Hey, I have a sister like this! She has a personality disorder........ She has an inflated sense of self worth, demands respect when she doesn't give it and only sees her side of any arguement (everyone else is being "selfish" LOL).
I haven't gotten anywhere with her in the 43 years she's been around, hope you have better luck with your H!
I'm doing well focusing on my issues, reading books that are directed to women and self-help, etc. I'm not expecting anything from H, just trying to co-exist nicely. We still have some negative interactions, though, because H still wants things from me that I'm not up to providing him.
So we had another odd exchange today. I just have to note this somewhere and maybe mull over it again later. Right now, it's just too odd. H: .... and you won't let me garden with you. CV: I haven't wanted you to garden with me for over 10 years, I don't understand why you're still bringing it up. And I don't understand how you think it's supposed to work. For example, if two people are doing something together, and person A does something offensive to person B, and person B asks person A to stop but person A continues to do it anyway, it makes the interaction un-enjoyable for person B. In your mind, what happens next? H: Well person B would probably stop that interaction with person A. CV: That's what I would expect as well. But then why do you expect something different in regards to my gardening with you? H: (long silence) CV: H? H: I only answered that way because that's what would happen in a perfect world. CV: (huh?) Okay, and how would answer it for the "real" world, since we don't live in a perfect world. H: In the real world, people forgive each other over and over and still manage to have a loving R. CV: (huh?) If that's the "real" world, then how do you explain the fact that 50% of M's end in D? H: They're not living in the real world. CV: (huh?!) What world are they living in?
At this point, H stopped talking. I suspect he started hearing himself and realized that he wasn't making sense. But before then, he appeared dead-serious. He never came back later to explain what he was saying, or even to suggest that he was only joking. He was not smoking or drinking. It was one of the oddest conversations I've had with him.
CV, It's really easy to get hung up on the logical inconsistencies, but when you do that you are effectively changing the subject of the conversation. If I were to guess, I would guess that's why H gives up and shuts up. You speak to him like a lawyer, with all focus on the words and logic. That's an R killer.
How about if you pretend to put some cotton in your ears? Just enough so you can't decipher the words. Then you'd have to focus on the true subject of the conversation - the feelings that H is trying to convey. Just figure them out, observe, and acknowledge them. That's all. No fixing or explaining. Let that be the point of the conversation.
Just for a while, practice responding like a T rather than a lawyer. See if it offers any insights.
By the way, I have a new housemate who I'm much happier with. Still, she does annoying things, some pretty similar to the housemate I found so maddening. I'm having to look hard at how I approach things and how I respond. I arrived home after one particularly stressful week on the road and immediately was livid about half a dozen things.
Bottom line is it's all about me. If I don't do the (uncomfortable, hard for me) work on my end, then every single person in my space will drive me nuts sooner or later. I keep asking myself if things could have been different and if I booted the former housemate for good enough reasons. Good enough or not, the reasons I didn't want to continue were that a) I didn't want to do all the hard work of taking care of myself and setting boundaries (lame and immature, but I'm just being honest) and b) I wasn't able to tolerate his limitations (shows a lack of compassion, perhaps, and I like to think I'd try harder for a more meaningful R). Anyway, I'm seeing more clearly than ever that my dissatisfaction was all about how I chose to see things and respond.
Hi SD! It's good to hear from you! I hadn't seen a recent thread of yours so I really appreciate the update. And your comments about your new roommate intrigue me. I've really respected your efforts and self-reflection in the past and know that you didn't just toss your old RM out without serious consideration, so I'm curious about the course you're currently on. I believe I recall some very specific things regarding your old RM that would have been unacceptable to me too, AND, I wouldn't even want to change my perspective of it being unacceptable. Perhaps that's because I've worked hard to define boundaries and hold on to them, and any back-tracking or dropping of boundaries I've already established seems like teetering on a slippery slope. I don't know when it's appropriate to hold firm or when to question it. It's not like there's a rule book. For example, some women find it unacceptable to be slapped by their H; others will stick around after being beaten badly enough to be hospitalized. Sometimes, it's the same woman, just a different time in her life. Somewhere along the way, she went from knowing it was wrong to accepting it, perhaps even blaming herself. Clearly, at some point, she decided that her "dissatisfaction was all about how (she) chose to see things and respond." She's being truly compassionate (staying with him, not pressing charges, etc.), but I don't believe it's good. So where's the line? Where does it change from good to bad?
To my conversation with H, I would love to know what it should have looked like. I've been told I have the "lawyer" thing before; I'm not a lawyer, but I'm definitely logically driven, so I don't really know how to think any other way and I could easily believe that it would show in my conversations. In this case, I don't want to garden with him. Period. I believe I should be allowed that boundary. I don't have any other personal/restricted interests. And it's not like I'm bar-hopping, I'm in the back yard, alone, dirty and sweaty. I invited him to join me the first 6 years of our M, and he acted like I asked him to eat worms, complete with the facial scrunch and everything. So I developed my interest as a lone person and stopped asking him. For a long time, he was perfectly happy that I stopped asking him; I would even describe him as "relieved." Then he started asking to join me about 10 years ago. I declined. Now he simply won't drop it, yet he has no interest in it on his own. It's not like he has his own corner of the yard that he manages, or spends his free-time browsing through garden catalogs and he simply wants to have someone to share with. It seems like he only wants it because he can't have it.
We do things together. We just finished biking with my BIL and SIL. Why is his gardening with me so important? And how would I ever find that out without asking him? And if I ask him and he says, "I don't know," (which is very common, BTW) does that mean I have to drop *my* position, simply because *he* wants to?
After he said, " ... and you won't let me garden with you," what is the appropriate thing to say next? What would a "non-lawyer" conversation look like?
Hi crazy, haven't caught all the way up yet with the thread but its an interesting read.
So I have to ask, what would be your 180 when it comes to gardening or being logical in your thinking? From what I gathered so far from the DB and DR books, its about doing the opposite of what you normally do? Im just trying to understand your difference in boundries and "doing something different" as the books say.
I'm certainly not gonna try to answer for your husband, but could it be he wants to garden so you have a connection together? Could this be him "reaching"?
I certainly understand thinking logical, im that way myself, but so far this has been anything but logical. In response to your "non-lawyer" question, how about, "Why don't we give you a small area to work yourself, and if you need help I'll answer any questions you have, or help anyway I can".
Hi, T. Thanks for dropping in! Gardening is my GAL, so it's already a 180 since I used to put it aside to do H's activities.
LOL! -- I don't have a clue how to do a 180 on logical thinking!
I've offered him an area for him to garden before. He doesn't really want to garden. He says he wants to do it "with me." I've agreed to his joining me in the past, and then he spends the whole time complaining and trying to rush me to get finished, so that I'll be free to go do "his" thing with him. That behavior from him makes me want to do it without him.
I've looked into your thread a bit. I read that you've been at this for 4 months, and I know that must seem like an eternity. There are certainly things you can do for yourself to make it less painful, but there's little you can do to make it shorter. It takes time, and lots of it. I hope you can find it in yourself to muster the endurance (marathon vs. sprint) because I don't remember anyone here having a magic bullet.
Frankly, I wouldn't describe your side of the conversation as "logical." I would describe your side of the conversation as containing a lot of case building statements, red-herrings, and blame/punishing statements all consciously or otherwise thrown at H to make him a living dart board. Yep, that's how it seems to me. This is the second conversation you've described in which you seem to me to mask cruelty and coldness with purported superior rationality and keen argumentative skills. However, your success in shutting down H comes from your rhetorical, rather than logical strengths. The two are distinct. Rush Limbaugh parades around as if he is a master of rationality and is quite persuasive in his efforts. But his spew, though effective, merely has the power of rhetoric, rather than logic or rationality, behind it.
On the other hand, I really liked your H's remark: "In the real world, people forgive each other over and over and still manage to have a loving R." He is quite right. In the real world, successful, healthy relationships depend on repeated forgiveness and allowing people space to grow.
I couldn't post to you for several days because (1) I was really, really sad to see you back to this sort of unhelpful posturing, and (2) I was at a loss as to what to say. Please take my remarks as criticism without judgment.
H: .... and you won't let me garden with you. Alternative response: There are a lot of reasons, my feelings are all tangled about it. When you rejected my invitations to garden, I felt unloved and abandoned. I still feel that pain, but it comes out as spite and anger now. When we garden together now, I feel a ton of resentment. I feel used and manipulated when you garden with me and then want me to do something with what you. I want a partner genuinely engaged in gardening. When we garden together now, I feel controlled when you criticize how I do things. When you make suggestions, I hear them as criticisms. When I sense impatience from you, I feel anger and resentment. And, to be totally honest, I get an unhealthy feeling of pleasure and distorted satisfaction about turning you down. But, I feel bad about myself when I experience that too. So, whenever the whole gardening thing comes up, my overactive defense mechanisms go on autopilot and I shut down the conversation in a way that lets me feel superior and sends a few darts your way. It is effective for sure. But, it is not really healthy either. I feel bad and lost when that happens. So I scale up my superiority and shut things down faster. Thing is, it is really hard to stop this cycle. And, I'm spiraling backwards. Help, I love you, I hurt so much.
OT, thanks for coming back, all things considered. But just think, if I ever do "get it," imagine your sense of accomplishment!
I wish I could step outside of my body long enough to see what every one else seems to see so clearly. I believe it 100%, I just can't seem to get that perspective from within myself.
Your alternative response is pretty close to right on. The differences are irrelevant. I'm afraid that halfway through my saying that, H would have just heard, "blah... blah... blah... criticism... blah... blah... blah. superiority... blah... blah... blah... and shut down.
But pretending for one minute that I could turn back time and would have said that to H, he would have then asked, "What do you want me to do?"
How do I answer that? Especially in light of the paragraph that's all about "me"?
CV has a hobby of gardening. CV doesn't ask H to join her anymore. CV has told H that she enjoys doing it alone and does not want H's participation, much like H and his golf. CV has asked H to stop asking to join her.
To me, logic dictates that H shouldn't keep asking/complaining about gardening with CV.
Is that illogical?
Would it have been alright if I simply responded, "Yes, that's correct, I don't you to garden with me", and have that be the end of the discussion?
I wish I could edit existing posts rather than keep adding new posts....
Anyway, the reason I suggested this short response is that I realize he wasn't asking me why I don't let him garden with me. He knows why, he was just griping about the fact.
More on the logic: I went down the road I did because it seems illogical to me that he would keep griping about something I've specifically asked him not to bring up again, and still expect to get a positive response. It especially seems illogical to me to think that it's impossible to burn a bridge, even with your S, considering how many M's end in D. This is my "logic." This is what goes on in my head before I attempt to discuss it with my H. Are you telling me that isn't logical?
