Continuing from
part 6 Okay, so my answers to my questions.
Why would that stand out for me? What does that mean?
That I really am not comfortable getting close to him.Do I really hate him that much?
No, it isn't hate, it's fear.Is my sadness and desire about the M really about the M and not about him/us?
No, it is about us, about what I believe a R between man and wife should be.Maybe I just really don't want to salvage my M.
No, I do want to, I don't know that I believe it can be.Maybe I just really don't love him anymore.
I do. Maybe I don't have any other answer to my H's email because there is nothing that can be done.
Maybe. Maybe it was over a long time ago and I'm only trying to revive it because we're still legal, and I don't want to be carrying his dead-weight.
I still want the happy M, maybe it was over a long time ago. Maybe that's why none of the suggestions are setting well with me, because I just don't want to.
I really don't want to. I do want to be happy. I find I'm happiest when I'm not around H. Why is that?
Because he isn't a safe person for me. When he's not around, I can be me without condemnation, without the imposition of his thoughts and feelings over mine. I can stretch and breathe. If it's something about ME, then why am I happiest when I'm not around HIM?
Because I'm safe with me. What is wrong about me that only comes out when I'm around him?
I do not feel safe around him. Where does "it" go when he's not there?
The lack of safety goes with him. Why don't I find the same dissatisfaction/unhappiness in my other R's?
I feel safe around other people. Other people haven't proven to be unsafe for me. Why does my generally happy self disappear when I get with him?
Because I'm afraid. Do I just dislike him to my core being and that taints everything?
Not dislike, fear. And it does taint everything. I recognize that I'm a sensitive person. Am I too sensitive? I don't think so. I've certainly weathered some painful exchanges here, with grace and dignity I believe. Yet I'm still here, still listening, still trying. I've also had incidents with friends, but a few incidents don't define someone as unsafe.
I've had this note on my laptop for months. It really struck a chord with me back then. Curious how it's tying in with this post as well:
When a spouse walks away, it isn't usually a spur of the moment decision. The groundwork for her desire to be out of the relationship was laid bit by bit over many years.
She started out trusting you and believing in you. She started out knowing that you would love her and desire her presence in your life.
As the years went by and she found out time and again that what she believed was in fact not true...well...it changes people inside. She didn't wake up one morning and decide to go. She talked herself in to this being her only suitable response to life with you.
It boils down to the fact that I trusted H, fully and deeply, and he has hurt me in every imaginable way, repeatedly. There is no longer anything that I could unequivocally state about him, about what he would or would not do morally or ethically. I almost feel like I don't even know him, certainly not from the man he claims.
I have stripped my needs of him to be nothing more than basic courtesy and respect, the same thing he would freely offer to a perfect stranger, yet that seems too much to ask. I want to rebuild trust, but he seems incapable of accommodating the simplest request (eg. not eating food off of my plate.) If I can't trust him with the simple things, how can I possibly trust him again with my heart? My H isn't acting like an LBS. He isn't doing any 180's. He isn't listening and affirming what I say and validating my feelings. He defends his actions and discounts my feelings instead.
How does one build a R without trust? How does one build trust when it is continually broken? How does one rebuild trust when the other person really isn't doing anything to try?
I can't extend myself, I can't invest, because I'm too afraid to try, too afraid of getting hurt yet again. Too afraid of losing myself completely and becoming nothing more than a shadow of H, because the only thoughts and feelings I'm allowed to have are ones that match his. I've already lost so much of myself, I've only just begun to find me again, and I'm afraid if I go back to investing again, I'll sink back into that depression that I just climbed my way out of. I can't do that again, because if I do, it will literally be the death of me. And I am much more afraid of that than I am of H walking away.
wow, crazyville - you're still the WAS here?
and because your've read this board and possibly the books, you're EXPECTING your h to be the LBS and follow all the stuff - do the 180's etc
i thought you HAD BEEN the WAS and now he was the WAS
i think there are two WAS's here - both you and him.
your quote that you've had for months - reading it everyday - you've kept the WAS idea and mentality completely alive in your mind and stuck to it, and still tried to "work on your marriage"
it's okay , if that is really how you clearly feel, and that you have to find out for yourself.
what i hear from your post, isn't that you really want to walk away - what i hear is that you are hurting really bad and looking to your h to make it better.
there's co-dependency there and the first thing you have to work on is realizing fully that h is not responsible for your happiness, you are, and all his actions do not need to extract a huge emotional response from you.
sounds more and more to me as if you really do need to go talk to a professional that can help you see these things and put them into perspective.
i hope sincerely that you can do that for yourself
zig
You seem to be ok with your level of sensitivity but I wonder how he has hurt you in every imaginable way so that you feel so unsafe with him that he is now the epitome of unsafe-ness to you, while other people get the benefit of the doubt. This seems so extreme that I think there's a component of your own emotional stability that is playing a role.
For example, why are you constantly devastated that he eats off your plate? Why not just deal with his habit? Why read more into it? I know you will be able to say why, but really, ultimately, does it matter? Can you let that go and just a) not go to restaurants with him, b) not sit next to him, c) slide your plate away or cover it when you see him reaching out, lovingly reminding him of your need for food privacy. It is your need you're trying to meet, not his behavior you're trying to control. Why does this become such a violation to you?
You have demonized him to the point where it seems like it's not all him, part of it is possibly going on within you.
CV,
I like what you wrote, it's very genuine and honest, and I "get it". Honestly previously I was seeing the anger and frustration without the pain and fear, and it's the pain and fear that make so much of your sitch make sense.
My MC, as you know, told me that my W doesn't feel safe in our marriage either. How am I to feel about that? What am I doing exactly to make her situation unsafe? When you think about someone feeling unsafe, I think you right away assume they are the victim of abuse -- but I don't abuse my W, so why does she feel unsafe? In my case, it was a combination of her innate feelings of inadequacy, coupled with my expectations, both real and imagined, that lead her to believe that nothing she could do would be good enough, and therefore she just doesn't try.
I honestly believe your H doesn't feel safe either, so you are on two sides of the same issue.
I obviously don't have answers for you, the problem is not easily solved.
I can tell you that I ran across an author who kind of specializes in this "unsafe" dynamic and maybe her books can help.
The author is Mira Kirshenbaum and two of the books that might be worth a read are:
"I love you but I don't trust you"
"Too good to leave, too bad to stay"
and
"Our love is too good to feel so bad"
Maybe check those out, see if any resonate with you, and if there is any guidance there that may be of value.
Accuray
I don't know how to respond to anyone's posts without being told I'm being argumentative.
So applying SBT, can someone please answer the following questions:
How does one build a R without trust? How does one build trust when it is continually broken? How does one rebuild trust when the other person really isn't doing anything to try?
One starts with oneself, with learning why they have trouble trusting, and becoming emotionally independent so their happiness is internal. JMO.
Hi CV,
I admire your courage in being honest and posting here.
I wish that my W had that type of courage, to ask the questions you are asking, instead of just running away.
I love what Accuracy said about feeling safe. I did not read your whole thread, but do you think that might be what is going on? you both feel unsafe and thus, no one takes the risk to love?
thank you again for your openness..
Pardon my density. No surprise I'm sure.
Could you play out a hypothetical example of what you're suggesting .... say, if you were speaking to someone else about the same trust issue, and their spouse was being unfaithful?
That's a good question. I'll use me as an example.
My H is or may be being unfaithful, regardless he is acting very cold and is not coming home nights, has said he doesn't love me and doesn't want to be with me. So what do I do to rebuild a relationship when there is no trust, how do I build trust when it is continually broken, and how do I rebuild trust when the other person isn't doing anything to try?
I tell myself, focus on yourself. I look hard at how I've become in the marriage and I work on that, I stop looking at him and I give him space and more space. We're not at the point where I would work on him and is problems. I'm working on being a happy person in the middle of a rotten situation. I'm working on finding joy inside instead of absorbing low self-esteem and low value from my H. I'm working on why I was so emotionally reactive to him, and I'm working on handling each opportunity with him better and better. I'm analyzing how he pushes my buttons and what I do in response and whether that helped me or not.
I'm using this experience with him to propel me in self-exploration and self-improvement. I may end up with him, or I may end up without him, but I already know how to set and negotiate boundaries with him and I'm already more happy from within than miserable from outside. I'm already going to be a better partner later on.
I could be focusing (ok sometimes I am) on how he said something mean or how he isn't there for the kids, or how thoughtless he is about me, or how his hair is thinning, or he sees my clothes on the floor but not his. I'm trying to think of my parallels to your 'eating food off the plate.' But right now he isn't even interested in appealing to me so my focus is on me.
It is a win-win. I end up married and healthier or divorced and healthier. That's what I'd like for you, and that's what I would advise someone else. Also, I would encourage you to be strong and face the 2x4s because it helps you to bounce your thoughts off others. We're not all here to agree with each other, necessarily. Hang in there & be tough! Best regards,
That's a good question. I'll use me as an example.
My H is or may be being unfaithful, regardless he is acting very cold and is not coming home nights, has said he doesn't love me and doesn't want to be with me. So what do I do to rebuild a relationship when there is no trust, how do I build trust when it is continually broken, and how do I rebuild trust when the other person isn't doing anything to try?
I tell myself, focus on yourself. I look hard at how I've become in the marriage and I work on that, I stop looking at him and I give him space and more space. We're not at the point where I would work on him and is problems. I'm working on being a happy person in the middle of a rotten situation. I'm working on finding joy inside instead of absorbing low self-esteem and low value from my H. I'm working on why I was so emotionally reactive to him, and I'm working on handling each opportunity with him better and better. I'm analyzing how he pushes my buttons and what I do in response and whether that helped me or not.
I'm using this experience with him to propel me in self-exploration and self-improvement. I may end up with him, or I may end up without him, but I already know how to set and negotiate boundaries with him and I'm already more happy from within than miserable from outside. I'm already going to be a better partner later on.
I could be focusing (ok sometimes I am) on how he said something mean or how he isn't there for the kids, or how thoughtless he is about me, or how his hair is thinning, or he sees my clothes on the floor but not his. I'm trying to think of my parallels to your 'eating food off the plate.' But right now he isn't even interested in appealing to me so my focus is on me.
It is a win-win. I end up married and healthier or divorced and healthier. That's what I'd like for you, and that's what I would advise someone else. Also, I would encourage you to be strong and face the 2x4s because it helps you to bounce your thoughts off others. We're not all here to agree with each other, necessarily. Hang in there & be tough! Best regards,
This is golden. Thank you so much for this. It is all about us trying to survive and become the better person.
Adinva, I admire what you're doing in regards to self-improvement, and I completely agree with it. I've always felt it was each of our own lifetime responsibilities to be the best "us" (singular) that we could be. I think we do ourselves a disservice if we go through life unconsciously. I would hate to think that I'm the same person I was when I was 20.
I don't read in your post anything about building trust or R with your H. That was more my question. Or are you saying that you can/will sustain this R indefinitely because you're so happy internally, it actually doesn't matter to you that your H might be having an A?
Thanks CV and I agree with you. I got to a place in life where I was getting kind of stagnant and this really shook things up - I'm glad for that.
To answer your question, my answers are frustrating you because they're not getting to the point of what you want. But I'm suggesting that you don't want the right thing for the point you're at. You don't want to build trust on a weak foundation, and you're the foundation. You don't want to build trust with someone who's not ready to be there for you, and your H is not.
So I'm saying I can/will sustain this R indefinitely until I decide I'm done with it. I'm hoping that my internal happiness draws my H back to wanting to work things out with me, making the affair irrelevant at that point. I'm recognizing that that may never happen and it may need to be me that ends things. But for now, I have a lot of work to do and I'm not looking so much at H.
Would you be doing anything differently if you knew your H was not coming back. Or will you be doing anything differently if you finally decide to end it? (Not physical, like using his old office as a craft room, but personal.)
That's a hard question for me to answer. I had to think about it.
I think there's like a little ember of love I have for him that I'm keeping alive. I am willing myself through this period where he's being absolutely the worst husband and I am trying to hold onto my love/vows/commitment to him while I think there's a chance of salvaging our marriage and family. This is what enables me to be vulnerable to him, to try to establish connections, to forgive potentially anything and everything. I worry sometimes that after he sees the grass is not greener he might want to come back and I'll have lost that ember and not be able to love him anymore. But I keep it now as an unconditional fact, in case things change and he becomes interested again.
That I believe will change when the marriage ends. We'll still coparent, we'll still see each other at family gatherings, but I believe I will release that ember and close my heart to him so I don't feel hurt by his rejection.
I don't know how to explain that in more concrete terms. Does it make sense to you? Does it get at what you were asking?
to be vulnerable to him, to try to establish connections
how do you do this without trust? Or do you somehow still trust him while he's being "absolutely the worst possible H?"
I suspect those things will stop? Can you give me an idea of what that looks like?
I really appreciate your efforts towards this. This is absolutely, positively where my confusion lies -- to make for a happy me or a happy H when I can't seem to do both.
I'm vulnerable to H because I trust MYSELF that I will be ok. He said some of the most awful things a H could say to a W and what happened? I survived, and I actually benefited from it. So worst case scenario if I put myself out there and he rebuffs me, can I deal with that? If yes, then I trust myself to go ahead and try.
How to stop taking my feelings from my H's words and actions I learned from Pia Mellody's CDs on boundaries, which I listened to about 4 or 5 times. I posted the notes from them somewhere on these message boards. Maybe that CD set would help with what you're struggling with.
I didn't understand your second paragraph.
You've got to learn to make a happy you - your H is on his own for his happiness. That's covered in the boundaries series too.
Sorry, perhaps I misunderstood your post. So you wouldn't stop being vulnerable to H or stop trying to make connections if it ended, because you would still trust yourself to be ok? The only thing that would change for you are your feelings for him?
(BTW, I'm not ignoring the rest of your posts. I'm just trying to keep focused and not sidetrack at the moment. I will definitely take into consideration your other comments ie. the CD's.)
Feelings meaning your love for him? Everything else you're doing you would continue to do, because it's all just for you anyway?
Oh, if it ended I would be done being vulnerable and I would be done trying to rebuild connections. I would put my emotional energy into a new relationship when I'm ready for that. Until then, my dogs would get extra love.
Right now I'm trying to improve myself and save my marriage. When I'm done saving my marriage, either because the D process has been completed or because I no longer want to save my marriage, at that point I will stop the things that are designed to save it.
I'll let that ember go out. I'll stop hoping for him to come back. I'll put some emotional and physical distance between us to protect myself while I get over him and get over the hurt and rejection. I'll stop living with him. I'll stop keeping the house neat for him. I'll stop picking him up at the airport. I'll stop avoiding other men who might be interested in me. I would not let myself be vulnerable to H because I would no longer be seeking to establish intimacy with him.
There are a lot of things I've learned that I would still practice with him because we'll still be coparents and will need to get along. I've learned how to be less reactive, how to take things less personally, how to communicate more clearly and how to recognize and stop oppositional behavior that I'm guilty of. I'll use the tools I have to have a good coparenting relationship with him. But I intend to move on and look elsewhere to get my emotional and relationship needs met.
Does that get at what you're asking?
Yes, thank you. And it's completely in line with my thinking. Then you would be a WAW. It's all about stages.
But I intend to move on and look elsewhere to get my emotional and relationship needs met.
This is very validating. I kept getting the message from some of the posts that I was somehow deficient because I have emotional and relationship needs. That somehow because of that need, I'm not happy as a person, when I would say I am. Always changing, always improving, but happy nonetheless.
I'll put some emotional and physical distance between us to protect myself while I get over him and get over the hurt and rejection.
This too. I've felt like I was being told I was dysfunctional because my H can do things that hurt me (aka. cause me sadness, aka. unhappiness.) Unless there's some non-S&M version to be hurt and happy that I'm not aware of...
Thanks so much! I feel like I've been interrogating you, but you've been so helpful! At least I don't feel like I've completely lost touch with reality anymore.
Now, in keeping with my 'living happy' commitment, I'm going to go pick up my son's bud and take them to the pool, while I do some reading! When I get back, I'm going to take some time and reread the posts up until now and glean. Thanks again, Adinva!
Yay! Have fun at the pool.
How does one build a R without trust? How does one build trust when it is continually broken? How does one rebuild trust when the other person really isn't doing anything to try?
it's what we all ask ourselves, when we are in doubt - especially when the other person is not trying at all, or doesn't seem to be in our eyes, in the way we want them to.
i think it's a question of faith. there is no reason to trust anyone or anything. but the decision to trust is within your control, just as much as the decision to leave is within your control. it's a matter of choosing - not waiting for it to be proved to you in advance.
living one's life with the attitude that"i will only do things that i can trust and feel safe about in advance", is putting the onus on an external thing or person. it FEELS safer, but is very misleading because one is always dependent on something or someone else to make them happy.
but when you can get to a point where your happiness comes from within because you have worked through your issues and you are centered, grounded and independent, then sharing your life with another doesn't get affected by how safe or unsafe you feel with them, because you are responsible for your own emotional health and safety.
the fact that you feel so unsafe with h indicates strongly that you are expecting him to fulfill some need within that you shouldn't be asking him for in the first place, nor should he be asking for it from you.
it also indicates that you are not ready to decide whether you even want to be with him or not. your decision about wanting to be with him should be about why and how you want to share your life together and whether you two are a good fit.
i think the ultimate answer to your question is that only when you start and continue to do the work on yourself , will you eventually get to the place where these questions won't even need to be asked.
all these months i have had so many questions - and felt so frustrated when no one could give me an answer. now, as i keep working on myself, i find that i don't really need answers to these questions any more, and i am having way more faith and trust - and it genuinely surprises me - i didn't expect that
zig
Okay, just to get back to a few posts.
Accuray, thanks for the list of books. I actually have/read one of those books, "Too good to leave, to bad to say." I might check out the other two, but honestly, I think I've run out of enthusiasm for trying right now. I'll make a note, for later.
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?
Adinva, you asked, "why are you constantly devastated that he eats off your plate?" How was I "devastated?" Devastated is a pretty extreme reaction to me and I don't remember indicating anything more than being offended. At best, I said I'm hurt because I've specifically asked him to respect my wishes and he doesn't. I'm just curious what you are referring to when you said I was devastated by it? What did I communicate that caused you to interpret it that way?
Also, I found and read your notes on the Pia Mellody CD's on boundaries. A number of things tweaked my interest. I'll have to add that to my list. I would say I've developed some good boundaries over the years, but they definitely have holes in them. Something for me to work on for me.
I spent some time at the pool yesterday reading the book Passionate Marriage that someone suggested. I've read about a third of it, but I'm going to need to put it down for a while. It's too much about sexual R's and too much incorporating the cooperative actions of two people for me to digest right now. It's interesting, though, so I'll have to come back to it.
do you think that might be what is going on? you both feel unsafe and thus, no one takes the risk to love?
Yes, he has fear as well. He told me he has fear of walking in the same room as me, because he's afraid I might ask him a question like, "How have I changed in the M?" like I was charged with asking him last week. And several months ago, I asked him what he saw his role to be in this M, which he hasn't answered. These are the things he said he fears.
It has been a week since I asked H the question of how I've changed, to which he asked for time, said he'd think about it and get back to me. I asked him last night if he had come up with anything else. No, he had forgotten, hadn't thought about it at all. I wasn't surprised. Does that mean I have expectations that I shouldn't have? Perhaps expecting that he will do what he said he will do? Or perhaps expecting that he won't because that has been my experience? I don't know how to live life completely clueless so that I wouldn't have any expectations.
So how did it make me feel? Disappointed, in it being the same old same old. And somewhat sad, but in a very distant sort of way. If it rains on your picnic plans, it's still a bummer, even if you knew it was probably going to. Still some joy in hoping anyway. Maybe it's not even sadness, but the loss of that joy, of the anticipation of a pleasant surprise.
Meh. My day goes on as planned.
Hi there - I'm glad you stepped away to the pool. I find myself obsessed with divorce and relationships and stuff sometimes to the point where I have to get some space from it, hope you did.
You're right about my comment - devastated is a bit overly dramatic. But without going back and rereading I have noted that you bring it up frequently and it sort of serves as an example of the many ways he just doesn't listen or change, which is offensive to your soul as much as to your dinner. At least to me it would be. It kind of serves as an example of the hopelessness of your sitch if H just won't stop eating off your plate (figuratively and literally).
What I suggested was that you put off looking for behavior changes of his, because it's too early in the process. First you need to work to change the dynamic that happens with you two, and that can be done just by changing you. If you want to.
So using the plate example, I had suggested some alternate responses and I wondered what you thought of them. They would involve dissociating the hand reaching out from your sense that he utterly disregards what you clearly tell him you need. Lose the offendedness. It's a feeling based on the thoughts you have about his action, and you can change your thoughts. Take action to protect your boundary (move your plate away, etc) and hopefully begin to erase the bad feelings that make it so difficult for you to even be sure you want to be in the relationship.
I dunno. Trying to grasp at the things I think might help. Take care,
Best regards,
Yup, sometimes obsessed, admittedly. It was good to get away, but now I'm thinking I wish I would have brought a different book, something just for fun.
You're right on the plate thing. It has become symbolic in my posts, not that it happens constantly or that when he does, it somehow devastates me. And sorry if I was jumping on you in some way. H has a tendency to do that and I've developed a sensitivity to it. If H ate off my plate and I calmly asked him not to do that with even the slightest tone, he would tell you I went ballistic. Just trying to figure out if it's something I'm putting out there.
Lose the offendedness. It's a feeling based on the thoughts you have about his action, and you can change your thoughts. Take action to protect your boundary (move your plate away, etc) and hopefully begin to erase the bad feelings that make it so difficult for you to even be sure you want to be in the relationship.
This is interesting. I read your suggestions about the plate thing. I've been offered them before too. I think they're good suggestions and should work. So this past weekend, we went out to breakfast with H's parents. There were 5 of us, and I sat at the farthest position possible. Seating worked out well, didn't embarrass anyone or make anyone feel awkward, just sort of slipped it in that way. H can't even reach my plate. We get finished eating, S has some leftover fries and offers them to H, so H looks across the table and says to me in a volume that everyone can hear, "I'm not taking them off his plate, S said I could have them." That was rather awkward for me. Am I wrong?
The thing I find most interesting about your post is that I feel I'm reacting the way I am because I'm trying to protect my boundaries. With H, in order to enforce one, it seems I have to choose to breach another. One of my boundaries is not acting in a way that ruins dinner for everyone else because H and I have a dysfunctional R. To get up and leave the dinner table in the middle of dinner as was suggested at another time would protect my "respect MY food ownership" boundary but breach my "don't ruin it for everyone else" boundary. By not going to dinner with him at all, I can protect both.
The problem is that there doesn't seem to be anything left that we can do together.
Hi. I'm so drawn to your sitch. I think it reminds me a lot of mine, but you voice things I stuffed down inside.
I think your meal this past weekend sounds great. First, you managed the seating in a sensible way. Second you heard from H that he's trying to remember you don't like this habit. Sorry that felt awkward to you, which I could see, because it's a little belligerent, but it would be worth noting and rewarding the effort and ignoring the delivery.
What you mentioned about him saying you went ballistic is interesting. He is able to manipulate you with his reactiveness, so that you're reluctant to enforce your boundary (nonpunitively) because you want to avoid his (punitive) response. In the Boundaries tapes, that would be a case where you let his statement float up to your boundary, consider the validity of it, and let it bounce off because it is invalid. So you don't have to get upset or mad that he said it. You might say "I didn't intend for you to think I was going ballistic. I don't want you to eat off my plate."
The "don't ruin it for everyone else" is a problematic boundary, since it involves two things you don't control - his behavior and everyone else's perception of it.
So, you like to eat out together. How about a cooking class together? Or...see a movie? Or...
Let's see, my IC would say to enforce a boundary you need to express it first and state what you will need to do, and get agreement that it's fair and the other person will try to accommodate it. So it would go like this. Before you go out to dinner you say, "H I'm really looking forward to this dinner, and am glad to spend the time with you. I want to discuss ahead of time my boundary about food so we can both feel comfortable. As you know, I feel disrespected when you take food off my plate, so I'm going to ask you not to do that tonight, and if you reach out, I'm going to cover my plate with my (knife! napkin! hands!) as a quiet reminder so we don't have a scene that is embarassing to me. Will you agree to that?" Hopefully he says Yes Dear I will! But he has just as much right to say "no way jose, I am the man and I eat what I see, beware!" to which you might agree to still go but arrange to sit far away from him, or you might decide not to go. Without animosity you negotiate this to meet your need for your plate of food and his need for more food than he got served. It's kind of a funny example, but in my sitch I love stuff like this because it's a sandbox to practice in, and represents larger issues that are more serious. Still the skills build. For me, it was dog poop, my early posts are littered with it, ha.
It's the absence of animosity and judgment. It's the acceptance that your H and you have different ideas about plates. It's the realization that you aren't going to get along if you read his behavior as a symbol of overall boorishness (judgment) but handle his behavior as an objective thing that if you can negotiate you can be successful with him.
I know, how about go to dinner where they serve family style, and keep the serving bowl between you two? Anyway, brainstorming. Gotta get back to work.
Take care friend,
A.
but it would be worth noting and rewarding the effort and ignoring the delivery.
THIS! I have a problem with this. What is it? What is it I'm missing here? My immediate reaction to your statement was this:
I feel like that is treating him like a child. I feel like this is so basic, that for me to
reward him would be almost belittling. I definitely feel like his post-dinner comment was belligerent, like it was a major put-out for him to be courteous. For me to respond, "Well done!" -- well, I'm not sure I could to that without feeling that I was being belligerent right back. Now, for example, if he purposely steered the restaurant selection away from the steakhouse to something that was more veggie-friendly, then THAT would definitely deserve being commended. It isn't basic courtesy, it's personal. It still conflicts with his pre-existing meat-eating personal preference, but it's truly consideration that I could be appreciative of.
Plus, I didn't hear anyone else thanking him/commending him for not eating food off of their plates, and I never have. He doesn't do it to anyone else, just to S and me. I don't think I have it in me to thank him for being as "kind" to me in that way as he is everyone else on the planet. That sounds very co-dependent from the little I've learned of it, which I was just reading up on - again.
Just thinking outloud...
I think I spent the early years of our M exhibiting some measureable co-dependent behaviors, disguising it as trying to be a good W. If H is narcissistic (very possibly,) a co-dependent is his perfect mate. While I think I have some mild tendencies and therefore slipped into the role somewhat easily, it obviously didn't fit me well because I rebelled. I feel like H is still trying to put me back in that role, and I refuse to go. Your comment that I should somehow reward him for treating me with basic courtesy flared that rebellion again. I can easily thank him for things above and beyond, I can't thank him for treating me like a human being, of which he obviously knows how and can easily do with others. One of my boundaries is treating me with basic courtesy and respect.
You seem comfortable with it. Can you describe for me what you're thinking? Obviously I have my own issues clouding the benefit that you see clearly.
I can appreciate your reaction to "Passionate Marriage", to me it's like "Marriage 3.0" when I'm still trying to figure out "Marriage 1.0". I do recommend the book, because it challenges you and makes you think. The downside for me was that I saw potential I wanted to realize, but W didn't want to join me on that journey, so I also had to put it down, because it was making me increasingly frustrated with my sitch.
I'm reading "His Needs, Her Needs" now, which is interesting and good but somewhat dated. Here's the interesting thing about it:
"His Needs, Her Needs" says that you should absolutely expect your spouse to meet your emotional needs, and that you should NOT expect to drop your expectations to make things work.
It says that when you get married, you are granting your spouse EXCLUSIVE rights to meet some of your emotional needs (intimacy, sex, affection), so if they choose not to provide for those needs, they're putting you in a terrible situation because you can't get them met elsewhere while remaining true to your vows, yet they refuse to provide for them. (Reminded me about our discussions about "marriage entitlements" CV)
It also says that working on communication skills and problem solving never saves a marriage. The only thing that works is rekindling romantic love, and that is only done by making deposits in the spouse's "love bank". It says that when one spouse is withdrawn, there will be no reciprocation, and the spouse who wants improvement has to make all the deposits with no reward, but one day things WILL change if you keep at it.
Now that sounds to me like "pursuit", where you are seeking to meet their needs without having yours met.
I feel based on what I've read so far that DB is more appropriate for a WAS situation, but that "His Needs, Her Needs" philosophy may be more appropriate for piecing, where there is at least some mutual motivation to work on the marriage.
In any case, I found it interesting that so many people on this board espouse the importance of making yourself happy, not being codependent, and not relying upon your spouse to provide your happiness, whereas this book says you should absolutely expect your spouse to meet your needs and provide your happiness, and if they don't, then you're headed for divorce. I'm not sure those two concepts are opposed, I think they're actually complementary, but it doesn't let the spouse off the hook as easily some of the comments I've read here would imply.
In any case, good stuff, and sorry to hijack your thread for a book review CV!
Accuray
(FYI, H's comment was beligerent and inappropriate)
CV, I recommended leaving the table in the middle of the meal if he violates your boundary. I think my point at the time was that you'd only have to do that once. The one time you did it, it would be no fun, but you would definitely be communicating that this boundary is "for real", and you're going to enforce it.
I took a business strategy class once and they talked about Disney. Disney historically had a policy of litigating every lawsuit brought against them -- they settled nothing. Therefore, if you slipped at Disneyland and sued them for $1000, they would spent $10,000 to defend themselves instead of paying you the $1,000 settlement. Irrational and inappropriate? Yes! The strategy however was "signaling", they are sending a clear message that they will not be swindled with frivolous lawsuits -- don't even try. They'll kill a fly with an anvil, and they'll do it all day long. That informs the public about how to treat them, and what to expect. Sure, they far over-react to the lawsuits they get, but they probably prevent themselves from having to deal with thousands of cases that never get filed.
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.
That's my $0.02 on the "food sharing" in restaurants. I might now set a boundary about "rude comments in polite company" -- if you speak to me that way, I will quietly leave the table and go home and we can discuss it later. That's my boundary.
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.
Accuray
I've read that book, A (probably 17 years ago, so I could see it being dated.) In fact, H and I met some very good friends when we went to a His Needs, Her Needs seminar. We did a follow-up group book study with them afterward. I thought it was a good book at the time, even purchased a copy for a friend that was getting M'd. Then we continued with his next book, Love Busters.
It does make things confusing, because it does seem contradictory in some ways. There's also the reality factor of "how it is" versus "how it should be." Human beings are naturally selfish, so whether it should be or not, M's tend to develop into a tit-for-tat situation. That's really what he's describing when he talks about the deposits and the love bank and being overdrawn.
One of them (possibly the second book) also says that you're not supposed to do recreational things without your spouse, because then you're making happy memories without them instead of with them. It stated that you already have a ton of unpleasant things that you have to do with your spouse (bills, cleaning, diapers, etc.,) so doing the pleasant things with them is needed to balance that out. So you should spend your recreational time developing things you like to do together. Otherwise, all your spouse gets from you is all the ugly. Also makes sense in a way; H had a huge problem with it. I can tell you in our case, developing our individual interests contributed significantly to our demise, among other things of course.
The one thing I did pull from Passionate Marriage that I really appreciated was that the author acknowledged that "love" and intimate relationships are unique to humans and fairly new in our evolution, and therefore, a bit of a cr@pshoot. Like the different styles of learning, there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach that works for everyone.
Okay, just to get back to a few posts.
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
Go Disney! Not irrational at all. Sounds like something I would do and then be accused of being argumentative.
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.)
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
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.
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."
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.
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.
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!
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?
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?
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.
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.
I'm posting this on my own thread. Definitely something I need to think about.
CV, your analogy is interesting. There's something niggling at my brain but I'm not sure how to put it into words. I'll be back once I've read through it a few more times.
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.
I already know that I can. I did that last weekend when I went with him to visit his family. The whole weekend was about his agenda and my accommodating it with a positive and pleasant attitude. He was pleased and grateful. He responded by anticipating how he might get even more out of me (re: sex), rather than having the desire to reciprocate. (I know this because this is what he told me.)
I probably could, but I just don't want to go through the rest of my life with no toys because H has to have absolutely every one of them, or snipe at me because he doesn't.
Hey CV, many of our sitches seem impossible the way we define them. Your perception is your reality. The way you think creates the way you feel.
But in reading your story I wonder why you've been beating your head against this wall for so long. How does he feel about being with someone who down inside doesn't like or respect him? What are each of you getting from being married that isn't worse than being alone?
All of your questions come down to how you can change him, and unfortunately you can't. You can change you. But, you ask, how can you change you in a way that will change him? You can't.
He might change, on his own. But there are no answers here that I've ever seen that tell you how to change your spouse.
What can you focus on about you?
Adinva, I believe my hope on this board came from seeing all the men that had such insightful and introspective posts. I knew that it wasn't an insurmountable gender issue as my H claims.
I also saw all the LBS's making such effort, willing to acknowledge all the things they did wrong and work desperately to get their WAS's back. I hoped to glean something I could do to get my H's attention.
I can work on me in all sorts of ways, and will do so regardless of my M, always have. But as Accuray said, this is a two-person relationship and H bears some responsibility in it. I can't force him to change, but nor am I wrong in expecting him to do his part. It takes two to make a healthy M work and only one to make it crash and burn. I can't do it alone.
The M commitment (or not D'ing) is complicated, part of which is not wanting to put S through what you're going through re: your kids. If H doesn't step up, I plan to do my time, probably much like Accuray described his parents' R, until S is on his own. Then I'll just disappear into my own life, career, activities etc. and avoid being with H as much as possible. My search here will at least contribute to my knowing I've tried everything I could.
Honestly, there's a part of me that figures I won't have that long to deal with it anyway. H is 9 years older, has already had one heart attack, doesn't take care of myself or exercise or eat right. I wouldn't wish his death, but the writing is on the wall. If it happens, part of me will consider it a blessing. I know that might sound cruel, but I'm not causing it or wishing it, I've even tried to get him to do better. I'm just being honest. I will be very sad, because I do love him, and because just like a D, it's the end of what could have/should have been something beautiful. But it doesn't leave the mess behind that a D does. Heck, who knows, maybe I'll die first, then that becomes a win for H.
CV,
I like your story.
Adinva, DB says that you can change your *relationship* by changing yourself. That's different than changing the other person, but maybe the distinction isn't that meaningful because it's the relationship that's probably more important.
i.e. someone can't fight with you if you don't take the bait. It's hard for someone to be mean to you if you're consistently nice to them, etc. etc.
I think that's what's behind the "build a bridge" suggestion right? That it might improve the relationship through CV's actions.
I was just listening to a marriage radio program where the H was doing what some people are suggesting what CV should do. They were telling him to "build the bridge" -- be the best husband you can be, complain about nothing, don't criticize his wife in any way, address her complaints, don't get defensive, be a model husband. That's almost impossible to execute and retain your humanity IMO, but in any case, he was complaining that he's been doing that for 8 months, and his W is still not reciprocating, she's not meeting his needs. His frustration and weariness were coming through in his voice. He said that this process has just left him with "no love left for her". He said his blood pressure is at an all time high, he feels physically ill, and just wants the pain to end. Interestingly, the doctor said that he hasn't been doing it nearly long enough -- he said to expect to do it for 2 years. He said that eventually you'll see a change, and it will be overnight. You'll pass some threshold and your spouse will start to engage. If you sabotage yourself however by backsliding, you keep pushing the end date out. The guy said "Two years! no way, no way, just not going to happen"
The problem I have with that advice is that people don't do well with long feedback cycles. If I flip the switch, I expect the light to come on. If the system is designed so that the light turns on 12 hours after I flip the switch, chances are I'm going to run in circles, replace the lightbulb and try to completely rewire it instead of waiting. That's why I think your sitch is so admirable, you've been at it for at least a year, and are trying to model "great wife".
It feels to me like the amount of pain that CV would have to push through to build that bridge for up to 2 years is something she doesn't see herself having the strength or desire to do.
The cruel irony is that you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you don't build the bridge, you're guaranteed 2 years of suffering anyway, and then as many more years of suffering as you stay in the marriage.
If you DO build the bridge, your 2 year pain is even worse, but there's a chance things will be MUCH better later.
To me it's like someone saying to me "If you go to prison for 2 years, when you get out I'll give you a coin. If you flip the coin and it lands on heads, I'll give you one hundred million dollars. If you flip tails, you get nothing"
Boy, two years in prison is going to be unimaginably painful, but one hundred million dollars would be life changing for me, my family, and our future generations -- but I could also walk away with nothing.
I feel for you on that CV. My sitch has some of the same themes, but my pain level is not as great.
Accuray
If someone said Hey Ad, your husband is being a rotten jerk and the way to get happiness in your life is to be a model wife to him, to love and understand him, to find and fix all of your problems, and to let him be how he is...for one year (or two, or anything more than a couple of weeks)...without seeing or expecting to see any change in him. I would have said, forget it. And that's what you see all over the boards when people first come in.
I see the choice as: (a) my husband is being a rotten jerk and I can tolerate it and deal with it by hating him, demeaning him, and wishing him dead for the rest of my life...without seeing or expecting him to change...so my kids aren't from a broken home and so I'm not stygmatized as divorced. Or...
b) my husband is being a rotten jerk and regardless of him I'd like to be a gentle, forgiving and loving person. I'd like to be someone who overlooks small things and isn't eaten away by medium and large things. I want to release my anger and resentment and act like the wife I'd like to be...without seeing or expecting him to change...so I like who I am.
In both cases H may never change, but in case (b) I get to feel better and happier in my own skin and H MIGHT too, and might want to be with me. In case (a) I just figured H would never divorce me so I'd live with it.
Because (a) is exactly where I was pre-bomb. I didn't strive for (b) right away and sometimes I still have some trouble with it. But in my logical mind (b) is the right choice, hands down, and I don't see a better one anywhere.
Choice (c) was where I leave him, because we were certainly making each other miserable and frankly he deserved better as much as I did. I was dedicated to marriage and would rather suffer forever than choose (c). I have read enough on these boards in real, personal stories, to know that there are worse things than divorce.
The debate I've been reading up on lately is whether or not (b) is truly sustainable long term. Can you really live with someone over the long term who (1) you have feelings for and (2) is a "rotten jerk" and STILL manage to find happiness for yourself?
My MC said "no, that's fiction", that while it's healthy to work on yourself and to see to your own needs, it's not realistic to expect to find happiness in a marriage where your needs are not being met.
The "Marriage Builders" website effectively says the same thing -- dropping expectations and focusing on you doesn't work long term. I believe it ABSOLUTELY works short term when your marriage is in crisis and you need to prevent divorce, but it doesn't seem like a sustainable way to live, particularly when you know it can be better -- ignorance can be bliss in that regard. Instead, dropping your expectations of your spouse and focusing on you feels like a transition strategy to get to something better.
I'm 100% convinced that I'm drawn to the "Marriage Builders" philosophy because it's what I want to hear -- it supports my preconceived notions and "let's me off the hook" by making W at least in part directly responsible for my happiness. I know why I like it, it's an easier way out. I'm just not sure it's right, and I'm still wrestling with that.
Accuray
I'm 100% convinced that I'm drawn to the "Marriage Builders" philosophy because it's what I want to hear -- it supports my preconceived notions and "let's me off the hook" by making W at least in part directly responsible for my happiness. I know why I like it, it's an easier way out. I'm just not sure it's right, and I'm still wrestling with that.
Accuray, my question is this: If this ISN'T true, then why would people get M'd in the first place? They can do all that other stuff single without the hassle of being M'd? Sex is available outside of M. It can't be just to have kids because not everybody wants to have kids but they still get M'd. And I can tell you honestly, if anyone had presented this formula as a long-term M OP, I would have declined. I already had it all otherwise.
I guess I have a second question.
Can you really live with someone over the long term who (1) you have feelings for and (2) is a "rotten jerk" and STILL manage to find happiness for yourself?
Isn't this promoting a sort of narcissist/co-dependent R?
CV, I agree with you. W feels we should each be 100% self-sufficient and the marriage is like a bonus over the top. From my perspective, if I were 100% self-sufficient then why would I get married?
She's very dedicated to her view of things and lives by it to her credit, she's consistent. She's not a "rotten jerk", she's nice to me, like a friend would be nice to you. She just doesn't act like she's "in love" with me, and that bothers me. Should it?
Accuray
Ah, i left out a very important part of my (b). In changing myself - my perspective, my reactions, my actions and my feelings, it turns out he's not a rotten jerk at all. He's more human than I thought, and sometimes in great pain that I didn't know about, and a lot easier to get along with because I'm not fighting him tooth and nail oppositionally to protect my sense of boundaries.
That is not an act.
I've worked toward it since September, and I don't regret it for a minute. I'd do it longer. Not saying forever, but I have improved myself and I'm a more thoughtful and more empathetic person, and I see there's more I can do to improve. So while I focus on that I'm no longer noticing the things that he did that annoyed me, and no longer taking personally the things I really had worked myself up over.
I don't necessarily have the choice about whether or when we get divorced, but either way I have a whole new attitude and I get different results.
So CV, that's why I kept telling you to focus more on yourself, build your own foundation. Focus less on his shortcomings, take them less personally. Work on you. You don't want to leave him yet, so why not make things nicer while you're there? For YOU.
That's good stuff Adinva, inspiring!
So CV, that's why I kept telling you to focus more on yourself, build your own foundation. Focus less on his shortcomings, take them less personally. Work on you. You don't want to leave him yet, so why not make things nicer while you're there? For YOU.
I feel like I'm circling back around to the beginning of my posts, maybe for the second time around. The question is what would that look like? For me it's sleeping in the other bedroom; for H, it's the same bed. For me, it's not sitting next to him at dinner or not even going out to dinner with him; for him, it's going, sitting next to him, and letting him eat off my plate. For me, it's being able to make my own decisions about things; for him, it's me doing exactly what he wants regardless of my own feelings.
I can either invest in me or invest in us. There doesn't seem to be a cross-over.
I believe the path there lies in establishing and enforcing your boundaries, while at the same time being polite, friendly, and nice to be around.
Being nice to H is not the same as giving in to things you don't like. I believe that's where you start -- remove the criticism and judgement, provide encouragement and support -- while at the same time NOT allowing your boundaries to be violated.
Will that make H totally happy? No -- at least not initially. Will that make H happier? I would bet it will -- although to your point when he gets a little, he'll probably instantly want more -- his "taker" will emerge and start trying to make a land grab. Instead of retreating, stay where you are but maintain your boundaries. If you're the little girl and you decide you're going to keep 5 of the best and newest toys for yourself, you just do it. If he can't be happy with the 15 toys you left for him, you can't own that, that's his cross to bear. If he tries to take one of your toys, you make it very clear he can't have it -- you don't give in even a little bit, and each time he tries, you reinforce it again and again.
Over time, if you're consistently avoiding active hurts (criticism, scolding, shaming, cold shoulder treatment), he begins to feel safer, and maybe doesn't need to grab for all the toys to try to make himself feel good. Eventually maybe he offers one up.
I think that's where the road lies.
Accuray
[quote=Accuray]Adinva, DB says that you can change your *relationship* by changing yourself. That's different than changing the other person, but maybe the distinction isn't that meaningful because it's the relationship that's probably more important.[/quote
Unfortunately, CV appears to be interested in changing her H...
As is apparent by many, CV continues to circle around to these "key issues" that seems to be getting her no where. When things are put out there as suggestions, there are reasons CV mentions why she will not do them...
And IMHO, I don't think that boundaries are an issue for CV. I get a feeling she is a very strong woman who has no problems with standing up for what she believes in...
And again IMHO, I think she is so angry (still) and resentful that her H isn't doing what she wants, that she absolutely will not attempt a softer approach...
and the problem remains... nothing will change in the M unless CV actually DOES something...
Still more time to cook...
Let me put it this way.
If your H stopped falling asleep during movies (and therefore did not snore) and he stopped eating off your plate...
Would you suddenly love him to the end of the earth...?
I kinda don't think so...
This remains NOT about your boundaries NOR about your H's distasteful or disrespectful or whatever label we could put on your H's behaviours...
I remain convinced that this sitch is about you not knowing what you want...
Your plan, if I'm not mistaken, remains trying to keep the M intact until your S graduates...
I don't think your H changing will change your viewpoint...
unless he became "perfect" in your eyes... meaing molding him to be the person you want him to be...
Which is contrary to DB...
yep, she is using him to make herself feel better and keep certain aspects of her life intact until she is done using him.
What we don't know is CV's H's perspective. I'm convinced that he would have a differing perspective of what is wrong in the M.
What we also may not be fully aware of is what CV thinks SHE did wrong in the M.
From what CV writes, it appears that her H is trying from time to time, but we get CV's perspective of how he is doing that to try to manipulate her rather than what might actually be an honest attempt by her H to try to work out the problems.
CV's fear shows up as anger and resentment... what might actually be her fear that the M will actually be reconciled, meaning that her current perspective that her H is a bad person will have to be rethought. How could it be possible that her H actually is a good man with a couple things that he needs to work out, rather than the her stated belief that her H is really a self centred man who really doesn't care about her.
She still appears to be currently wanting to believe that the M will not be reconciled and therefore her own introspection is unnecessary. Her H will not be the person she wants to be with so she does not need to look at how she was in the M and how she can work on herself.
Her H will not be the person she wants to be with so she does not need to look at how she was in the M and how she can work on herself.
And by that, I mean outside of the M.
CV claims to be a great person. I'm sure she is.
That being the case, how is she a great person outside the M and yet can't seem to be that great person INSIDE the M?
It MUST be something to do with her H? (THAT is sarcasm)
CV is quite possibly able to be a great person outside the M because she can remove herself from the company of people who rub her the wrong way.
Rather than removing her H from her life because he rubs her the wrong way, she can remain a victim by staying in the M and continuing to focus on how he's a bad person.
Rather than making a tough choice and doing...
Either do the introspective work and see and fix/resolve her own issues...
or removing her H from her life and stop complaining about him...
So CV, that's why I kept telling you to focus more on yourself, build your own foundation. Focus less on his shortcomings, take them less personally. Work on you. You don't want to leave him yet, so why not make things nicer while you're there? For YOU.
I feel like I'm circling back around to the beginning of my posts, maybe for the second time around. The question is what would that look like? For me it's sleeping in the other bedroom; for H, it's the same bed. For me, it's not sitting next to him at dinner or not even going out to dinner with him; for him, it's going, sitting next to him, and letting him eat off my plate. For me, it's being able to make my own decisions about things; for him, it's me doing exactly what he wants regardless of my own feelings.
what being a better you, a better wife for your h, means is not what you suggested at all. Avoiding what you cannot tolerate, because you cannot tolerate much of anything about him, is not the "work on yourself to make it a better marriage, for you" that i meant. My "for you" was misinterpreted. I didnt mean make it more comfortable for yourself, which is what your examples were. I meant do this hard, uncomfortable, painful work, for the benefit of your self. Just learn to be compassionate because it is beautiful to be compassionate. Just stop taking things personally because you can learn to stop (i believe you can). Just learn to ml with him once in a while to feel good together and not see him as taking yet more from you. Change your perspective, change your thoughts, change your feelings. Thats what it looks like.
I had suggested that if you dont think he deserves it, do it anyway just to be the wife you want to be, just to be a more enlightened person than you were, just because what you practice is what you become. And youre practicing hate disgust dehumanization of him ( what you accuse him of doing to you).
He may not deserve you, but you do. Improve yourself from the inside, because it will be good for you and it might make your narriage better.
As i pointed out it did make mine better without changing what h was doing right away there was an immediate change in how i decided to perceive his actions. Thus, i find you unattractive became "i am in so much pain and confusion that i will say anything just so i can get you on board and end this quickly, dont take it personally." is that really what he meant? Who cares? I feel better thinking he doesnt really think im a dogface; hes just not in his right mind. Snide remarks i used to take personally i now think of as evidence of some anxiety i can help alleviate. And since i'm not engaging, we are not butting heads so much and so our home is more pleasant. I didnt change him, i changed how i think about him.
Whether you stay with bim for the long haul or wind up with someone else, stop practicing meanspiritedness, scorekeeping, and outrage. This is work to do on you, regardless of what he does or notices.
So again i say work on you, it is way too early to expect any change in him, realistically. Its not about whats fair, its about who you are.
Your notes about h make you sound mean and unreasonable, sick and tired, bitter and loveless. Yet you are here. Who are you and who do you want to be?
Does that paint a clearer picture? Your closing sentence, below, i say if you invest in yourself meaningfully, internally, it is ALL crossover, and there is no downside.
I can either invest in me or invest in us. There doesn't seem to be a cross-over.
I've read the posts. I'm thinking about them and I'm rather all over the place mentally and emotionally. I'm trying to step away a bit and regroup, relax, stop obsessing, let go of the reins. I need to be able to think on this with a clear head and an open heart.
In the meantime, I have a dilemma. H has said for years that he would like to have someone that he could bounce things off, relationally. He knows I've chatted on various message boards on various topics (gardening, kids, etc.) and so he said he went looking for something for himself but couldn't find anything. He also meets regularly with other men and men's groups under the term accountability partners, but readily admits that little accountability actually occurs. Without including all the gory details, suffice it to say nothing ever happened.
My dilemma: I can find message boards all over the place with ease. Do I assume that, in spite of his computer career/background, that he really doesn't have the capacity to find them and offer him with a list? Or assume that he does have the ability but really doesn't want to and that's just his excuse? I could probably focus on it and form a position based upon my (tainted) opinion, but I'm throwing that out and asking you wise, experienced folks instead. He has not specifically asked me for a list, just asked me what I googled and how I find them.
To further complicate things, I could give H THIS site, as I feel it is filled with wonderful and insightful advice, but then I feel like I should leave because that just seems awkward. I don't want to leave, but a number of you have asked what his take is on the R and it would certainly provide an open door to that information. If he had searched out his own sites, I would have let him do his own choosing and just crossed my fingers. As it is, if I should offer a list of sites, should I include this one?
BTW, this topic came up again yesterday when H asked about the board I spend a lot of time on (this one.) I didn't invent this idea to come up with something for HIM to do. Up until this point (months), I've just blown off his comments as hot air. I'm trying to step out of my typical response and thought I'd ask.
I don't know. How would you feel if he read what you've written so far and realized it was about him? If he came on here too andparticipated, maybe people could provide some help to him.
If my H asked I would not provide the name of this forum, and I hope that he would not find it. It's a valuable resource for me and I need to be able to talk all the way through my feelings, some of which are ugly and some of which aren't really how I feel just a little while later. I feel H would miss the evolutionary aspect of what I write and be insulted by things I've written.
I would say my forum is a private place I journal with like-minded people and I'd prefer he seek out his own resources. Rinse, repeat.
You're right that it is not your responsibility to do this work for him, to find a message board to participate in. He may just be wondering who's capturing so much of your attention.
There have been couples who have used this site, at the same time.
If we get out of the "why's" and "meaning" of your H's request, then we have to assume that he actually is wanting a good place for support.
Don't assume what he means...
Find out if he is asking you for feedback. If he is, then...
IF you feel comfortable, you could have a conversation about him being on the same site as you. This IS a good site and if your were not here, this would absolutely be my suggested site.
So, first, consider if you would like to "share" this site with him. IF you might, ask him if he would be willing to share a site with you. If not, either way (which is fine, of course) there are other DB "like" sites out there. IF he is asking AND you are providing, just let him know to seek out M friendly sites or counsellors or what have you.
Again, first ask him if he is asking you for "help".
oh, and another thing... IF you think he could afford it, then I would actually recommend he seek out the DB coaches as a first step.
and another PS...
adinva, while I understand what you are saying, I do not believe in keeping secrets from my spouse. I'm not judging you by saying that, it's just how I feel.
So as ugly as some of my posts might feel now, I am human and if my W was not willing to accept the good AND the bad in me, then so be it. If my W or anyone for that matter, found my posts and put me to the posts, I would not be ashamed.
That's my feelings and I accept that others might feel different.
umm... ok, last one...
Just realize that... your H is claiming to seek a forum...
Realize that... he might find this site, anyhow...
And... he might put your posts to you...
So really... is any intimate R worth secrets? Any good R has it's basis in open and honest communication.
Thanks for your replies, Advina and KD, you pretty much expressed my consternation.
So, I asked H if he was wanting help with finding a discussion forum and he said yes. I suggested that he could check out askmen (figuring he would feel comfortable with that, he said he had been there, didn't know they had a board) and the Willard Harley site. I had to show him how to maneuver the site, pick a forum, submit a post, etc. so he really is clueless about it. He said he was just going to read for a while, which is probably a good idea.
I didn't offer this site just yet. I'm going to see if he's really the type to use a message board before I decide if I'm willing to give up mine. I have a feeling he'll do it for a few days and then throw it out, not being willing to invest the time. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt though and wait and see.
Now I'm struggling with whether my knowing what he posts would be good or not. I don't visit either of those sites, so I won't stumble across his posts but I am curious. That's part of why I had wanted him to find his own site without my help, and why I didn't want both of us on the DB site. I didn't want to be tempted. I like my privacy (vs. secrecy,) he should have his.
DO NOT SNOOP on him... he has his own path to follow... let him... let him go...
That's what I thought. I haven't snooped. Just saying, it would have been so much easier to resist if I didn't know.
CV, just a thought here...
If your H actually participates and continues to get support and help regarding the M "problems"...
Would you consider that he is "working on the M"?
Have you decided what you want, yet?
Yes, I know you are here and want to work on the M and I know you have suggested such, although it still appears you maintain your position of keeping the M intact only until your S graduates...
You continue to have a few choices and none of them are easy:
+ Actively work on yourself to help make the M better
+ Continue to "survive" the M until your S graduates
+ Consider that your M actually is already dead and continue on with D
Personally... I think the second choice is the easiest route...
KD, I'm still working on all this, but I did want to get back to you and others and answer a few questions you had.
Of course, I want to actively work on myself, regardless of the state of our M. There are always things I can work on, and I'm sure I'll invent new ones as time goes on. I find it comforting that Advina has been at it for a year and still has things she's working on. I can cut myself a little slack in light of that.
At minimum, I will work to survive the M until S graduates. ScaredSilly accused me of using H, but this is a mutual position. Neither one of us wants to give up any time with S (this should ring home with you, KD) or have to deal with the court system again, like he experienced and I witnessed with his first D. So both of us are on board with at least "getting along" until S is out. Both of us claim to want better.
I have considered that the M is already dead. I don't think it is. I wouldn't be here if I thought it was truly, irrevocably dead.
I appreciate your comment that I come across as a strong woman perfectly capable of enforcing my boundaries. I don't think you would have said that about me 3 months ago. In fact, I believe you were one of several in an older thread that chastised me for negotiating my boundaries on some things. In any case, to me that means progress.
Accuray, keeping a land grab at bay is a serious concern of mine, but I hope to be up for the challenge. How to look at H in a positive light in that instance is the hard part for me.
KD, you asked, "If your H stopped falling asleep during movies (and therefore did not snore) and he stopped eating off your plate... Would you suddenly love him to the end of the earth...? I kinda don't think so..." You're right. That would not cause me to love him to the end of the earth. What it would do is remove the thorns from the rose so that I could feel safe enough to get near and smell the fragrance and appreciate its beauty.
I will add that I'm not trying to change my H, but I AM hoping that he changes. As Accuray referenced from other sources, I don't believe a healthy M can be derived or sustained long-term when only one party is contributing, or the R balance is skewed, regardless of how saintly that one person is. That sort of R seems a bit abusive and co-dependent.
As for providing H's perspective, all I can suggest is that you can scan the other two sites I mentioned and see if you can figure his out. I don't know if he has posted yet, or if he will. He has the information.
As an update on the state of things, H and I spoke a bit this weekend, since S is away on camp. It wasn't terribly encouraging for me, a lot of stuff I already knew but H arrived at during the course of the convo. He claimed it was enlightening, claimed he didn't like that about himself and could see how it fostered the conflict in our M, claimed he would address the issues if I would just reengage and give him a chance. I'm trying to have a better attitude about this rather than, "Another empty promise, same-old same-old." I did agree to go for a walk with him. I did not jump in bed and have sex with him.
Also, I did manage to intercept a topic before it went bad. One of the things H has an issue with is accepting the word "no" from me. If it fits in his head, it should fit in mine, so he picks and badgers until I agree. The topic was about my summer classes. I'm taking an online P.E. course. I know, how does one do that, right? Well it's three P.E. credits, the class is health and fitness. I chose it because I can't manage to do 3 separate one-credit-hour classes that require me to be at school 5 days/week for one hour, regardless of how fun it would be to play volleyball, because I can get my fun elsewhere/elsehow. Well H kept telling me I need to do that, it would be fun, I need to get out, etc. I looked at him and just calmly stated that it was time for him to drop it, that I gave him my answer and he needed to accept it. It ended nicely at least, and he somewhat recognized what he was doing. Afterall, it didn't affect him in any way, so I don't know why he was arguing.
Anyway, I'm still listening, and I am still trying...
Afterall, it didn't affect him in any way, so I don't know why he was arguing.
Men feel valuable if they can help you to solve problems. If we put forth what we believe is a great solution and you reject it for one which is (in our view) less optimal, we're going to argue with you about it. Even though, to your point, it doesn't impact us either way. I catch myself doing this too. You handled it the right way, "I've decided, let it go". If he's weak he'll make a smarmy comment and then drop it. If he's strong, he'll accept that as the last word and move on.
Accuray
Accuray, any suggestions on how to handle it when it DOES affect him, albeit indirectly? (ie. me not doing something with him that he wants me to do but he still gets to do it himself, like boating with friends.)
CV, I've read your response. I'm quite busy ATM so I will have to come back to your post as soon as I can.
In the mean time, you are on the right track as you continue to work on you... it has more benefits than just for you.
That lightly touches on the DB idea that changing ourselves changes the R and to that end, changes by one person means that the other spouse simply can not stay in the M and NOT contribute...
CV,
As I mentioned I'm just reading "His Needs Her Needs" and it says that "Recreational Companionship" is a top 2 emotional need for men. Therefore, he's probably inviting you boating for that reason, that he'll feel very good for having you along.
Now if you know you're not going to enjoy it and you're going to be miserable, then I would NOT go, but one suggestion would be to offer up something else you can do together that he can look forward to. i.e. "I'm going to pass on boating Saturday -- I really don't like getting wet. How about on Sunday we go for a (bike ride, hike, walk around town, walk on the beach) etc."
You've said in the past that he tends to sit in silence when you're together and looking to have a conversation. One other stereotypical male "trick" is to get him involved in an activity first. Once he's doing the activity, he may start talking. That's why walks can be good. You may find if you go for a walk he'll start opening up.
Accuray
Recreational companionship is his number one LL per the exercises we did. I get that. Though I can accommodate his needs somewhat, frankly I'm a little sick of boating and really don't have much interest anymore, especially in light of the work and expense involved. He has never been party to doing MY interests with me (floating, biking, gardening, etc.) If I suggest alternatives that he could do with me, he continues to pitch why boating is a much better activity and why my other suggestions are flawed. My best approach lately has been to do just a little boating with him (twice a year maybe) and then he's welcome to pursue more on his own while I pursue my interests alone. He complains that my pursuing my interests separately is wrong, because friend's W is coming boating and that's what couples do.
How do I approach this in a DB methodology? (And not be accused of trying to change him?)
I will also throw in, H did suggest a walk on Sunday, or at least I think he did but maybe not (complicated.) We went and H wore loafers and blistered his toes. I noticed and asked before we got far but he said they would be fine. He canceled his racquetball plans on Monday because his feet hurt, wore bandages on his toes all day, limped around in pain. It makes me feel bad. I know I'm not responsible for picking his shoes, but it still bothers me. Like when someone invites someone else to do something and that person gets seriously hurt or killed, the person still feels bad even though they aren't directly responsible for the other person's injury or death.
It taints the enjoyment of the experience. I think that's normal.
How do I bypass that feeling without feeling heartless instead in order to want to go for a walk with him again? Blistered toes aren't a life-threatening injury, but neither is walking together a life-sustaining activity. Asking him to wear athletic shoes next time would be trying to change *him*. How do I change me so that it doesn't bother me?
It makes me feel bad. ... How do I change me so that it doesn't bother me?
Remember that it's only our own train of thoughts that MAKE us feel anything.
Find a train that leads in a different direction and repeat it over and over until you start to believe it.
"H is allowed to make his own choices and mistakes. I'd make different ones but that's okay. I can still enjoy a shared activity even if H makes some choices that I wouldn't. It's his feet. He gets to figure it out." Or some such. Whatever it takes.
It may be normal to be bothered about this kind of thing, but the Pia Mellody tape running in my head reminds me that it's not a functional path forward. I'm quite certain that if I could eliminate all the things that I really have no business being bothered about then I'd have a much shorter list to work on.
Sometimes it's hard to figure out where the lines really ought to be drawn. If you imagine asking H to wear different shoes because...? Because you are uncomfortable if his feet hurt? When you have to explain the details it can make it clearer who the problem really belongs to.
What can you do to give yourself some mantras that lead you in the direction you want to be going?
Re: the boating, I suppose the DB approach would be to just go boating with him and find a way to enjoy it. If you just can't do that, then "His Needs, Her Needs" suggests that you both do a "recreational activity inventory", compare your lists, and focus on the ones you share. That means that if boating is on his list and not on yours, then you don't go boating together. If gardening is on your list but not on his, then you don't do that together either. If you have no interests in common at all, then you either make a longer list until you find one, or you agree to each compromise on something off the other person's list -- but the key is you choose which one, not them.
I was just reading last night how it's very common for the woman to engage in these activities with men they are dating, but after they're married they're no longer interested in doing them. Men are very surprised by this and wonder why you changed? It says the path to success is to find something you can continue to do together, and the path to failure is to pursue divergent activities on your own. That's what the book says -- personally I can't imagine giving up skiing because my W doesn't like to do it anymore, but things I'm less passionate about I have given up.
WRT the blistered feet, it's horribly frustrating when my kids do stuff like that. My son likes to walk on slippery wet rocks wearing jeans and his sneakers. Me: "Don't do that, you're going to fall in the water and get wet!" Him: "No I won't I do this all the time." (Splash) Then he has to walk home in wet shoes and pants and I feel badly. Unfortunately, nothing you can do about that. Now your husband is a grown man, so I might not even suggest he change his footwear. He knows you're going for a walk, if he can't figure out that loafers are a bad choice, he'll learn. I bet he won't wear them next time!
Accuray
Accuray, I just wanted to put in a big "thank you" for your continued efforts on this board. I've been watching your thread and there haven't been any updates in a while, though you've been posting all over the place. It's so great of you to share your thoughts and experiences with others, in spite of your piecing R status, and your sitch is a true inspiration. And a reminder that it doesn't have to be perfect to be good. Thanks!
^^^ agree! accuray is a gift to us all!
Wow, thanks you two! That makes me feel really good. An update is probably overdue. I will post. The board keeps me sane, I wish I could help on more threads than I do.
Accuray
This week while S was away at camp, I made a point to engage with H in a positive way. We didn't do any more walks because of his blistered toes, but we did go to dinner twice. At dinner, H didn't take any food off of my plate but made a point to mention it. I don't think he intended to be belligerent, but I still find it a bit awkward. I also suggested that he start looking forward at the calendar and plan a boating trip. I did not go overboard and over-invest.
On Sunday morning, H made a comment to me that he thinks S watches too much tv and was asking me for my ideas on what to do about that. I turned and looked at him, and then looked past him at the tv that HE had on. I didn't laugh out loud but did think it was rather hypocritical of him. I didn't tell him that. Instead, I suggested that the best way to teach children is by example, that if you tell them something but then live something else, they can see right through it. H got extremely defensive about his tv watching, gave me a bunch of reasons why his programs (Glee, NCIS) are so much better than the cr@p cartoons that S watches, that he can still be productive while the tv is on, etc. He wasn't calm when he was saying it, treating me very disrespectfully. I planned on going to a potluck for boy scouts with him at noon, but I bailed because I didn't want to be around him. That made him even more angry because he wanted me there anyway.
So, I'm looking for suggestions as to how I could have handled this differently/better, since I know I can't change him. Obviously, I could have gone to the potluck. That doesn't address the conflict in the morning which is more what I'm interested in.
I also learned something about myself this weekend. I think I've touched on it before but was unable to put words to it until this weekend. I really resent that H is so comfortable with putting me in the traditional male role. Until the last 6 months, I've made considerably more money than him, and he readily admits it doesn't bother him. At the same time, I'm going back to school to be able to advance my career, and he has never done anything to improve his career. I spent a good part of the week fixing the sprinkler system and rewiring the yard lights, because he "didn't know it was his responsibility so it wasn't on his radar." Well, we aren't rich and don't have a groundskeeper, which means he had to think it was on my list of responsibilities.
I also put a good amount of time into analyzing the work on the deck, making sure the builders are doing things the way we want them to. There have been several problems/mistakes that I've had to ask them to address. I told H a month ago that I need him to get more involved, to step up and share ownership of this deck project, that I need help, that this isn't my thing (I do computers, not decks.) I mentioned it again Sunday afternoon, so H steps out on the deck, says he doesn't see anything wrong. I tell him there are at least a half dozen issues. I show him one thing, he starts telling me that I'm just a perfectionist. The thing I showed him was a spot in the deck where the boards dip and make a trough because the cross-supports are set down 1/4". After H takes a few seconds to look at it, he decides it really is wrong. So he goes from accusing me of being a perfectionist to the builders aren't meeting the minimal requirements of level and square. He's not helping in the process AND beating me up for what I'm contributing. It seems to be a lose-lose for me.
Keeping the focus on me, how do I deal with this in a positive way? What can I do differently?
Have you read "Co-dependent No More." ?? I'm in the middle of reading it right now and it seems like it might be something that could help you and your situation. Heck, I would even suggest possibly reading it at night with H if he's willing. It may be an eye-opener for you both.
CV, you did a great job and I honour your effort in that.
You had a no win scenario when your H asked for advice regarding the TV. Any answer from you may have triggered him.
I learned (after a lot of mistakes) that the best answer is, "I don't know. We can look into that."
This past friday when I picked up my D9 from my W's, my W said "Hi." to me in a pleasant enough way and I responded in kind with a "hey." I immediately saw that triggered her and suspect it wasn't actually the word, but rather that I was distracted in my thoughts and it might have come across a little abrupt.
Here's where I can see the difference between what happened afterwards between my W and I and what happened between your H and you...
I continued on as though nothing happened...
Whereas it appears that the "normal" dynamic between your H and you occurred. He got defensive, you put up your walls, and communication broke down again.
He triggered on what appeared to be an honest suggestion from you. That's his problem. But then again, he came to you with his problem when he could have solved it himself. And if you would have pointed that out to him, he probably would have triggered on that.
So yes, by your words he DID appear to have been trying and sure, he made a point on putting a spotlight on his "effort" (a classic LBS mistake).
Maybe the best out would have been for you to let him know that you were sorry, you thought he was asking you for advice and suggestions and that you did not intend to sound like you were judging him. And then left him with that thought and carried on.
As far as the rest, I just want to say that it is important to focus on one thing at a time and take it slowly. Working on you will be a long process done bit by bit. Your H will have the same experience. So him doing better at one thing will not mean he's getting better in other areas. Let him get his wobbly legs under him with one thing and soon he may pick up the pace with all things...
So yes, by your words he DID appear to have been trying and sure, he made a point on putting a spotlight on his "effort" (a classic LBS mistake).
Is this in regards to the comment at the dinner table or in his comment about S's tv habits?
I see the pattern that you're referring to. We did it again in a brief conversation tonight. It went something like this:
H: Whenever I do something wrong, you apply some catastrophic consequence to our M.
CV: Catastrophic, like what?
H: Like sleeping in the other bedroom.
CV: That's your definition. I don't define that as catastrophic, I define it as a good night's sleep. I define catastrophic as going out and sleeping with
someone else. I certainly don't do that.
H: Well why can't you just get over it quickly and get on with the day?
CV: How long is "quickly?" I believe you were upset about taking the tv out of the bedroom for about 6 hours, and it was
your decision to do it.
H: Well it was painful for me, and six hours is nothing compared to you.
CV: Okay, so you think six hours is a reasonable time period? Then it was perfectly reasonable for me to still be angry about your treatment of me three hours later when I blew off the luncheon. So what was your problem with my behavior?
H:
I wasn't pissy.
CV: Perhaps not by your definition, but you were by mine.
H: Well it was painful for me.
CV: I understand that. And your treatment of me when I was asked for help was painful for me.
H: Well I thought I would have an advocate in regards to S. Why does it always have to come back to me? I felt judged.
CV: I don't have a better answer than parenting by example. If you feel judged, then you did your own judging. I never asked you to take the tv out of the bedroom.
....etc., etc.
Yeah, I see lots of defensiveness on both parts. Where to intercept? Can I just say, "I'm sorry you feel that way...." What, I don't even know, I can't even come up with an example.
How do I intercept this cycle before it begins?
H: Whenever I do something wrong, you apply some catastrophic consequence to our M.
CV : Do you think so?
H: yeah, like racing off to the spare bedroom.
CV: Reflective ... " I can see why you might see it that way."
change the subject .....
Okay, I can do that.
Wouldn't H then expect me to change my behavior, now that "I can see why he might say that?"
My post was a little jumbled. I meant your H's classic LBS mistake was the bit about bringing up his effort at the dinner.
Regarding this past convo, Walking is exactly spot on. That's how you "end" the conversation.
A lot of what appears to be going on in the dynamic of the convos is reacting. That's where the 48 hour rule is very important. Validate the feeling, keep doing what you are doing, and let it go.
IF it is something that needs to be discussed, it can be tabled again any time after the 48 hours.
IF during that part of the convo, emotions come into play again. Use the same technique to validate and again impose the 48 hour rule.
Eventually, convos about these types of things can become more logic based, than emotion based. You are changing yourself which can set the stage to work through issues without emotions getting in the way.
Walk off? Really? So....
H: Whenever I do something wrong, you apply some catastrophic consequence to our M.
CV: Catastrophic, like what?
H: Like sleeping in the other bedroom.
CV: (Reflective)..... Okay, I understand your point and how you feel about my response.
(Walk off...)
Really?
And this is somehow ultimately going to improve my M? I totally agree it will change it. I totally get how it makes for a short convo. But If I shared my feelings about something, and H gave me a token response and walked off, I wouldn't bother to share with him again. If he did that to me, I would simply shut off completely. Why bother?
I can't imagine the dynamic of this coming out in a more positive way.
BTW, what exactly is the 48 hour rule?
CV, I loved that you posted this, I wanted to chip in my two cents if it's not too late:
This week while S was away at camp, I made a point to engage with H in a positive way. We didn't do any more walks because of his blistered toes, but we did go to dinner twice. At dinner, H didn't take any food off of my plate but made a point to mention it. I don't think he intended to be belligerent, but I still find it a bit awkward. I also suggested that he start looking forward at the calendar and plan a boating trip. I did not go overboard and over-invest.
Awesome! That's all good.
On Sunday morning, H made a comment to me that he thinks S watches too much tv and was asking me for my ideas on what to do about that. I turned and looked at him, and then looked past him at the tv that HE had on. I didn't laugh out loud but did think it was rather hypocritical of him. I didn't tell him that. Instead, I suggested that the best way to teach children is by example, that if you tell them something but then live something else, they can see right through it. H got extremely defensive about his tv watching, gave me a bunch of reasons why his programs (Glee, NCIS) are so much better than the cr@p cartoons that S watches, that he can still be productive while the tv is on, etc.
H took a risk here -- he opened himself up and came to you looking to engage and you kind of gave him a smackdown. Granted, given the situation, you could view it like no-win "does my ass look fat" type question. In situations like that, your best bet is not to give a direct answer, because doing so is just going to hurt the other person.
Here's how I would have handled it FWIW: I would have asked H what he thought you should do about it -- i.e. don't answer his question, turn it back to him, then just engage with him on discussing his ideas in a supportive way. Really, it's his problem, and you're not responsible for solving it, and he may not really want you to. Chances are he just wants to be listened to, and to feel that he engaged to work with you on something. If you view that as his real objective, then the answer to his question doesn't matter at all.
Now if you feel you MUST influence him, you can use a "Socratic Method" and lead him to the answer by asking him questions. This has to be done delicately and skillfully, as asking questions that are too leading or disrespectful defeat the purpose.
He wasn't calm when he was saying it, treating me very disrespectfully.
Yeah, too late at that point, you'd already nuked him so his emotions were up. Game over when you get to that point.
I planned on going to a potluck for boy scouts with him at noon, but I bailed because I didn't want to be around him. That made him even more angry because he wanted me there anyway.
That probably felt like punishment to him, maybe it was. If you need space it can be helpful to tell him as much before he leaves -- "I know you want me to go but I'm not feeling good about our discussion earlier, I need some time to regroup. I'll do my best to be back in a good mood by the time you return"
So, I'm looking for suggestions as to how I could have handled this differently/better, since I know I can't change him. Obviously, I could have gone to the potluck. That doesn't address the conflict in the morning which is more what I'm interested in.
Step one is that if H engages with you to help him solve a problem, see it for what it is, it's an "olive branch". Secondly realize that he's taking an chance an exposing himself to rejection and ridicule by making the overture, so appreciate the risk he's taking in an effort to connect with you. Then, try to figure out what H is really looking for here -- is he looking for a solution, is he looking to be listened to, is he looking for a discussion? What do you think he really wants? Tread carefully and try to tease this out by asking a couple questions. Try to build some rapport by probing. "Why do you feel S watches too much TV? Why does it bother you? What do you think he should be doing instead? How can we make the alternate activity more appealing?"
I also learned something about myself this weekend. I think I've touched on it before but was unable to put words to it until this weekend. I really resent that H is so comfortable with putting me in the traditional male role. Until the last 6 months, I've made considerably more money than him, and he readily admits it doesn't bother him.
Some would say a lack of ego like that is a virtue. Why is it important to you that he make more money than you do? Many would say it's more important to be happy than to be rich, so if he's achieved happiness at his current income level, that's a victory.
At the same time, I'm going back to school to be able to advance my career, and he has never done anything to improve his career.
Why does he need to improve his career? If he's happy with it, why isn't that good enough? Did he ask you to go back to school to advance your career, or was that your choice? If it was your choice, then you can't make him responsible for it. I think your resentment is justified if he pressures you to make more money but does nothing himself. If he puts no pressure on you and makes no comments about wanting you to earn more, then why does he owe you any action on his part?
I spent a good part of the week fixing the sprinkler system and rewiring the yard lights, because he "didn't know it was his responsibility so it wasn't on his radar." Well, we aren't rich and don't have a groundskeeper, which means he had to think it was on my list of responsibilities.
Not necessarily -- there's a difference between neglecting it because it didn't bother him and just assuming that you're going to fix it. He obviously didn't care that the sprinkler system was broken or that the yard lights weren't working, it wasn't high on his list. The fact that it's high on your list doesn't make you right. You could have told him that you noticed the sprinkler system and yard lights aren't working and that it bothers you and see what he says. If he says nothing you could ask him to fix them, or ask if he will help you fix them. If you decide instead to just do it yourself, then you own that decision. You're asking him to mindread here that these things are important to you and expected of him.
I also put a good amount of time into analyzing the work on the deck, making sure the builders are doing things the way we want them to. There have been several problems/mistakes that I've had to ask them to address.
Whose project is this, his or yours? Whose idea was it, who selected the builders, and who has been "handling" the project? You, him, or both of you together?
I told H a month ago that I need him to get more involved, to step up and share ownership of this deck project, that I need help, that this isn't my thing (I do computers, not decks.)
Is it his thing? Does he have expertise in this area that make him more qualified? When you told him he needed to be more involved, what did he say? Did you define what "more involved" means to you? In a situation like this, you may need to get more specific, and tell him exactly what you need him to do to be more involved -- i.e. "I'd like you to walk the deck every night and look over what the workers did that day. If you see anything that looks wrong, let me know and we can look at it together." That type of thing -- specific statements of your expectations that can be measured as "he did it" or "he didn't". Getting more involved is too vague.
Now you may think that's ridiculous and exhausting to have to manage him that way, and you're right. The problem is, though, that your partnership is broken and you're not working well as a team. Therefore, you need to go through a transition period to get the train back on the tracks, and that takes "over the top" effort in many regards. Once you get there, however, he'll better understand what "get more involved" means and you won't have to be as specific, but for now you do.
I mentioned it again Sunday afternoon, so H steps out on the deck, says he doesn't see anything wrong. I tell him there are at least a half dozen issues. I show him one thing, he starts telling me that I'm just a perfectionist. The thing I showed him was a spot in the deck where the boards dip and make a trough because the cross-supports are set down 1/4". After H takes a few seconds to look at it, he decides it really is wrong. So he goes from accusing me of being a perfectionist to the builders aren't meeting the minimal requirements of level and square. He's not helping in the process AND beating me up for what I'm contributing. It seems to be a lose-lose for me.
You can call him on that, tell him that's not helping, and is making you feel badly, but then follow up by telling him what you need (i.e. change the subject back to something productive)
CV, overall I think these overtures on behalf of H and willingness to enlist your opinions are very positive things. When I really thought you didn't love him, I felt very differently about your sitch, but now that I know you really would like this to work out, I'm very hopeful for you. I don't think you need to solve everything all at once. Pick one element of your interactions and focus on marginal improvement in that area alone, and then build from there.
Accuray
Accuray, I don't know what you do for a living but I think marriage counseling could make you millions... just sayin.
CV, Accuray is giving you some good advice. I agree...take it one thing at a time. I like everything to be great all at once too so I can relate to that.
I think you are very brave to keep digging deep to get the answers you seek.
Thanks you two...
CV, you know I'm reading "His Needs, Her Needs" and you've read it too. One of the 10 core "emotional needs" outlined is "Financial Support", and it says that's a common one for women. If you feel your resentment is triggered by the fact that this is a top need for you and he's not meeting it, then that may beg a different course of action.
In that case, once you get things on a better footing, I think you have that discussion and start a negotiation process with him to get that need better met.
It's interesting to me because you and your H seem to agree on the goal -- both of you want a better marriage, more respect, less criticism, etc.. You're perfectly aligned on the fact that you want something different than what you have now. That's good, that means you're both motivated to work on it.
The next level down you're not aligned, your vision of having your needs met is in conflict with some of his vision of having his needs met, and that's where negotiation comes into play.
In my sitch, we're not aligned on the goal -- I want a better marriage and W wants to leave well enough alone -- that's a fundamental disconnect that causes my actions to tend to spin in circles.
I think you should view it as a positive that you and H share the same high level goal.
Accuray
I think you should view it as a positive that you and H share the same high level goal.
Is that an advantage? At least in your sitch, you can base your future decision on the reality that lays before, you instead of on a dangling carrot that you may or may not ever reach in an infinite timeline.
Here's how I would have handled it FWIW: I would have asked H what he thought you should do about it -- i.e. don't answer his question, turn it back to him, then just engage with him on discussing his ideas in a supportive way.
I actually learned this technique from H; he rarely ever answers a direct question. I've tried using it on him but it just pixxes him off immediately. He says that he's not creative and knows that I am and that he wouldn't have bothered to ask me if he didn't want my input. Then he rarely likes my input. It makes me feel like he just asks the question so that he can criticize my answer. I agree what you're suggesting should work though; so I'll make a mental note to apply it next time and try to remember how the convo goes for feedback. And, no, I don't feel like I MUST influence him.
Yeah, too late at that point, you'd already nuked him so his emotions were up. Game over when you get to that point.
Can I just walk away at this point? He denies his pixxy attitude, so I'm sure he'll think I'm nuts.
That probably felt like punishment to him, maybe it was. If you need space it can be helpful to tell him as much before he leaves -- "I know you want me to go but I'm not feeling good about our discussion earlier, I need some time to regroup. I'll do my best to be back in a good mood by the time you return"
I did tell him something pretty close to that. It didn't matter. The only thing that mattered was that I wasn't there so he could feel "normal." Even my having a migraine is hardly a valid reason for him.
Some would say a lack of ego like that is a virtue. Why is it important to you that he make more money than you do? Many would say it's more important to be happy than to be rich, so if he's achieved happiness at his current income level, that's a victory.
My concern is not his ego, it's his sense of responsibility. He's not happy at HIS income level, he's happy at MY income level. Before we got married, we discussed this aspect of our R. He promised that when we had our first child together, that I could quit working and be a SAHM. Circumstances haven't prevented it, lifestyle has. He's had a number of bouts of unemployment, during which I was earning the money to pay the household bills, including his child support judgment from his first M. Didn't bother him at all, at least not enough after six months of unemployment to prevent him from buying an RV to tow his boat around. I'm going back to school because I know I NEED to have another job when my current contract is over, and if I want to be able to compete with the other people applying for the same job I might want, I need to have something to offer. I've done more than enough in my career to appease my ego; now it's about a sense of survival. The computer industry moves so fast, if you're not keeping up with technology, you're already obsolete. He does the same thing I do, and it doesn't get easier to find a job at his age.
We have talked about it in the past. I resent it, I know I do. I'm not sure I would have married him if I knew his lifestyle was going to prevent my plans for being a SAHM. Regardless, no response from him.
Not necessarily -- there's a difference between neglecting it because it didn't bother him and just assuming that you're going to fix it. He obviously didn't care that the sprinkler system was broken or that the yard lights weren't working, it wasn't high on his list. The fact that it's high on your list doesn't make you right. You could have told him that you noticed the sprinkler system and yard lights aren't working and that it bothers you and see what he says. If he says nothing you could ask him to fix them, or ask if he will help you fix them. If you decide instead to just do it yourself, then you own that decision. You're asking him to mindread here that these things are important to you and expected of him.
The sprinkler system hasn't been working for 3 years, at least (meaning some of the heads are frozen and don't rotate.) H would tell me he was going to turn the sprinklers on, I would point out that there were bad heads all over the place. He would turn it on anyway and walk away. H was involved in the decision to put it in, he still uses it albeit broken, he sometimes schedules the turn-up or shut-down, so to me he seems interested in having/using it, but not being responsible for maintaining it. It reminds me of his oldest daughter that asked us once when she was a teenager if she could use our car instead of hers, because she didn't like to have to pay for gas.
The part that disturbs me is that I did get offered assistance from a neighbor and from the contractor. I didn't have to ask them. They seem to have the concept of chivalry, my H I have to ask. I own that need of mine. I don't know what to do about that. I want my H to treat me like a lady (to open the door for me without my having to ask him to open the door for me, for example.)
But you are absolutely right -- I own it. I feel responsible for having my things maintained. I'll at least get in and see if I can figure it out. If I can't do it myself, I'll hire someone. (Last time I hired a handyman to do a few things, H was mad.) I wish I had a partner. With H, I feel like I'm dealing with the responsibilities of life all alone, or working with a child that I have to ask/tell every little thing, which simply doesn't meet my definition of a partner. I'll own that it's my definition.
Whose project is this, his or yours? Whose idea was it, who selected the builders, and who has been "handling" the project? You, him, or both of you together?
The deck was rotting and needed to be taken down. I found a deck style that I liked and showed H and we agreed. We both pursued quotes from builders and agreed on the one we have. That was about the last that H had to do with it. It is not his thing either. I've asked him for specific assistance and he doesn't deliver. I've been handling it pretty much ever since we hired the builder. Again, I wish I didn't feel like I was alone with the responsibility, especially since I have no skill in the area to fall back on.
I don't think you need to solve everything all at once. Pick one element of your interactions and focus on marginal improvement in that area alone, and then build from there.
What one element should I start with? It all seems so overwhelming. I'm not sure I have the stamina. I'm not sure it will be worth it when I arrive, with everything I need to compromise to call it successful.
I'm whining. Feel free to ignore. I just needed a 15-second pity-party. But I'm over it, so now what?
Yes, really.
Here's the thing. What needs to happen is SOMETHING needs to change. What the results will be? None of us know UNTIL you try it. Then, let's review the results. One time will not make a change. It needs to be consistent, over a period of time.
Lets just say that MAYBE things would get worse. Then you can always go back to the original way, or a new way can be tried.
What HE (likely) KNOWS, is that when he triggers, he probably comes at you in order to feel better (it serves him). You're removing the ability for him to serve THAT need through you. He'll find a different way to vent, rather than venting on you, because you are choosing not to play his game. It is his choice to trigger on what sounded like a very valid response from you.
BTW, what exactly is the 48 hour rule?
48 hours before responding to what appears to be a direct question or request for advice.
Many things can happen in that 48 hours. He might solve his own problem.
He might decide that it is not a problem. He might even decide it's not a hill he wants to die on. (ie. Arguing with you, so he may approach you in a more constructive way.)
And yes, Accuray's suggestion is also a great option:
Here's how I would have handled it FWIW: I would have asked H what he thought you should do about it -- i.e. don't answer his question, turn it back to him, then just engage with him on discussing his ideas in a supportive way. Really, it's his problem, and you're not responsible for solving it, and he may not really want you to. Chances are he just wants to be listened to, and to feel that he engaged to work with you on something. If you view that as his real objective, then the answer to his question doesn't matter at all.
A couple reasons I did not put that up:
+ first, I did not have the time
+ second, too many options means the possibility of doing nothing
+ third, I simply want to be SBT rather than discussing the pros and cons of any particular sitch or possible option. SBT is "there is no bad choice. Only lack of doing. Results are monitored and SBT course corrections are made."
He'll find a different way to vent, rather than venting on you, because you are choosing not to play his game
Yes, he will. He takes his anger out on S. Not physical, just crabbing and yelling at him for no appropriate reason.
OK, that's A reason, CV.
Is that A reason why you would not do something?
If your H is crabby for ANY reason, does he take it out on you FIRST and if you are not available then he takes it out on S?
Or does he take it out on everyone?
And in the end, if he's crabby with S, then set a boundary there.
"H, if you are upset about something, do not take it out on S."
It is his relationship with S that will be harmed. That's his problem.
When H got home from work, I tried to apply some communication techniques mentioned here. He asked a number of questions about the deck, but they were too specific, like, "Did they put on the shingles today?" and there wasn't a good way to turn it back to him. There were a couple miscellaneous questions that I declined answering, either claiming I didn't know, or stating that I had already answered and didn't have a better answer than the one I already gave him. I wasn't being vindictive, just very intentionally doing something different than what I normally would do.
I was able to shut down one potential conflict almost immediately. It was about the sprinkler system, ironically. Last night, I walked away from a conversation with him where he was firmly defending his position that he thought it was perfectly reasonable for him to let me manage/fix it. So tonight, as I was tweaking a few connections, he approached me and broached the topic again. I couldn't really walk away since I was elbow-deep in mud, but I basically told him that he made his position perfectly clear last night, that I didn't feel we needed to discuss it anymore, and that I'd like to move on. He walked away and went to run some errands.
It worked great for me, because after I finished my 10-minute task, I was able to visit with the neighbors for a bit, whereas normally, I would have spent the time arguing with him, ultimately walking away feeling frustrated and angry. I accept the fact that he's comfortable with his position, and I'm grateful that I have the ability to manage it myself. I'll just treat myself to a mani/pedi for the hard work I'm doing. Besides, THOSE people know how to treat me like a lady, even if I do have to pay for it.
Tonight didn't bring me closer to H, but it did make for a better night for me otherwise. Can I consider that a positive baby step?
Beautiful!
... just very intentionally doing something different than what I normally would do.
... told him that he made his position perfectly clear last night, that I didn't feel we needed to discuss it anymore, and that I'd like to move on. He walked away and went to run some errands.
It worked great for me
Can I consider that a positive baby step?
yes... that's what we're talking about...
And in the end, if he's crabby with S, then set a boundary there. "H, if you are upset about something, do not take it out on S."
I have. Sometimes he listens, mostly he just runs off.
If he's crabby, he'll take it out on everyone... Well, S and me, no one else. He would never yell at the mailman or the clerk at the grocery store. Maybe that's normal. It just looks immature from an outside viewpoint. It is affecting his R with son, in a way. S has said things to him before. He's more receptive and will back off when S points it out to him than when I do. No one's life is in danger, H isn't out of control angry, just crabby. I'll do what I can for S, the rest is H's problem. I have no problem not owning that one.