Yes, Zig, I am the WAW. H has never been. He is the LBS and has read DB with a positive response, at least intellectually. You're inserting a lot into my posts that isn't there, like the above, and like stating that I read the quote everyday to keep the WAS perspective fresh in my mind. What you're inserting is not true - period. It's not my opinion or perspective, it's a tangible fact. I almost feel like you're projecting, which is understandable, it happens. But I don't know how to address the invalid insertions of yours without being accused of being argumentative, so unless you ask for clarification, I just won't comment on the invalid statements.
BTW, I've read your sitch. You have a LOT going on, had a lot going on. I don't envy your sitch. It seems like you're doing a great job evaluating your contributions to the problems. I feel for you. I also feel for your H. I can see why he would just want to get away from the stress/burden. Tough road!
I did want to ask you ... do you believe there is such a thing as a "bully"? Or is the victim just not "centered, grounded and independent" enough and if they'd get their stuff together, there wouldn't be a problem?
i'm not really sure within what context you're asking me about the "bully" thing.
are you asking that because you think that i am bullying you? or that your h is bullying you?
and what exactly do you think i'm projecting? my feelings about my h onto you, because you're the WAS here?
i find it really interesting that you only respond vehemently to things that obviously touch a raw nerve within you. when anyone offers advice or a different perspective on how you could approach things, you ignore that completely.
if you are the WAS spouse, what do you really expect right now? your h is telling you loud and clear that he is having a hard time with you. you've changed your mind and you want to make this work, and i think deep down you do, but if you are approaching it with the same tone of voice and attitude that you express in these posts ( and i could be wrong about that, but a lot of stuff does come through in spite of written text), why are you surprised that you are not getting the response you need?
There is no gentleness, empathy, sympathy or love expressed in your writing about your h. there is no generosity in your tone - maybe it is there within you, but it's not showing here - all i hear is defensiveness and holding on to old stuff. you want your h to let go of stuff and work with you on this - but i don't see you letting go of something as little as him eating off your plate - and yes, i do agree that you are a tad bit too focused on that detail.
my comments on that quote, are still the same. if you are approaching trying to fix your marriage with those sorts of feelings that you say are very present within you, then i'm just wondering what you are really expecting from your h in terms of participation.
as for your comments on my sitch - "thank-you" - your warm sympathy and well wishes are duly noted.
i wish you well on your journey - and hope you find peace and clarity for yourself. I also wish your h the same
zig
me 46 H 38 M10yrs T 11 S10 BD ow 8/11 h filed 9/25/12
"if i could define enlightenment briefly, i would say it is the quiet acceptance of what is"
Go Disney! Not irrational at all. Sounds like something I would do and then be accused of being argumentative.
Quote:
FWIW, I believe he hurled that barb your way out of a sense of pain and frustration -- he doesn't understand why you have such an issue with that, because he doesn't have an issue with it. Making that comment was his attempt to be "right" instead of being happy, by making you look petty and unreasonable. If he felt loved and accepted, he wouldn't do things like that.
So somewhere in his mind, his making me look petty and unreasonable will get him the love he wants from me? This sounds like you described your dad. (I'd love to spend some time with your mom and learn how she copes.)
Quote:
That's why sometimes I believe you have to have a disproportionate reaction to a boundary violation, and you have to be 100% consistent. If you're not, the boundary isn't credible, and if the consequences aren't meaningful, then the boundary isn't respected.
And simply refusing to go out to eat with him doesn't fit that bill? There's other things to do besides eating out together. Shouldn't that set a precedent for other things/behaviors? I think it should, it doesn't, but then I haven't found anything that works.
CV, he did not do it to get love, he did it from the perspective of fear and hurt, to lift his self-esteem by trampling yours -- unfortunate human tendency when we feel wronged.
So "His Needs, Her Needs" and the accompanying weekend seminar didn't help? Did it not help because the two of you couldn't execute it well, because no one could execute it well, or because it's fundamentally flawed?
I also saw the part about recreational companionship -- that struck a nerve with me because W won't engage in any of my recreational interests, and she doesn't have any for me to engage in.
It also recommends 25 hours of undivided attention time per week when you are engaged only with each other not watching TV or a movie and without your kids present -- how do you do that with a full time job and 3 small kids?
I know you've done lots of MC and now I know you did this. What else have you done and what's the usual trajectory? Does it help for a little while and gradually deteriorate, or not help at all?
Give "Passionate Marriage" another chance, if you get passed the sexual stuff in the beginning there is some good stuff waiting.
Accuray
Married 18, Together 20, Now Divorced M: 48, W: 50, D: 18, S: 16, D: 12 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 7/13/11 Start Reconcile: 8/15/11 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 5/1/2014 (Divorced) In a New Relationship: 3/2015
i find it really interesting that you only respond vehemently to things that obviously touch a raw nerve within you. when anyone offers advice or a different perspective on how you could approach things, you ignore that completely.
vehemently re: raw nerve? Seems logical, though vehemently sounds a little dramatic, like devastated and ballistic. If I agree with something or want to continue thinking about it, there's not much reason to address it.
Originally Posted By: Zig
your h is telling you loud and clear that he is having a hard time with you.
Can I tell you I disagree with your statement, and thereby not ignore it, and not be accused of being argumentative or responding vehemently? I disagree with your statement. Is that okay? Can you give me an example of what you've read in my posts that my H has told me loud and clear that supports your statement? (Or perhaps I'm not understanding your meaning of "having a hard time."
Originally Posted By: Zig
are you asking that because you think that i am bullying you? or that your h is bullying you?
Neither. I was just wondering if your philosophy allowed for such a thing and what it would look like. It doesn't seem like it does. I can feel real empathy for someone that was in that sort of sitch hearing your approach.
Originally Posted By: Zig
but i don't see you letting go of something as little as him eating off your plate - and yes, i do agree that you are a tad bit too focused on that detail.
As stated: not focused, figurative example for posting.
The concrete details are a lot easier for me. Back to the plate scenario when he said that somewhat belligerent "see I asked him I didn't take it" - you could have said "I appreciate that." end of story. Not over the top, but honest. Not condescending or like talking to a little kid.
Your responses to him, expressed and even just internal in the way you write how you feel about what he said, strike me as oppositional, which was frequently triggered in me too, and is a very big problem my h had with me. Leading up to about 2 years ago I had almost a teenage girl mentality toward my H as an overbearing father. I was obnoxious and oppositional. It still pops out occasionally, and my IC notes and challenges it. It comes from my childhood, and I see it in you. Anything you might work on there?
I hate to hear 'you can be happy or right'. Someone said that to me in iVillage as if that explained my whole situation in a nutshell and I thought "recipe for a doormat." There's a happy medium. In a loving relationship you choose your battles wisely, you overlook some things out of love and tolerance. You can trust that you're going to get tolerance back for your idiosyncracies. I'm working to let go of certain things, or be a little extra tolerant in how I respond, and I feel better about myself because of it.
I think if you could practice acknowledging good things about him once in a while without letting the whole pile of bad that becomes obvious in light of the measly good OVERWHELM the good little thing...you can start to build a bridge of goodwill toward each other. So yeah, 'thanks for not eating off my plate - I know you don't get it but it means a lot to me' seems ridiculous in light of how basic it seems to you, and even more how you use it as a symbol of even being treated as a human (!) ... it's one tiny step in the right direction. And then you can take another step. The surprise (!) was how far you stretched the meaning of the food-plate thing. Your pain is so deep and multifaceted.
I like what they say about how you eat an elephant, one bite at a time.
I really enjoyed our chitchats these past days, and always appreciate a good argument/discussion. Helps us all understand this very complicated stuff.
Adinva 51, S20, S18 M24 total 6/15/11-12/1/12 From IDLY to H moving out 9/15/15-3/7/17 From negotiating SA to final D at age 50 5/8/17-now: New relationship with an old friend __ Happiness is a warm puppy.
So "His Needs, Her Needs" and the accompanying weekend seminar didn't help? Did it not help because the two of you couldn't execute it well, because no one could execute it well, or because it's fundamentally flawed?
I know you've done lots of MC and now I know you did this. What else have you done and what's the usual trajectory? Does it help for a little while and gradually deteriorate, or not help at all?
I don't think the philosophy is flawed, of this or any of the other things we've done, which included parenting classes. Just like a diet and exercise plan, there are 100 different formulas that work, but you actually have to DO what the plan says. H has a tendency to do the same with everything -- claim to be 100% on board, twist the rules to fit his definition (cheat on a diet, for example,) and then drop it altogether when it becomes difficult or inconvenient or doesn't provide instant gratification. He can talk it really well for the most part, but has a very difficult time changing even when he says he wants to, especially when it came to his kids and discipline. Might be another typical human thing, still hard to live with though.
From my side, I don't have a problem changing my behaviors when I believe in something, so I could apply the principles pretty easily. I just didn't do it well, and I believe now that I did it in more of a co-dependent fashion. I should have had stronger boundaries instead of continuing to give and thinking it would come back around without managing it better. If we were on the same page with the love bank theories, I should have said "You owe me, pay up," but that just seems so icky, and it doesn't seem to be effective with him anyway trying it now. Also, for me, some of this R stuff is really hard to jibe with Christian teachings (ie. sacrificial=good vs. co-dependent=bad) so it's still tough for me to sort out an appropriate balance.
The 25 hours thing? Yeah, I can't see that either.
I'll give P.M. another chance, later. It did have some good stuff, just too hard to pick it out of the rest. It's been a long, dry spell for me. I don't need the tease.
With the plate thing, I just didn't say anything. Honestly? I'm NOT appreciative. Partly because it was S's plate, not mine. Party because I can accomplish the same thing by not sitting near him or not going to dinner with him. Maybe that's selfish, maybe that's arrogant, I don't know. I get it that he's making a change in his behavior, but the behavior is a choice in the first place, unlike his snoring. Wearing his cpap is something I can be appreciative of because he has to put effort into changing something that he's not choosing in the first place, it's inconvenient, probably uncomfortable. That I can appreciate. Otherwise, this is something I don't get. I wonder how I would look this up?
Oppositional behavior.... I'm going to have to look that up before I can respond to the idea. My first thought was, no, that he's more of a child. I've certainly never thought of my H as a father figure, I've always felt like the mother, like I have two children to raise (hate it!) But I'm clearly opposed to the suggestion that I thank him for not picking food off my plate. Is that the same thing? I certainly don't look at you as my mother, so I'm not opposing you that way. So I'm going to have to look into this one a bit. Goody, something new!
Originally Posted By: Advina
you can start to build a bridge of goodwill toward each other.
LOL! Well I couldn't type fast enough to put down the train of thought I had for this one, so I'll just say I landed on you're probably right. The big question is will I want him when I accomplish that?
Originally Posted By: Advina
The surprise was how far you stretched the meaning of the food-plate thing. Your pain is so deep and multifaceted.
Yup. I think the problem is how our R has been whittled down to almost nothing. If you only interact with someone for 10 minutes a day, and the other person spends 9.5 minutes in silence and 30 seconds offending you, it's hard to look beyond it. There's nothing beyond it to look to.
Thank you for your time, Advina. You and Accuray and a few others either have tougher skin or I'm not offending you the same as I do some. So thanks for hanging with me. There is progress, I am listening, some things are sticking.
Hi CV. I think your combativeness is self-protection, or anyway mine is, so it doesn't offend me.
Try this on for size. What if you built that bridge simply for you, to prove you can, just to try to love him a little more and practice loving in case there's someone else in your future.
And then when it's possible for you to reconnect with your H, decide then if you want to. But start the work just for yourself.
How's that fit?
Adinva 51, S20, S18 M24 total 6/15/11-12/1/12 From IDLY to H moving out 9/15/15-3/7/17 From negotiating SA to final D at age 50 5/8/17-now: New relationship with an old friend __ Happiness is a warm puppy.
H and I had a very enlightening convo last night. Enlightening for me anyway, I can't say for him. I now have a very good analogy of the progression/state of our R.
Picture a young boy and girl sitting and playing with a pile of toys. Initially, the toys are new and interesting, the R is new and untainted, so both are playing quite well together. After a while, when the personalities start coming out, an observer would notice that the little boy is playing with the majority of the toys and the little girl has less, but because the little girl is creative, she can be content playing with less so no conflict ensues. Soon, the little boy, who is not very creative, gets bored with his big pile of toys, notices the little girl having lots of fun with her pile and decides he wants her toys. He takes her toys. The little girl is surprised by his action but just calmly takes some of the toys that he was no longer playing with and is content. This cycle occurs a couple of times, but after a while, the little boy takes the toys from the little girl and won't let the little girl take any of his, so she has nothing to play with. For a while, the little girl just watches the little boy play with all the toys, but since the little boy is not very creative or entertaining, she tries to take one of the toys. A fight ensues.
About this time, Mom, who has been offering instruction all along about playing nicely (counselors,) walks over and separates the two, giving each of them half the toys to play with. The little girl is ecstatic because she has more toys to play with than she has ever had. Little boy is very unhappy, because he wasn't happy with all the toys, he's certainly not going to be happy with half. He tries the nice approach and asks the little girl if he can have first this toy, then that toy. Initially, the little girl complies because she doesn't really need that many toys to be happy, but notices that he isn't willing to do the same for her. Finally, when she's down to 3 toys, she refuses to give him anymore. He already has all of the biggest and the newest toys, and she only has three. Because of the limited number of toys she has left, she refuses to negotiate a trade with the little boy unless he hands her a toy first, because she believes she won't get a toy back, and since he won't go first no trade happens. The little girl would like to be able to play with the bigger, newer toys, would even like to have someone to play with, but determines that's not an option so she'll just make the best of it, grateful for her creativity.
Well this all makes the little boy angry. He decides to steal one of the toys when the little girl isn't looking. So now she's down to two. She tries desperately to be protective of her last two toys, but the sneaky and determined little boy manages to snatch another. Now the little girl is down to one toy (boundary), which she is holding onto with dear life. Once in a while the little boy tries to physically wrestle it from her hand, but the little girl is no weakling and manages to keep her last toy.
Unfortunately, the little girl has gotten to the point where she spends the majority of her time preventing the little boy from taking her toy and very little time actually getting to play with it. She has become a commando toy guard (oppositional) in order to retain the only toy (dinner plate) she has left. She wants to leave and take her toy to the other room (WAS,) because she feels that is the only way she'll get any peace and actually be able to play with and enjoy her one remaining toy.
Oh, forgot to add, the little girl realizes the possibility that there might be more toys in the other room that she would be able to play with, as well as maybe even other kids that can actually play nicely.
