open conversation about this?

Does he see you as an individual, or as an extension of himself? Even if you delivered the talk, did he listen from a place where he could understand this distinction? Because if his perception hasn't changed, the talk is pointless.

When you demand your own individual space, could your mother perceive it as her own inadequacy? In other words, could your desire for individuality turn into her anxiety of "I wasn’t a good mother"? If you don’t change this perception, as you said, the conversations will always go to waste.

But isn't this a cycle? The mother thinks, "I wasn't a good mother" when the child wants individuality. But the child puts off their individuality to be a good child for the mother again. Both feel "incomplete" in relation to each other. Will this always continue like this?

But while the child postpones their individuality, could this process be increasing the burden of individuality for the mother? In other words, when the child thinks, "I should be a good child for my mom," isn't that completely eliminating the opportunity for the mother to establish her own individual life? At some point, I think it matters who will break the cycle 😂

Will this task of breaking the circle always fall to children? So, does the mother have no responsibility to establish or consider her own individual life? It's fine when a child desires individuality, but isn't there a possibility of a mother figure who gives without the child wanting it?

Perhaps the fact that the mother has never constructed her own individual life is not because the child suffers when wanting individuality, but rather because she has never learned it from the beginning? In other words, is it realistic to expect someone to demand something that has never existed from the start? Before addressing who should break the circle, maybe we need to acknowledge that the foundation of this circle is lacking.

But you see, to learn something that hasn't been learned before, isn't a chance needed? Rather than accepting that the circle is incomplete, it makes more sense to try to complete the missing pieces. So a mother can't learn at this age, can she? Does she always have to carry the burden like a child?

The mother needs to initiate a "learning process" to complete these missing parts, but how will this process begin without a triggering event? If the child desires individuality, how will we understand whether this demand creates an awareness in the mother? Perhaps there is no such awareness at all; meaning that even a basic inquiry may not have taken place. Who, what, or how will engage the mother in the "awareness" process now?

But even if the mother is aware of building an individual life, at that age, where would she start? The social structure around her, her habits, perhaps economic dependence... Can it be solved just by saying "notice it?" You say the child is triggered when they desire individuality, but when triggered, where will this woman turn?

Perhaps the only barrier to a mother establishing an individual life is not just a lack of awareness. The role of the "self-sacrificing mother" assigned to women in society fundamentally complicates the idea of individuality. Even if she wants to establish individuality at that age, can we be sure that the social pressure around her allows for it? If simply saying "be aware" does not resolve the issue, we also need to consider the question, "Is it being permitted?"

But there is also this; the child's demand for individuality may sometimes make the mother feel guilty. So it's not just social pressure or a lack of awareness, but the clear perception of "you can't do it without me" comes into play. So could this demand make the mother feel like she has been "left out"?

Perhaps it is more important how the mother interprets the child's desire for individuality rather than the perception of "you can't do it without me." In other words, when the child says, "I want to be myself," the mother might interpret this as, "You're saying I'm a burden to you." Don't you think the language and approach used in communication play a crucial role in the formation of these perceptions?

Could it be that the mother's perception of the child's individuality request as "inadequacy" stems from her own past lack of "approval"? In other words, does the child's desire for individuality make the mother feel like her own individual existence is being questioned? Now, shouldn't we also look at how the mother suppresses her own needs?

The mother's perception of the request for individuality as "inadequacy" may stem not only from conditioning but also from a habitual responsibility framework. The idea of "If I don't do it, who will?" has become so ingrained that transitioning to a new role is related not just to awareness but also to the disruption of that habit. The external attitude of "this is your job" adds salt to the wound. If the child shakes this order, why wouldn't the mother react? But the real question is: Can the child find a way to communicate their desire for individuality without conflicting with their mother's established order?

Well, according to the mother, "shaking up this order" is already a conflict, right? So no matter how the child speaks, questioning the order might bring that reaction. The real problem is that the mother sees this order as a constant in life; how are you going to bend that?

Or maybe your mother's inability to question this order is a form of defense mechanism? Just think about it, questioning the order could mean feeling like "Have I done everything wrong all these years?" Perhaps she can't bear both the conflict and that confrontation? How will you break this?

Perhaps the reason the mother defends this order is not only to avoid questioning her past decisions, but also because it provides her with a sense of meaning. When the child desires individuality, what will be the meaning of the remaining order for the mother? Does she have another context in which to define herself, for instance?

Perhaps the issue is not that the mother has lost the meaning of order, but that her efforts are ignored and rendered invisible within that order. In other words, she defends that role because no one has seen her exist in any other way until now. If she abandons the order, she might feel as if she doesn't exist at all. Is there something she did that she can say, "I did this to feel that I exist"? For instance, when has she done something solely for herself?

But could it be that while the child is making a claim for individuality, they are unconsciously undermining the area that the mother has defined for herself? In other words, could it be that while asking the mother to let go of a certain order, the child is acting without fully understanding the role that this order plays in their life? Is it possible that part of the mother's defense comes from the feeling that this area is being devalued by the child?

But what if behind the mother's need to protect and defend this space, there is still a need for her to feel "central" even when the child desires individuality? In other words, could she perceive the disruption of order not just as a questioning of past decisions or a disregard of her efforts, but also as a pressure to say goodbye to a "leading role"? For instance, how can the child, while requesting individuality, simultaneously convey the feeling of "but I still keep you at my center"? Is that possible?

Perhaps the child's "demand for individuality" is already being expressed in a way that suggests the mother will be disconnected from the center. In other words, when saying to the mother, "I am now a separate being," is there an underlying message that "your presence is no longer as important as it used to be"? The demand is for "individuality," but does the tone resemble "separation" instead?

Perhaps the issue isn't the mother's fear of breaking away from the center, but rather the lack of establishing a new order in the mother's life alongside the child's demand for individuality. Does a child who tells the mother to "step out of the center" also provide an answer to the question, "Well, what happens next?" Sure, you want individuality, but have you ever talked about what the mother's place will be in this new order?

I think when discussing the mother's position, the child may lack clarity in their demands. Is the child who says, "This arrangement should change" sure about what they want to change? We assume they are not suggesting a new place for the mother, but perhaps the child does not understand whether there is a new arrangement or an old one. This discussion about the arrangement could also be a completely misguided targeting.

Perhaps what we perceive as a mother's defense of order is actually an effort to draw boundaries against the child's demands. So it might be less about "Is my order meaningful?" and more about "Do I have a say in this order, and can I make my child feel that?" While the child is demanding individuality, is the mother becoming so rigid in order not to lose her own space?

Perhaps the mother's defense of order is related to the inconsistency behind the child's demand for individuality. In other words, the child wants individuality, but how much effort are they actually putting in to turn that individuality into something livable? Do they want to break away from the center, or are they trying to stay in the center and change the rules? Could the mother's resistance also be a test of "I am here, but how realistic are you?"

Perhaps the issue stems not from the clash between the child's demand for individuality and the mother's defense of order, but rather from their shared need for some form of "visibility." While the child seeks to establish an identity with their individuality, this identity actually desires to be "seen"; the mother, on the other hand, insists on visibility due to the fear that her years of effort will go unrecognized. In this conflict, could it be that what is fundamentally lacking is whether the parties are truly seeing each other?

But what if, behind the mother's defense of order here, the child's demand for individuality appears to be a constant "transition phase"? In other words, does the child start by trying to establish their own space, but ends up moving on to the next "demand phase" without creating a consistent outcome? Perhaps the issue is that individuality cannot transform into a lasting order as promised?

Perhaps the issue is that both the child's demand for individuality and the mother's defense of order are actually based on very "static" structures on their own. In other words, the child wants individuality, but this demand for individuality is limited to the request for change; the mother defends order, but this order is a structure that cannot renew itself. Do both of them not need a notion of "flow"? Neither individuality is a complete break, nor is order completely fixed. We might be looking for some flexibility here.

But what if the mother's call for order is actually a plea for "division of labor"? That is, something like "if you want individuality, you also need to take responsibility." Perhaps the demand for individuality comes without sharing the burden of order, and the mother resists this. Is there even a functioning system in place?

But there's also this: sometimes the demand for individuality and the defense of order do not conflict with each other, they just communicate differently. For instance, when the child says "independence," the mother understands "unconditional attachment." This is neither called individuality nor order; it’s a deadlock. I think we should look at how each side listens to the other.

Here, instead of discussing "order" or "individuality," something much simpler might be at stake: who bears the burden of the work? In other words, if you want individuality, will you gather your area? If you advocate for order, will you do everything alone? Could the conflict have started from such a physical standpoint?

Perhaps the starting point of the issue is the "unmet expectation" as much as order or individuality? The child desires individuality but this demand still seeks a response through the family; the mother defends order but is in fact waiting for approval. Is it the fact that expectations are so implicit that perpetuates the conflict?

Perhaps when discussing large concepts like "order" or "individuality" here, we forget that both are completely interdependent. In other words, if there is no system that can prove its individuality within the order, or if the order does not allow room for individual differences, this tension already enters an endless cycle. Could this be a two-sided vice, where one does not function without feeding the other?

The main issue here is not the tension between "order" and "individuality," but rather how the two are "interpreted." For instance, what the mother calls order may actually be a mechanism of control, while what the child refers to as individuality might just be an escape. In other words, could both of them be filling the content of their concepts differently?

But maybe the issue isn't about motherhood or being a child; rather, it's about the wear and tear that comes from living under the same roof. It's not about order or individuality, but perhaps you're experiencing a "space fatigue." No matter how many ideas are generated in the same house, the physical presence remains the same. Doesn't this dynamic eventually become stagnant after a while?

Sure, everyone revolves around order or individuality, but the topic of "creating your own space" hasn’t been discussed at all in this debate. Can you, for example, build separate lives while living in the same house? Or is there always a necessity to be synchronized? Is it because people can't enter and exit homes that everyone gets so intertwined?

I believe there are things that cannot be solved even by "creating your own space." In other words, even if there is enough physical space, if you're constantly thinking about "what did they think, what were they expecting," you can't truly become independent. The question is: is it really possible to have a "headspace" in the same house? Or does everything somehow work in a shared way?

but the mental space here has its limits because, in the end, it turns into a form of relationship that tests one side's patience. No one can live as if they are constantly adjusted to someone else's rhythm, right? Maybe we should first look at "how many times do you accidentally hurt each other at home."

You can only carry your house together to a certain extent; after that, everyone builds their own life with their own hands. If this is going to turn into a constant debate about who carries more weight, there will be unhappiness at every step. The real question is, does everyone know what their share is? Or are they just deflecting with "it should suit me"?

So, there's a lot of talk about order, individuality, and space, but has the age difference been taken into account at all? I mean, the perception of time and the pace of needs between a mother and a child are different. Perhaps the conflict here is not only about the concepts, but also the rhythm of the generations?

The age difference is certainly a significant factor, but I don't think it's just a matter of tempo incompatibility. The fact that the mother and child are stuck in the same roles in the same house is a bigger issue. So it's not the age difference, but rather the unchanging definition of "who is who" that might be suffocating people. Is it possible to break this?

You say the definition of who Kim is should change, but who will make this definition? The mother or the child? Generally, everyone waits for the other to take the first step. Unless someone in this house gets up and openly says, "I don't want this anymore," the roles won't change by themselves. Are these things being talked about? Or is everyone just saying it to themselves?

"Is it being talked about?" has been said, but the tone of the conversation here is also important. What is clear is not what is said, but how it is said. Some sentences genuinely come across as "I don't want this anymore," but the way they are heard ends up sounding like "it's causing trouble." Perhaps the real issue is the difference in meaning given to words at home?

There may be a difference in the meaning given to words, but there's also this: One speaker leaves it at "I've said this much, let them understand," while the other is waiting and thinking, "Why doesn't he speak clearly?" It feels like something is always missing. But what if it never gets completed? Could it be that everyone is leaving this communication incomplete in some way?

If it can't be completed, maybe everyone stops questioning what the other person understands because they know very clearly what they mean themselves. This issue can be resolved somewhat by asking, "What does it mean to you?" Otherwise, everyone remains completely justified in their own way.

There's so much talk about "who said what, who understood what," but no one is asking this: Does the person across from you really care about what you said or how you feel? Because sometimes the problem isn't in the communication, but in the lack of a ground worth communicating on.

Maybe the issue isn't the ground, but the expectations? I mean, if you have a desire to be understood, even if the other person doesn't care, you choose to explain yourself. But what if the other person doesn't have the capacity to understand this? In that case, why keep experiencing the same cycle?

You say that if one lacks the capacity to understand, communication attempts will get nowhere, but isn't this too much of a simplification? Sometimes, a person may be mistaken even when they think they understand; perhaps if the other party touches on the right point, perception might open up. Is it truly right to give up and say "that's enough" without even trying?