Cary's response and all of the other letters are so true. I was especially touched by the observations about how the things parents do and provide for their children can actually separate them from each other in profound ways.

It occurred to me while reading the letters that the LW's mother and Anonymous' mother might have had something else in common: not wanting to admit to a profound personal failure. One about her daughter's sexual preference, and the other about her daughter's mental health. In both cases, these are things for which mothers were, in the not-so-distant past, often "blamed." If your child (especially an only child, into whom you have poured everything, and who, unlike most of your peers, you waited to have until you were a fully-fledged adult, 28-30 yrs old), doesn't turn out the way that everything you were taught said she would, then you must have done something wrong.

Conversely, if you are convinced that you were the very best mother you could possibly be, then it is unimaginable that your beloved (only) daughter could become something so unacceptable in Society's eyes.

Cary, what does one call the emotional version of "cognitive dissonance?"

[FYI... I don't really think that parents with more than one child have any to "spare," but they're more likely to appreciate that there are inherent differences in each child, even though they all grew up in the same family.]

Another thought I had was about something I only wish I had learned earlier myself... that a parent's primary responsibility to a child is to help him or her understand and learn how to deal with their feelings, and that lots of parents need their own help in this area.

...must have been thinking of re-experiencing the birth process as the beginning. Potentially very painful.

I keep trying to think of a problem worthy of one of Cary's imaginative and poetic responses, but I'm already past most of the really critical issues. Unless I want to ask about aging, but it's still too soon for that.

Frankly, I found the 40's to be mostly difficult-- with stresses around my health and in my family and at work-- and I am just glad that I survived them to arrive safe and sound in my 50's. So far, I haven't seen any mention of mid-life crisis, but perhaps that is what's really happening for the LW. Fast cars, new wardrobes and love affairs are not the only manifestations of entering the 40's, just the stereotypical ones. Some folks find a new maturity then, and it isn't always comfortable, especially when feeling pulled between having to make small talk and wanting to discuss more important issues.

[For the cosmically minded: the planet Uranus will have traveled halfway around its (84-yr) solar orbit when you enter the 40's. Think of it as representing the freedom to be who you really are, just as the moon can represent your emotional life, and the sun your ego. At Uranus's half-way point, it's natural to be reevaluating and wondering and questioning your identity and past choices. Unfortunately, not everyone gets to be 84, but of the 84-yr olds you do know, aren't they mostly comfortable with themselves?]

Passive-aggressive behavior is infinitely wearying, and, if truth be told, probably a factor in their partners' health problems. (my opinion)

I found this book by Scott Wetzler: "Living with the passive-aggressive man: Coping with hidden aggression-- from the bedroom to the boardroom," to be helpful in dealing with a passive-aggressive man in my life, if only because I didn't play "the game" anymore (or at least not as often).

What makes passive-aggressive behavior so effective is the way it makes its victims question their own sanity and behavior. Wetzler's book helps to break through that fog. I can't say it was a cure-all, but it definitely helped me feel less crazy.

An excerpt I found via Amazon:

He's brilliantly persuasive at selling himself-- whether it's his brooding stoicism, his understated charm, his boyishness or irresistible seductiveness. You buy into his elusiveness; but you also buy into his neediness. You feel for him and want to be the one who breaks through, who tears the walls down and gets him to shape up. In many cases, it is a thankless mission.

Problems arise with the passive-aggressive man because of his fatal flaw: an indirect and inappropriate way of expressing hostility under the guise of innocence, generosity or passivity. If what he says or does confuses you, or, more likely, angers you, this is why. You're not the only one to react this way. It's what passive-aggression is all about.

Wetzler continues later with:

This is a man who's driven to appear above suspicion, guiltless and guileless. That's why you find that most passive-aggressive men negotiate the world as "nice guys," denying even the slightest hint of hostility or conflict.

Notice how many Salon readers were sympathetic to the brother-in-law? And wanted to give him credit for his "good deeds?"