Story by Emma Bittner // @emmabittner // she/her
Graphic by Krisha Anonuevo
There is no easy way to talk about abusive relationships. There just isn’t. We know they happen and we more than likely know people who have survived them. Yet we still sweep the conversation under the rug as an acknowledgment. However, I think it’s time we understand that the hardest conversations to have are often the most important ones.
Recently, the term trauma bonding has been tossed around loosely like a new catchphrase. Younger generations aren’t afraid to talk about their past experiences and agony. They are blunt and candid about what they’ve been through. When discussing their past, many find a connection over these shared horrors and have found budding relationships because of it. This experience has been coined as trauma bonding, a phrase that has been around for a while now associated with a morphed meaning.
I’m part of the group that tacked on this distorted definition. It made sense. I bonded over shared trauma with someone, and – at the time – it felt right. I was far off. Clinically, a trauma bond is the bond built in an abusive relationship as the result of cyclical abuse and a power imbalance. These bonds are commonly seen in abusive relationships where one party has obvious power. Predatory power dynamics like these are often seen between a child and adult, a kidnapper and hostage, or even a cult leader and follower.
The term I and thousands of others have been throwing around holds much more gravity than we ever assumed. The traumatic bond that happens in abusive relationships isn’t a choice. It’s often questioned by those who haven’t been in an abusive relationship why someone doesn’t just leave, but this bond keeps you connected and ties you close. It’s not your fault, it’s biological.
The term we’ve flung around has roots breaking the abusive Stockholm Syndrome–type connection one has with their abuser. It’s not simple and it’s misunderstood by outsiders. Trauma bonding keeps you in these relationships; it makes it hard to leave, leaving you to make excuses to stay and protect your abuser. This bond seems unbreakable at points, and it’s difficult to imagine a life beyond it.
We bond over our past wounds and experiences we’ve had. We find commonalities in our lived experiences and wounded past. We get close with others and find a connection, but we aren’t trauma-bonding. Most of us don’t have an unhealthy power imbalance that has caused one of us to rely on the other. We are simply finding comfort in sharing things that have hurt us in the past.
Understanding the gravity of trauma bonding in relationships is critical. It provides insight into understanding abusive relationships at a surface level. Discussing our past calamities isn’t bad and talking through our past is a healthy coping mechanism. However what we’ve labeled this isn’t ideal. Noting the differences between bonding over common experiences and the traumatic bonds from cyclical abuse is imperative. This phrase holds much more weight than we’ve let on, and bringing light to the true meaning and roots of the term is one step in the right direction.
We aren’t brushing abusive relationships under the rug anymore. We are discussing them bluntly and openly. We are correcting the mistakes of the past and it starts with accurate comprehension.
