That's a very utilitarian way of maintaining a relationship with anyone, let alone family.
Don't associate with bad people. That is absolutely
utilitarian and it is also moral
. And I will do as I please, thanks very much.
Families do drift apart. Varied interests and work schedules often prevent interaction until a holiday forces our hand and we interact with virtual strangers.
Who is this "we"? Got a mouse in your pocket? You're collectivizing there.
However, I demonstrate no virtue in loving those that love me in return. That's E-A-S-Y....and selfish.
I demonstrate real virtue by loving those that can, or don't, give me a thing in return, are unpopular and/or unloveable. In other words, selflessly. I should love others, especially family, regardless whether they love me back.
Everything you say in this part of your post is the opposite of what is good and true. Selflessness is not a virtue. Rand covered this in 1943 and codified it in 1957 fairly well.
This is many times difficult and painful. I only grow as a human being when I'm stretched out of my 'comfort zone'; when I do what I KNOW is right vs what I FEEL like doing. When I act out of conviction instead of simply reacting.
What you "KNOW is right" is wrong. Altruism is for suckers.
If I withhold relationship from anyone in my family I'm committing violence against them, albeit covert, but violence just the same.
Incorrect, also stockholm syndrome.
I'd give you advice but you probably won't listen, so I'll just hope you eventually see how self abuse isn't any better than abuse from others and wish you good luck.
But look, it's your life, right, go do what you want and if you think you have an obligation to associate with bad people then by all means go ahead and enjoy it, or not enjoy it for the sake of your interpretation of what is virtuous if that suits you.
But I have to disagree and reject with great distaste your definition of virtue and absolutely refuse to acknowledge it as valid.
Also, the claim that me NOT giving something to someone else is the initiation of violence is absolutely absurd, and logic like that could be turned right around and applied as an argument for pretty much any power the state currently wields. So double ick on that.
<<<Goes to shower off the icky.