#intergenerational trauma

Add this to my "weird reasons for hope" tag:

You know, the more I learn about people - about myself, society, psychology, language - the more I begin to think that a truly shocking number of conflicts - interpersonal and large scale - can be explained by some combination of:

Cognitive biases x, x

The fact that we're generally accidentally insulting each other all the time without realizing it, actually x, x, x, x

The fact that there have been a lot of different explanations for How Things Are and How Things Came to Be, believed in very strongly by different groups and people throughout history, and a hell of a lot of those explanations have now been empirically disproven (e.g., the earth is four billion years old, not six thousand) x, x, x

Trauma/intergenerational trauma and epigenetics x, x, x

50% child mortality rate for all of human history until the past 150 years, and much higher rates and younger ages of adult mortality, too x, x

All that constant heavy metal poisoning in Europe and North America from the late 1700s to like the 1970s-1990s (highly correlated with increased aggression and lower IQ*) x, x, x, x *ETA: IQ is a fundamentally flawed concept. It has a lot of issues and has been used to perpetuate a lot of bullshit and justify even more horrible bullshit. However, as the second source argues, it does look like it's a useful measure of cognitive damage and certain neuropsychological processes

Scarcity (x) and especially:

Europeans were historically pretty bad at agriculture and medicine, actually, but they decided they knew best and killed or persecuted everyone who disagreed with them and forced their shitty methods on the whole world via colonialism x, x, x, x, x, x

(Yes, and also capitalism, but everything on that list is older than capitalism, which coalesced in the mid-/late-1700s and early 1800s x, x; the first known use of the word "capitalism" is 1833 x)

This is an article about the article:

The article itself:

This is a long post that may contain Heated Rivalry spoilers.

I'm almost positive that this is the first time, on this blog I've had since 2022, I've expounded heavily on a Western show like Heated Rivalry. I created this blog specifically to write about Asian dramas.

I'm Asian-American. When I watch Asian dramas, my Asian brain and heart are always looking for themes I can connect with -- themes like filial piety, saving face, family structures, and intergenerational trauma.

(One of my very favorite shows from Thailand, Bad Buddy, featured a strong narrative framework of intergenerational trauma, filial piety, and saving face -- and is a rivals-to-lovers show that I highly recommend to anyone watching Heated Rivalry at the moment.)

After yesterday's fantastic episode five of Heated Rivalry, I want to take a moment to write about what I see are some important themes of intergenerational trauma in Heated Rivalry that I think the show is working with wonderfully.

Yuna Hollander, Shane's Family, the MLH/NHL, and Hockey Culture

Yuna Hollander is the kind of Asian parent that I would normally have started writing about by the end of episode one in an Asian drama series. I've read Rachel Reid's Game Changer series in full now, so I held myself back to talk about Yuna, knowing, generally, what's coming down the pike with her.

(Source: @firstprinced)

But just to make a few quick notes about her: Yuna is

1) an Asian mom, 2) a HOCKEY mom, and 3) an ASIAN HOCKEY mom.

For context, I have children of my own, and I was advised STRONGLY, early in my motherhood, to specifically NOT become a hockey mom. Why?

The schedules of lessons and practices are brutal for hockey parents. Practices can start at 5:30 am. You have to drive to a rink that may be far away from where you live. You have to deal with expensive gear, and kids growing out of that expensive gear. The fear of safety for your child regarding head and other physical injuries. Tough coaches, long games, longer road trips, demanding and brutal schedules. And that's just for pre-amateur leagues, nothing professional. If your child is a talented player, as Shane Hollander and Scott Hunter were as children, they might be scouted as early as their early teenage years. Their entire lives will revolve around hockey, and a hockey parent will have to adjust THEIR life around their child's schedule.

What does being an Asian mom mean as I work to understand Yuna Hollander? As I write about really often, there are some safe generalizations I can make about Asian family structures across dramas from Japan, South Korea, Thailand, and elsewhere. Patriarchy is often king, but strong mothers certainly abound. Filial piety is very often expected of children, and frameworks of filial piety can explain decisions made by main characters to acquiesce to their parents that may be inexplicable to a Western audience. In other words, when we as Westerners expect an Asian main character to act more individualistically, they may actually not do so, as they are Asian, and may take more into consideration a parent's demands or perspective, from the frameworks of collectivism and/or filial piety.

(In Bad Buddy, Pran, managing his mother's expectations and his devotion to his mother, is an excellent example of demonstrating this kind of behavior.)

Yuna -- the Asian hockey mom -- is Shane's manager. She's cutting him deals, she's making sure he's fulfilling his contracts. After his huge hit, he convalesces at his parents' house. Shane lunches with his parents before big games and big moments, and Yuna piles on the expectations and questions.

Shane's an only child, devoted to his parents. But -- AND -- he's also following what Yuna has designed for him. He wouldn't have been able to grow up as a major hockey prospect if it weren't for Yuna's total devotion to his career.

I say all this, because Shane's coming out to Rose held something significant, besides the incredible act of coming out. Shane, of course, has not yet come out to his parents. And he hasn't come out to hockey -- to the hockey culture that he was raised in -- and is expected, by Yuna, by his teammates, by management, by the fans, to participate in wholly, with the power of his entire professional and personal life.

Yuna raised him to be a hockey prospect, but also to participate in a pre-established culture of professional hockey that, at this moment of the show, has not welcomed out gay players yet.

Yuna has Shane organized as a full-bodied participant in hockey culture. Outside of Shane's contracts, his on-ice play, his relationships with his teammates, his macrobiotic diet, Shane rebels. He rebels when he's alone with Ilya, when he escapes the confines of a hotel room shared with Hayden. It stresses Shane out to hell and back, but that's how he needs to express himself vis à vis his otherwise repressed sexuality. It's how gay hockey players in real life have previously needed to behave to save their hockey careers.

Shane, up until the very end of episode five, is bearing the weight of intergenerational expectations from his mother and from professional hockey, to live by their established cultural standards and rules, and to not rock any boats. He's literally, in so many deals, contracted to not cross any lines. The fact that Shane's mother -- again, a woman that Shane is otherwise totally devoted to -- is the conduit to making Shane's career happen, besides his talent, is, I think, a very important Asian story that the show highlights really well. Shane, by Yuna and by the MLH, is expected to only toe lines -- not to cross them.

(Source: the wonderful @rozanovs)

Ilya's Family

I said yesterday that I think episode five eclipsed the book, in my opinion, and what we saw of Ilya's family in yesterday's episode was perhaps the biggest example of this feeling of mine. I absolutely LOVED what the show did with Ilya and Alexei, which was a departure from the book.

(Source: @thebitchesterbrothers)

Ilya left Russia to play professional hockey in America, against his father's wishes. What the deal is with Alexei's lifelong beef with is with Ilya, we don't quite know. What we do know is that Alexei has hated Ilya for all of Ilya's life, and they share a mother -- a much younger mother to Ilya's and Alexei's father -- who is now dead. We also learn, in episode five, that Alexei credits himself with taking care of Ilya's father in his dying days -- a claim that could be arguably refuted from the phone scene in episode four, with Ilya berating Alexei for leaving his father alone and confused.

I can't claim to know Russian cultural family structures and standards. But disregarding a younger sibling wholly, while expecting, AT THE SAME TIME, that younger sibling to provide constant financial support, is something that I, as an Indian, can really fucking relate to. At least in my Indian culture, if a younger sibling has made a life-changing decision against the wishes of elders, that sibling can be totally written off within the family structure as a nobody, all while still being expected to financially and emotionally provide for the older members of the family. I know this from experience.

While I question the validity of Alexei's statement that he took care of his father, I understand Ilya's feelings of guilt regarding his father's last days. Ilya, in all other circumstances, never failed to show up for his father. Ilya spent summers taking care of his dad, seemingly without Alexei present. Ilya showed up to the Sochi events in 2014 to make his father look good and proud, despite his father's continued complaints and berating.

And before his father's death, in a hotel room in Tampa Bay, Ilya says that he can't go back to Russia if he lives a life where Shane is his partner. In that moment, Russia is still a bitter part of Ilya's life -- which makes it all the more remarkable that Ilya makes his first confession of love to Shane while still in Russia.

(Source: @thatonekimgirl)

Ilya is inextricably tied to his family. He isn't necessarily trying to completely run away from them. He certainly came to America to play hockey, as opposed to playing in Russia, because he KNEW he had to get away, physically. But, emotionally, he's still very tied to Russia and to his family -- and he carries the baggage of his family's and his country's expectations of him. When Shane climbs into his lap to comfort him in Tampa Bay, Ilya finds himself in a moment where he is FINALLY being CARED FOR by.... someone else. Anyone else. Instead of needing to care for himself.

Ilya, in his confession to Shane, realizes that he's had these feelings for Shane for a while. His charmed-off-his-ass look when Shane reveals that he's hired a stylist is an off-the-charts moment of adoration. Ilya's tremendous fear for Shane's health after the hit on the ice, and in the hospital room, just give that away more. Ilya is BUCKING the accusations from his family that he's a lazy nobody. Ilya is a deeply caring person, who knows the immense amount of work he needs to put in to keep his love for Shane safe and growing.

In that hospital room, Ilya is hesitant about their future. After Scotty Hunter's insane moment on center ice -- Ilya is certain. He will move forward, away from the intergenerational expectations of his family, his country, and his culture, to forge a new path forward with Shane.

Rose and Svetlana as Lovers, Friends, and Allies

What the show is doing with Rose and Svetlana -- especially with Svetlana, who is quite different from her book characterization -- is just GREAT.

Rose and Svetlana represent the new generation of friends and allies in Shane's and Ilya's lives. They do NOT carry expectations of Shane and Ilya. Rose and Svetlana are THERE AND PRESENT. NEITHER OF THEM hold against Shane and Ilya that Shane and Ilya don't want relationships with them. BOTH OF THEM hold mirrors to Shane and Ilya, to help the two young men recognize their own feelings and their own truths.

(Source: @magnusedom)

THIS IS HUGE. Parents should be nurturing and reflective just like this, right?

Well, but. Yuna and Grigori HAVE THEIR EXPECTATIONS OF THEIR CHILDREN, and they have put those expectations on their children without hesitation.

(I hate to put them together in this comparison, but I have to do it just for this point.)

Rose and Svetlana have no such expectations for their lovers.

In fact, both Rose and Svetlana are like, HEY GUYS, what exactly is your own truth?

AND WE WILL BE HERE TO SUPPORT YOU IN YOUR TRUTH.

Rose wants her and Shane to be total besties after Shane's coming out. Svetlana pulls Ilya out of almost every uncomfortable scenario he's in with his family members. These ladies STAND ON BUSINESS in protecting their friends.

(Source: @maxanor)

And I think that framework -- especially in comparison to how the main parents behave in this show -- is so generationally brilliant for Heated Rivalry to focus on.

BECAUSE: the show is meant to depict and to encourage CHANGE. Hockey culture needs to change. Parents need to change. Social change will come with generational shifts.

And Rose and Svetlana represent generational change. After we see Rose and Svetlana supporting their boys, we can ask: at this point, why the fuck ISN'T there an out gay hockey player? We WILL have support for that player amongst an ever-diversifying fan base for professional hockey. No one's sexuality fucking matters when you're trying to win games.

Rose and Svetlana are both saying to Shane and Ilya: JUST BE YOU. Be happy. That kind of unconditional support is exactly what Shane and Ilya need to propel them to move forward, together, in their lives.

The show tells us that we need Scotty Hunter on the ice with his Kip to move hockey culture forward. But what I really am loving about this show is that it's also saying: we need the social dinosaurs to get out of the way, so that people of ALL kinds can be accepted into hockey, and into society, with open arms.

Your feelings are valid on too. Special shoutout to all the cycle breakers. 💐

Created with Mother Wound Project

The media turned. Social media turned. Several prominent 'influencers' – many of whom call themselves 'feminists' – posted aggressive anti-Zionist rants online. These were the progressive left, people I had admired and supported in the past. It was profoundly shocking. I felt violated. I can tolerate differences of opinion – I mean, I trade in opinion pieces – but this was blatant misinformation. Many of these influencers called Israeli Jews 'colonisers', erasing our ancient ties to the land of Israel.

One by one, several of my non-Jewish friends in the media joined the chorus, making their own antisemitism blatantly clear. They 'liked' offensive posts or wrote inflammatory posts of their own. Some thinly disguised their antisemitism as anti-Zionism. Others didn't bother to hide their contempt for us. Stop using the Holocaust as an excuse. Go back to Poland. Good on Hamas. It was resistance! There were no rapes. This wasn't empathy for Palestinians. This was hatred of Jews. It shattered me, because these people knew me, the Jew. We used to share coffees, meals, our life stories, secrets. How could I not have known what they thought of me and my people?

I have been writing opinion pieces for over twenty years. I am told I am good at it. Sometimes I can change people's minds with my words. So I tried to use my platform for good. There are two peoples who are indigenous to the land of Israel, I posted on social media. This is the source of the conflict. I was measured. I was calm. I knew that I would be able to help people see that Jews could care deeply about the hostages and their dead, and also feel devastated at the loss of Palestinian life.

I was wrong. The comments were fast to arrive, the likes of ZIONISTS LOVE GENOCIDE.

I've had vile comments in the past, sure, but I've usually been able to disarm the commenter with humour. More than once, I've turned a troll into a fan.

Not this time.

Initially, I responded as gently and reasonably as I could. I sent links to articles, explaining the history of the Jews in Israel. ZIONIST PROPAGANDA, they wrote back. STOP MAKING EXCUSES FOR COLONISERS.

No argument worked. Nothing could make the commenters reflect on their own prejudices. Why did they care so passionately about this one conflict, but not about ones in Yemen or Sudan? Why did they care about the suffering of other minorities, but dismissed – even mocked – the suffering of Jews? Why did they 'believe all woman' except Jewish women?

No argument worked. I realised, because antisemitism is not logical. You can't use reason to dismantle hate.

With that dawning realisation, something happened to my brain. A sense of hopelessness and impotence overwhelmed me and, in the vacuum it created, the horrors of the Holocaust finally caught up with me, flooding my consciousness, running on a continuous loop in the background. My body was in Sydney, but my mind now was in the shetls. I saw the trucks rolling in, saw the trains, the piles of bodies, saw my father shot, heard my kids screaming for help. The intergenerational trauma I believed I'd been free of had been there all along, lying dormant inside me.

It was the closest I have ever come to a mental breakdown. I cried and I shook, and at night I lay sleepless. I could not talk myself down. For several weeks, I felt constantly frightened and constantly on alert.

In desperation, I went to my GP and got a script for antidepressants; the first time I had taken them in many years. I cut down on my news intake, limited my social media and disengaged from conversations about the Middle East. I rewatched movies from the 1980s, a time when I felt completely safe. It took three or four weeks for the fear to recede and the Holocaust visions to fade.

Eventually, I felt ready to write about my experience. I also wanted to write about the doxxing of 600 Jewish creatives and academics, which happened at the time of my crisis and made the news. I pitched the idea to the editor of my column several times. I even offered to waive the fee. I literally begged for the opportunity. I was firmly told 'no', they weren't interested in my take. They'd heard enough on the topic. No one reads those pieces anyway. They did, however, eventually run an article by another Jewish columnist, calling for the end of Israel as a Jewish state and blaming antisemitism in the diaspora on Israel. She, an anti-Zionist, was allowed to write her opinion on matters related to our community. I was not.

I continued to receive hate just for being Jewish. After a column I wrote in support of child-free women, I was accused online of 'wanting to stop other women from having children so you can populate the world with your genocidal Jewish babies'.

I quit social media entirely.

I'm a fairly resilient person, but my experience of antisemitism, and of being silenced when I wanted to speak against it, changed me. My passion for writing was crushed. My sense of security was shattered. I learned that antisemitism is just bubbling away under the surface. Friends can turn against me. The community I live in can turn toxic. People will hate me just because I'm Jewish. I have learned, too, that the trauma of persecution is in our DNA, even in those of us who have lived a relatively sheltered life. We cannot escape our trauma, because it continues to play out. We exist in a state of threat, as we have for thousands of years. Our history will be denied. Our pain will be mocked. Our words will be twisted and weaponised against us.

More than a year after October 7, my mental health has improved, but my life will never be the same. I cannot unlearn this new knowledge. I will never forget what has happened, and what is still happening. I am still struggling to write anything, including this essay. And as I do, I brace myself for the worst, for these words may be weaponised too.