In Heather's thread not long ago, Cobra brought up what he sees the problem in Heather's marriage. I believe the problem in Heather's marriage is that Heather's H gets treated as he demands to be treated and Heather gets treated as she demands to be treated. I could say the same thing about Hairdog and Chrome and probably the pre-separation Mojo. Perhaps that's just a truism without actual substance.
That's thought one.
Recent developments and discussions surrounding Heather, Chrome, Hairdog and Choc led to thought two, which also may be nothing more than a truism: boundaries are easy to enforce. If one really has a boundary, it gets enforced in whatever manner is required to maintain the boundary. The issue isn't enforcement, it's in actually *having* a boundary; knowing what the boundary is. Heather is a textbook example of this. She didn't like how her H was using porn. There seemed to be a boundary there but she couldn't really put her finger on it. It seemed to be something like, "I won't have sex with a husband who indulges in porn in secret," but she couldn't seem to sell herself on that. Events have revealed that her actual boundary seems to be, "I won't have secret porn in my house." Much different from the other version, and much different from, "I won't stay in a marriage where my H uses porn in secret." It seems to be in line with her actual beliefs as evidenced by the fact that she readily enforced it. Her H seems to have reacted positively. He really has no choice unless his boundary is, "I won't stay married to a wife who destroys my secret porn." Time will tell.
A popular boundary seems to be, "I won't stay in a sexless and/or affectionless marriage." There always seems to be a caveat, though: "I won't stay in a sexless and/or affectionless marriage, but I really don't want to get divorced."
I suspect that when someone on this board really decides that their boundary is, "I won't stay in a sexless and/or affectionless marriage," they won't have the trepidation inherent in the caveat. I think they'll wake up the next day exceedingly happy. Content. Satisfied. They've given themselves permission to be themselves. They'll know that they won't live in a sexless, affectionless marriage forever. One way or another, their future is bright. They can deal with and tolerate their current marriage just as long as they choose. They will be incredibly liberated. I believe their spouse will notice and react to their new vibe.
Others will maintain their current boundary, which is something like, "I will stay married." That's not actually a boundary because it's unenforceable. Your spouse can dissolve your marriage all on their own if they want. Plus, if staying married is your boundary then your only real boundaries are the ones you impose on yourself in order to stay married. From a practical standpoint, it seems that people in general (and men in particular) without boundaries are rarely seen as attractive for long.
The next step up the boundary ladder is something like, "I will stay married as long as I get just enough sex and affection to make me think that the miseries of staying married are just barely more tolerable than the miseries of getting divorced." I'm pretty sure that sort of thinking is why Thoreau wrote, "Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them."
We're frightened of boundaries because boundaries are designed to keep people out and we don't think we can afford to keep anybody out. If somebody wants in we'd better let them in (unless they turn out to be pure evil) because who knows when the next person who wants in is going to come along? The notion that strong, people-keeping-out boundaries will actually entice more people to want in is intellectually appealing but feels horribly counterintuitive. Maybe it works for blackfoot and NOP and Corri and the new Mojo but it won't work for me. I need all the friends I can get. Beggars can't be choosers.
Of course, choosers are rarely beggars.
Hey, while I was typing this I came up with a third thought. In NMMNG, Dr. Glover says that an Integrated Male (which is the opposite of a Nice Guy) doesn't follow the rules, he makes his own rules. I must have something similar to that a thousand times in my life and I've always hated it but now I find it oddly appealing. What does it mean?
Stop WaitingFeel EverythingLove AchinglyGive ImpeccablyLet Go
There are people who have a very strong natural sense of where their boundaries are and are willing to step up and defend them the second anyone gets close. People "just know" not to cross those boundaries with them. My H "just knows" not to cross the wife-beating boundary not because he hasn't been tempted in a drunken rage, not because it is a boundary for him but because he knows it is a boundary I WILL enforce. He knows a) I would call the police b) It's not going to make me do what he wants c) he wouldn't see me for dust. That is an extreme example but I think it is useful to make the point that we all do have boundaries and we all do know how to enforce them when someone gets close to crossing them. It ticks me off when parents can't control their kids and say "oh he just won't....." I know of NO parent of a child under 5 that wouldn't insist the child waits at the kerb and doesn't cross the road until the parent says it's OK. If every parent can enforce that boundary why can't they enforce the others? And since all of us on this board can enforce the "don't beat me" boundary why can't we enforce others?
Like you say Burg, they're not real boundaries.
Fran
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
Plus, if staying married is your boundary then your only real boundaries are the ones you impose on yourself in order to stay married. From a practical standpoint, it seems that people in general (and men in particular) without boundaries are rarely seen as attractive for long.
If a man marries and actually is committed to his marriage vows, then he effectively eliminates the one boundry that he needs to have , that of not living in a sexless marriage. A man without boundries is not attractive. So how does a christian man create, and enforce boundries that are truly effective and yet not break his vows to God.
I believe the problem in Heather's marriage is that Heather's H gets treated as he demands to be treated and Heather gets treated as she demands to be treated. I could say the same thing about Hairdog and Chrome and probably the pre-separation Mojo. Perhaps that's just a truism without actual substance.
This is true but the problem is that when you are in the thick of it, it is so hard to see that you simply need to follow the path out of the forest rather than chopping down every d*mn tree. Also, I should note that in my situation I absolutely believe that if I had been more self-aware and therefore better able to form and enforce boundaries my marriage would have simply ended sooner. Some evidence in favor of this might be the fact that my 2bx has now chosen a lifestyle in which he would probably not be able to support a hamster let alone a family. The extent to which I do not thoroughly support his choice of lifestyle is pretty much exactly the extent to which I am still fused with him (Especially since I got my FIL to give me the back child support out of my 2bx's future inheritance. My FIL has also pledged to give my D16 an allowance and help her through college which is really, IMO, a good thing all around because my FIL is one of the most emotionally repressed men on the planet but my daughter would always climb on his lap when she was little even though he had no clue how to cuddle with a little girl. It was one of the most pathetic things you could ever see. So I am all in favor of him rescuing her bunny.)
I also thoroughly agree that using the generic boundary "I will not stay in a sexless marriage" will lead to "acting differentiated" rather than "being differentiated." For instance, in my case I didn't actually have a sexless marriage. I had a mostly affectionless marriage in which the sex was almost always of the "hot monkey" variety. The frequency was low because it is pretty d*mn hard to be the hot babe picking up the same guy at the bar for hot monkey sex without emotional connection on a regular basis for almost 20 years. The only good thing about being in such a situation is that you do learn every freakin' monkey trick in the book - lol. If I had been more self-aware my boundary would have been something more like "I will not stay in a marriage in which I am not treated in a loving manner." which I admit is a bit of an ill-defined boundary but I could have broken it down into more enforceable pieces. For instance, a critical turning point for me was when I formed the boundary " I will not hug a man who goes stiff and doesn't return my hug." The boundary wasn't about trying to get him to give me warm hugs. It was about treating myself with enough self-respect to avoid behavior that I knew through experience would lead to poor treatment. The fact that I was able to enforce this boundary did increase my self-respect.
Quote:
We're frightened of boundaries because boundaries are designed to keep people out and we don't think we can afford to keep anybody out. If somebody wants in we'd better let them in (unless they turn out to be pure evil) because who knows when the next person who wants in is going to come along? The notion that strong, people-keeping-out boundaries will actually entice more people to want in is intellectually appealing but feels horribly counterintuitive. Maybe it works for blackfoot and NOP and Corri and the new Mojo but it won't work for me. I need all the friends I can get. Beggars can't be choosers.
I think the best way to think about it is that the better you are at forming/enforcing your own boundaries, the more you will respect other people's boundaries and that is what will make you attractive. OTOH, I think it's real easy to confuse boundaries with avoidant fusion because they can look like the same behavior. For instance, I was mulling over the puzzle of "Don't play hard to get. Be hard to get." It seems to me that a person who is playing hard to get is exhibiting avoidant fusion (trying to draw others near by withdrawing- like a sulky child) A person who is hard to get is someone who has created strong boundaries for themselves and become more differentiated by building ego strength and self-awareness. For instance, if I choose to date men other than NG because I want to make him jealous that would be avoidant fusion. If I choose to date men other than NG because I'm not sure he is the right guy for me then that is differentiated and self-aware behavior. If I look at NG's MySpace page just to see what other women he might be dating that is clingy fusion. If I respect his right to date other women as long as I am unwilling to enforce a boundary in opposition to that then I am behaving in a differentiated and empathetic manner because I understand that my unwillingness to enforce such a boundary can only be due to factors that signal by own inability or unwillingness to be in relationship.
One thought I've been having lately is that "fusion" is a lot like "racism" or "sexism". A horrible thing that is mostly caused by ignorance. A brand of ignorance that incorporates a lack of self-awareness with a lack of empathy for the other. A simple example would be the fact that so many LDW just don't know that men experience/express a lot of emotional connection through sex. Due to lack of self-awareness, I think I underestimated my ability to get emotional connection through other outlets. I concentrated on the lack of sex in my marriage and didn't pay enough attention to the lack of physical affection, productive and/or playful interaction and pleasant and respectful communication. A sexless Friday night with my 2bx was a black chasm of no connection whatsoever. A sexless date on a Friday night with a fun, pleasant companion reveals both my need for validation (the revelation leads to the need disappearing)and the true extent of my sexual desire. Differentiation isn't about getting the emotions out of your relationship, it's about getting your ego out of your emotions and the only way to get your ego out of your emotions is to build it's strength and we all know how to build ego strength.
Quote:
Hey, while I was typing this I came up with a third thought. In NMMNG, Dr. Glover says that an Integrated Male (which is the opposite of a Nice Guy) doesn't follow the rules, he makes his own rules. I must have something similar to that a thousand times in my life and I've always hated it but now I find it oddly appealing. What does it mean?
It's just like be differentiated don't act differentiated or be hard to get don't play hard to get. Think about that lame dating book "The Rules" that was a bestseller or the "rules" that Mystery teaches his clients. Of course, it applies to everything in life not just sexual/romantic interactions. You get to choose how to build your own ego strength. It's kind of like what you posted the other day where you said that you need to decide that your sexuality is okay just the way it is. Either you really believe that or you don't. Your own personal "rule" falls in between what you perceive society or perhaps your partner to be telling you the "rule" should be and any lack of self-awareness or delusion that is telling you that the "rule" should be whatever is easiest for you to do. For instance, you could delude yourself into thinking that you are super-sexy even though you weigh 300lbs. and lost your toothbrush two weeks ago or you could empathize with the feminine lack of desire to be close to you in such a state and take action that will build your ego strength on a realistic basis. Simply gaining the empathy will actually make you more attractive because you will project "I understand that you aren't attracted to these negative traits. I would wish to do better. Let me share some of my more attractive traits with you."
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
In order to have boundaries, you have to know how you feel about things, you have to have opinions. Maybe it sounds odd to most of you, but for most of my life, I lacked opinions on various things. I have always been very willing to accept my shortcomings in life, not because it is easy on my ego, but because I want to learn and grow. And so I accepted other people's opinions but neglected to form my own. I've always wanted to be a "laid back" kind of person...I would almost say that having an opinion had a negative connotation for me....but I'm here to tell ya, that kind of personality really has it's drawbacks in life. I could never see upsetting the state of the R over "small" things...it's not "worth" fighting over. I always completely missed the point that there should be no fighting and I always took responsiblity for creating a fight by trying to exert my will over something petty. Take this in conjunction with the fact that I was still a kid when I met my H. Had no sense of self, style, nothing. I can see now that I did have a core self, there are parts of that girl even back then that are still with me today....so obviously I had a core self but I did not recognize it. And I trusted my H completely......to the point where I believed everything he said. He wouldn't lie to me. I know now that something doesn't have to be a lie to not be the truth. I also know that trusting someone so completely is not necessarily a good thing....people have their own agendas and act accordingly, even on a subconscious level. I know now that I have my own truth and that acting according to my own truth does not render anyone else's truth any less meaningful to them. I can enforce my sense of self which I prefer to call it as opposed to 'boundaries'.....and not infringe on anybody else's right to do the same.
There seemed to be a boundary there but she couldn't really put her finger on it. It seemed to be something like, "I won't have sex with a husband who indulges in porn in secret," but she couldn't seem to sell herself on that. Events have revealed that her actual boundary seems to be, "I won't have secret porn in my house." Much different from the other version, and much different from, "I won't stay in a marriage where my H uses porn in secret."
The thing is that stumbling into the scenario I did, it was just very clear to me that my boundaries were being crossed. Even still, I can't tell you EXACTLY what it is about the porn situation that bothers me. I can only tell you that in that situation, my sense of self protection kicked in enough to allow me to act on my feelings and the learning and growing I've done here allowed me to control that reaction enough so that something good could come of it. But I can't take all the credit for this....enforcing this 'boundary' is not something I could have done on my own...my H really stepped up.
"Happiness is a butterfly, which, when pursued, is always just beyond your grasp, but which, if you will sit down quietly, may alight upon you."
(Martelo) ...are you questioning the ideas appeal to you or the concept of not following rules?
More the latter. I used to view it as ridiculous...if nobody followed the rules and everyone made their own rules, we'd have anarchy. Now I'm starting to look at that a little differently but I'm very curious as to what other people think when they read it.
(Cemar) So how does a christian man create, and enforce boundries that are truly effective and yet not break his vows to God.
You can have anything you want but you can't have everything you want. You do have a very potent boundary: you won't break your vows to God. From my perspective, you could be waking up happy each and every day that you're living true to yourself despite great difficulties.
I understand that your vows to God entail never divorcing your wife. Do they also entail doing everything in your power to prevent her from divorcing you? In other words, if you had a boundary that said, "I won't take a woman who has no desire for me to the movies," and your wife had a boundary that said, "I won't stay married to a man who won't take me to the movies," do your vows require you to take her to the movies so she won't divorce you?
(Corri) "Boundaries are meant to keep people out."
No. Boundaries indicate where you stop and I begin, and vice versa. Boundaries define self, so I can determine, here, there and the space in between.
Agreed. I didn't state my point clearly. Keeping people out isn't the purpose of a boundary, it's a potential consequence of a boundary. Let me try again. Change the first sentence of the paragraph you quoted from to read: "We're frightened of boundaries because a potential effect of a boundary is to keep people out and we don't think we can afford to keep anybody out."
"In the absence of Who You are Not, Who You Are, is not."
Dig it.
Mojo, your FIL is a good dude. Since you mentioned, "the "rules" that Mystery teaches his clients," I'll take the opportunity to discuss that show a bit. I've watched every minute of every episode and I really enjoy it. I've recorded them all and am going thru them with my 14yo son. He's very wary of "not acting like I'm something I'm not" and "just wanting a girl for sex" but he sees a lot of the value in many of the show's concepts. The absolute worst concept I've seen, which really amused me, is Mystery telling a story about breaking the windows of a girlfriend's ex-boyfriend who was harassing her. The point of the story was to demonstrate higher value to the girl one would be telling the story to. But it's a made up story. I gotta think that you're sending yourself a very self-defeating message if the only way you can demonstrate higher value is to make something up. You're confessing to yourself that you don't, in fact, have intrinsically high value. If a guy can project higher value to a girl while in the process of demonstrating lower value to himself, that's a pretty amazing trick.
(Heather) But I can't take all the credit for this....enforcing this 'boundary' is not something I could have done on my own...my H really stepped up.
Of course you can take all the credit. You did all the enforcing. From what you say I gather he's complying, ergo *you* enforced the boundary. You seem to be saying that if he hadn't complied you wouldn't have been able to continue enforcing the boundary, but that's neither here nor there. If he's complying, you enforced, all on your own.
Stop WaitingFeel EverythingLove AchinglyGive ImpeccablyLet Go
There is so much to think about in the concept of boundaries with relationships. I am still trying to sort out the difference between boundaries, conditions, needs, desires AND preferences. All five are part of relationships.
"I won't stay in a sexless and/or affectionless marriage," seems more like a condition versus a boundary to me.
A boundary to me seems more concrete and requires that someone DO something that crosses the boundary and NOT that is is something that someone has to do to NOT cross a boundary. This probably doesn't make sense but I am still trying to sort it out.
Again I guess it's hard for me to imagine saying that I have a "boundary" in a relationship that requires someone to do X,Y or Z for me. It seems more natural to say that a boundary in my relationships is that someone CANNOT to X,Y, or Z to me.
It seems more like a condition if I say, I won't be in a relationship with someone that doesn't enjoy sports or at the very least appreciate my enjoyment of sports. It would seem weird to say that liking sports is a boundary for me. On the other hand I enjoy sports so much that I think it would have to be a condition of a relationship.
It seems more like a preference if I say,I want to be in a relationship with someone that likes coffee. It would seem weird to me to say that liking coffee is a boundary or condition. because I love to have a cup (or two)of coffee in the morning I probably prefer having someone who appreciates it also. OTOH it wouldn't affect my decision to date someone if my boundaries and most of my conditions are met.
We're frightened of boundaries because boundaries are designed to keep people out
Well if you look at boundaries that way, then it absolutely makes sense that it is tough to enforce them. I would have thought there might be more issues with people feeling that they are worthy of enforcing their chosen boundaries. Again like it or not, MsHdog has a boundary that she feels worthy of expressing and defending. Not a bad thing but the obvious step is making sure your boundaries are actually HELPING and are healthy.
The notion that strong, people-keeping-out boundaries will actually entice more people to want in is intellectually appealing but feels horribly counterintuitive...I need all the friends I can get. Beggars can't be choosers.
Think about it this way. If you are are pickier about the friends you choose, you are more likely to have BETTER friends. Would you rather have 2 GREAT friends who respect your boundaries, meet most of your conditions and be there through thick and thin or have 10 or 20 friends that have no respect for your boundaries, occasionally meet your conditions and might fall off the face of the earth tomorrow??
Dr. Glover says that an Integrated Male (which is the opposite of a Nice Guy) doesn't follow the rules, he makes his own rules. I must have something similar to that a thousand times in my life and I've always hated it but now I find it oddly appealing.
That's tough for me too. I tend to be an odd mix of devoted rule follower AND stubborn, obstinate and resolute rule breaker. I don't randomly break rules but I don't blindly follow them either. Of course I think we all need to make our own rules because I think OWNING the rules is what helps you stay resolute in your decisions and actions even of others around you don't see what a great person you are or, more likely, don't verbalize their approval of you or show appreciation for you for every "good thing" you do. That's why i am so adamant about doing what I need to for ME and by doing that I am not so dependent on others when the fact is EVERYONE has rough days where they are not as observant or appreciative due to their own issues. What does it mean?
That you are becoming more integrated???
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
