Gonna Get Me A Mojo Hand

[SmileysPerson]

6s and 7s???

At Sixes and Sevens

[Bridgestone]

Bridge,

Where in what I asked you did I ever suggest forcing myself on anyone or "techniquing". I've never even suggested arguing with her...

Your wrath is misplaced. Or you have me mixed up with someone else.

I suggested nothing akin to what you took from the question.

-AlexEN

My apologies then, I interpreted the 'techniquing' part of the above thread in a much different way than you seem to be... by all means, keep doing what's working in your sitch.

[CityGirl]

I agree about keeping busy and changing the house to make it more "yours". When my H moved out I did a few simple things but it made our place feel more like mine. I purchased new bed linens and arranged the living furniture in a new way. He noticed and commented right away. But I did that for me, not him.

As far as showing compassion I feel that is a given. But I feel it is a given for ALL humans and not just the WAS "humans". I think this is where validation and compassion go hand in hand.

My H sent me an e-mail last week saying he really missed talking to me. I have compassion for that feeling because there was a time I missed talking to him so much that it made every inch of my body and heart ache. Do I miss talking to him now? A little but when I look at the big picture and his continued involvement with his GF its just not right for me. However, my disagreement with the choices he has made and continues to make doesnt mean he doesnt deserve compassion. I suppose you just have to decide what degree of compassion you want to offer.

My response to him saying "I really miss talking to you" was, for me, a mix of compassion and validation. I simply said "thanks for sharing... I can relate to all the adjustements a divorce brings". So yes, I can relate to the missing aspect and tried to validate that but I also made it clear his choices do not come consequence free for either of us.

Of course, each situation is different but for me and my situation this approach is best for ME. He did what he thought was best for him and he did so in a very cruel fashion. I wont respond with cruelty but I also wont respond with anything more than compassion (which everybody deserves) and validation.

I think so often the LBS forgets or doesnt realize the WAS *needs* to experience it all. They want to walk away and get a divorce that is fine but it also means walking away means walking away from it ALL. Now maybe it wont be forever but when one does walk away they must be prepared for it to always be that way and so often, IMO, they are not. They felt powerful making such a decision but rarely think past what that power will bring their way. If nothing else it usually means a very, very deep rift or a complete end of a friendship... something my WAS never anticipated.

I learned in C'ing that the "growing pains" of divorce usually arent totally felt by the WAS until the divorce (legally) is over and all the BS associated with divorce is done. Reality is tough for all parties involved. Its just that the LBS has been working and preparing for the realities for some time and the WAS hasnt given much of anything any deep thought. And some couples can meet up somewhere along all these twists and turns and some cant. Nobody can predict the future and really, who would want to? Part of this process is learning and as much pain as it brings, the learning and realizations of what is possible is sort of a fantastic rush.

You go from being busted to 8 zillion other things to thinking... hey, I am okay or on the road to okay. Its a terribly hard journey to make and one that is usually thrust upon us in a shocking fashion. Looking back though how often do any of us get to learn so much about ourselves? Probably not that often.

[Puppy Dog Tails]

6s and 7s???

At Sixes and Sevens

And now I know something new! Thanks.

[SmileysPerson]

They want to walk away and get a divorce that is fine but it also means walking away means walking away from it ALL...They felt powerful making such a decision but rarely think past what that power will bring their way.

True dat! I can count at least a half-dozen occasions in the last month -- really, since I started Rolling -- that I've been gobsmacked by something WAW has said ("Golly I've already spent $12K on the new house -- I didn't think it would cost that much") and could only reply, "Didn't you think about that? You knew you were divorcing me for at least a month and by your own admission had been thinking about it longer than that. It never occurred to you -- you, Ms. GTD-Filofax-DayRunner of 2009 of all people! -- to actually find out what it would entail?"

Looking back though how often do any of us get to learn so much about ourselves? Probably not that often.

Was just saying the exact same thing to OCF and FFF the other day. Unreal. On the one hand I've lost 4.5 months of productive time and am being CRUSHED beneath the weight of Things Undone, but on the other I really really really like who I'm becoming. Don't know if the Cost/Benefit lines have crossed yet, but they're converging.

[SmileysPerson]

@Puppy Dog Tails

And now I know something new! Thanks.

Legacy of a mis-spent youth. Happy to oblige.

[Thinker]

@CityGirl wrote: I do feel that when a totally new R happens (i.e. one that is not with your W) the "new rules" of a new R seem to happen in a more organic and natural fashion. IMO (or at least in my experience with my H) that is where the WAS finds it to be too much work because they have not done the work.

I have been pondering the same thing. In a completely new R, finding similarities and agreements is fun, easy and exciting. Example of a first date "Wow! You like Chinese food!! Hey, Me Too!! We have SO much in common!!" Now picture the same conversation while trying to build a new R with the WAS. You have already covered all of the light, simple things to talk about and easy ways to find common ground. Now to progress you have either avoid any truly relevant topics, or talk about the difficult, important things that you have avoided talking about in the past. This leaves the WAS feeling either bored or stressed depending on how the conversation goes. Since they are not doing The Work themselves, they run away.

[Coach]

@CityGirl wrote: I do feel that when a totally new R happens (i.e. one that is not with your W) the "new rules" of a new R seem to happen in a more organic and natural fashion. IMO (or at least in my experience with my H) that is where the WAS finds it to be too much work because they have not done the work.

I have been pondering the same thing. In a completely new R, finding similarities and agreements is fun, easy and exciting. Example of a first date "Wow! You like Chinese food!! Hey, Me Too!! We have SO much in common!!" Now picture the same conversation while trying to build a new R with the WAS. You have already covered all of the light, simple things to talk about and easy ways to find common ground. Now to progress you have either avoid any truly relevant topics, or talk about the difficult, important things that you have avoided talking about in the past. This leaves the WAS feeling either bored or stressed depending on how the conversation goes. Since they are not doing The Work themselves, they run away.

You are not there yet. It can happen and the truly relevant topics get discussed and worked on. For us it happend at a truly remarkable speed complete with speed bumps but hey I can handle it. I think it is important that you show your spouse how to do the work (lead). That is truly a loving and marvelous gift to give anyone. Plus it shows you taking care of yourself, which I am told is very sexy. Stay patient you are doing great.
Cheers

[AlexEN]

Yep, everyone has been busy and I’m coming to this party late…

But, before I start, @Puppy, you are SO right, we need a popcorn eating emoticon… Reading your back and forth with @SP was DB entertaining at its best…

The mental imagery was even better as I tried to put a clock on the exchange… Had to be 4:30-5:00 a.m. Smiley Time and 7:30-8:00 a.m. Puppy Time…

So, I get the split-screen visual in my head of Smiley sitting there in his DB Kung Fu jams, unshaven and still slightly disheveled, making coffee in the dark, moving around quietly so as not to wake the kids, and just getting his day going… On the right (pun intended) side of the screen, I see Puppy already spiffed-up, sitting at his desk with DB-themed tunes already cranking as a backdrop, and the bright Florida sun shining through his window…

And, then they log-on simultaneously and post their DB thoughts… and the ping-pong begins with concepts all too cogent given the early hour… even in Florida…

[Poll question: Does spending too much time on these boards constitute GALing or not?]

I guess what I'm looking for is clarification of what that sentence implies -- to save the marriage one has to remain vulnerable to some degree. Is that the basic argument?

Yes. And I'm asking whether the degree to which you need to detach in order to "be okay with divorce" hinders your ability to be sufficiently vulnerable in order to save the marriage.

yeah, I think it could stimulate some great discussion.

I have tended to see more success from the "willing to jump into the mosh pit" crowd than the "one foot on the platform" folks (of which I am a card-carrying member in good standing), so there's a reason I'm asking.

As I’m read this I’m wondered why dontgiveashitness and vulnerability have to be mutually exclusive? Or why it really has to be a zero-sum game?

I think two different concepts are, ahem, becoming enmeshed here… Why can’t the LBS fully detach and still be vulnerable enough to save the marriage if that opportunity ever presents itself?

To me, this is where my interpretation of “being dead already” comes in… If you replace “be okay with divorce” or “dontgiveashitness” with “accepting divorce” or “acceptance”, you don’t have to give up vulnerability, do you? In which case, the vulnerability – a precursor to saving the marriage or the next R – doesn’t have to be subsumed.

I hope not, because, for me one of the things I got back in the course of my DBing was the ability to feel again (to be vulnerable). I sure as $hit ain’t gonna give that back, because I know I want that in my next R. I was walled off emotionally and the “blame” for that is both of ours, but more so mine, because just as I believe love is a choice, so, too, is letting the dynamics of a M or an R suppress one’s feelings.

I’d rather think of it as being conscious of keeping both feet being on the platform and instead of jumping on the train as the doors are closing, waiting patiently for the next train, and if it’s still too crowded, waiting for the next one…

And, if that R is to be with the WAS, I agree with @SP, @Kalni, @Thinker, @TD and others that it ain’t all the LBS’ fault, it won’t work for the LBS unless the WAS does The Work.

@A&K said it well and as I read her post I think she’s almost to that place where acceptance and vulnerability can co-exist as precursors to “saving a marriage” or maybe not… [Although, granted, some could read her reference to “ambivalence” as disproving my point; but, nowhere in there do I really sense “dontgiveashitness”. It sounds more like "acceptance" to me.]

Once, I was willing to settle for just getting my H back (and did that 6 years ago. I am no longer there.

As of now, I am willing to walk into Retrovaille with nearly equal ambivalence that M "can work." I am willing to be convinced that we are a pair that can live with respect and mutual admiration, healthy boundaries, forgiveness, trust and exhibitions of valuing the relationship (reading, growing, etc).

I think that in some ways, it is the couples that really split, really take a good deal of time and space to grow (for real), and then come back together, who proceed to have marriages that I might want.

Again, saving the marriage can't be of as much importance as saving oneself.

Recently, I asked H, following his rattling off a litany of things I had done wrong or not done in the R since we last reconciled, "H, what did you change? What did you do differently?" Kaboom. There wasn't much other than a LOT of therapy that led to temporary changes in behavior that were short-lived. He changed zero, zilch, nada.

So, for the sake of sanity, for the sake of making this all worthwhile, I think you do have to jump off the cliff so to speak and let life, your own and WAS's evolutions reveal whether the new R is a viable prospect.

It’s true, and I don’t remember who posted it, that we are not all as fortunate as @Coach and @Greek to have both partners be willing to go “all in”, but that doesn’t mean we have to be okay with our sitch or notgiveashit about it, because whether or not the WAS even believes he/she needs to save himself/herself, it isn’t in our control.

Again, saving the marriage can't be of as much importance as saving oneself…

But, if you give up on your “hard earned changes” among which may be [should be?] the willingness to be vulnerable, you won’t have broken all of your own bad patterns and not only would the “new R” not be a viable prospect, but ANY “new R” of meaning will be ephemeral, too.

So far, Mrs. Thinker has shown absolutely no interest or willingness to do any of this. She is still in the "Blame it all on Thinker and Run away" mode. I am moving ahead as if she is, at some point in time, going to decide to really work hard on herself. One of my fears, however, is that she never will.

And, @Thinker’s Fear is valid, but, Thinker that he is, he knows the answer: She may not.

Because…

...at the end of the day, we can self improve and WAS can see it, awknowlege it, but they themselves might not want to do their own work and own their piece of the relationship.

Maybe they would rather have a blank slate or settle for less or, or, just really so many possibilities not really worth wondering about because, its their choice all the same. More power to them. Though certainly it is a refreshing window for the LBS, lets up some of burden.

So, I choose to accept… not to notgiveashit… and to stay vulnerable… because otherwise there’s no chance for me to have the kind of R I want in the future.

[Puppy Dog Tails]

As I’m read this I’m wondered why dontgiveashitness and vulnerability have to be mutually exclusive? Or why it really has to be a zero-sum game?

I think two different concepts are, ahem, becoming enmeshed here… Why can’t the LBS fully detach and still be vulnerable enough to save the marriage if that opportunity ever presents itself?

First of all, we NOW also need an emoticon of a little smiley rolling on the floor hysterically laughing, cuz you're just TOO DAMNED FUNNY, Alex -- the opening of your post was great. But I hate to disappoint you, I was equally disheveled, as my job fortunately allows me the luxury to start online from home whenever I wish.

To answer your question, "I just can't." (do both) Maybe it's just me???

Puppy