|
Post by csl on Oct 26, 2016 20:44:47 GMT -5
Boundaries is a popular book in Christian cirlces, and yes, you are right about it being weak on bailing out. Like all Christian materials, it's emphasis is on restoration, not separation. However, there is this line from the book: Unlike many Christian sources, Boundaries does support the idea of separation of the combatants. Saddad, the book might be worth your while, if only to be able to fight psychobabble with psychobabble. Separation is not the answer to abuse. A complete and permanent end of the relationship is. Interesting. Conservative #NeverTrumpers are always being told that if they don't vote for Trump, they are voting for Hillary. Our standard response is that the election is not a binary option with only two choices. You also present a binary option, when there are other possible options.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 26, 2016 12:13:28 GMT -5
It's abuse. You and your needs, your feelings don't matter. It's typical of many refusers. They are selfish, and as long as they feel okay, that's all that matters. I don't know your backstory, so I don't know where you are with plans to stay or leave. Do you have any plans or thoughts about this? I posited this in one of my blog posts: Brutal, or just "meh"?
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 26, 2016 12:04:04 GMT -5
A couple of things here. She is not responsible for your happiness.No, but she could be responsible for a lot of your unhappiness. Your responsibility is allowing it to happen, and continue. That quote and logic comes from the books Boundaries,and Boundaries in Marriage. They are both really good books, but one thing it says (i'm paraphrasing, I need to look it up) That boundaries are for you to set for yourself, not to be judging and casting control over another person. These accusations of being passive aggressive, the same book defends those actions when dealing with a controller,who is only interested in thrusting there boundaries on you, but rides over yours like a tank. Where the books fall short is instructing you to end it. Instead they give a little advice to communicate, never explaining what to do when it just gets rejected. Boundaries is a popular book in Christian cirlces, and yes, you are right about it being weak on bailing out. Like all Christian materials, it's emphasis is on restoration, not separation. However, there is this line from the book: Unlike many Christian sources, Boundaries does support the idea of separation of the combatants. Saddad, the book might be worth your while, if only to be able to fight psychobabble with psychobabble.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 23, 2016 22:30:52 GMT -5
phinheasgage and GeekGoddess,
Thank you so much for your understanding and support.
In an another thread, I shared that because my wife no longer cares about my needs, she has no say in how I deal with those needs.
You have told her that, right? An old Fibber McGee and Molly show had a man tell the story of how he got a black eye. It seems Sweetieface, his "big, ol' wife" asked him how he liked her new hat. His line went something like this: "Frankly, dear, it looks like it should be on a mule. It's ugly and horrible. And then, out loud, I said, "It's simply beautiful, dear." Fibber asked how he got the black eye, since his reply was so mild. He answeredd, "She knows me so well."
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 22, 2016 12:49:09 GMT -5
Hub leaves me alone every night while he goes out to the living room to watch his history videos. Lelo and I have a pleasurable time together. Afterward, I wrap her up in a paper towel and zip her back into her little cosmetic bag and drop it beside the bed to be cleaned up in the morning. I know he knows what is in the bag. I don't hide it. I wish I would have had the idea and the courage to do things like this when I was living with my wife. Like, I should have done this right next to her at night as we were falling asleep. Unfortunately, sex was such a shameful topic, and I was already such a "bad" person for bringing it up "all the time" that I embarrassingly hid what I did to relieve the tension. Boy, if she had ever found me, or seen me doing it next to her, or if had we talked about what I do alone---I can only imagine her angry, indignant, oh-my-gosh-what-kind-of-monster-are-you reaction. In hindsight, I firmly believe I should have pushed that button and started that conversation. Why do I accept her stigmatization of our sexuality? One statement that I frequently make on my blog is this: as long as the situation is tolerable, you will tolerate it. It's only when it becomes intolerable that you won't tolerate it any longer. Making an ultimatum you don't intend to keep means that your situations is still tolerable.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 21, 2016 12:33:12 GMT -5
What I always say: It isn't true that "everything's great bar the sex." It's more that having a reasonable sex life makes the other problems easier to deal with. This is exactly the sentiment I describe in “ How My Sexless Marriage Is Exactly Like a Bad Knee”. Exactly the theme of my colorful Plucked Chicken post. Some think I went a little over the top with my illustration, but I hope I drove the point home.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 21, 2016 5:09:56 GMT -5
Have you heard of,or tried, 'shoulder to shoulder' communication, rather than 'face to face'? The thinking is that many men communicate better in non-confrontational postures, sitting side by side rather then facing.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 21, 2016 4:53:27 GMT -5
I sometimes vacillate between wanting to ruin her life to wanting to make her day. She has a body the likes of which I may never see again in two lifetimes. Our life would be nearly perfect if we had sex twice a week. For Christ sake, we are only talking about 1-2 hours a week, and she enjoys the sex! I just can't keep doing this rollercoaster. Phuket! It is good that she enjoys having sex with you. Is it a matter of frequency? In essence, it seems that the message is "I want to have sex; I just don't want to have sex with you."
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 21, 2016 4:47:57 GMT -5
My wife friend without benefits " worked" from home today. So before I left for work I throughly cleaned and dried the bottle of lube, but it was wet and slippery when I returned home from work 12 hours later. I should have added some Icy Hot! Sounds pathetic, right? Well, for ILIASM types it is like cheating when your partner goes solo. Am I the only one that feels that way? I'm one of those who believe in a well-timed, well-deserved Holy Hissyfit. Mr. Milquetoast should be subsumed into a rant of major proportion, biblical even. Confront and demand an explanation. Then go from there.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 19, 2016 10:22:50 GMT -5
The sentence I've seen attributed to Anthony Robbins, Einstein, Henry Ford and Mark Twain. The abbreviation I came up with simply to cut down on typing. It's something of a mantra on my blog, and I just didn't feel like typing it over and over. Proper attribution for the abbrevations would be Curmudgeonly Librarian. Also attributed to Einstein: insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result That line has made its appearance on my blog, although not with the frequency of IYADWYAD, YAGWYAG.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 19, 2016 9:06:16 GMT -5
The sentence I've seen attributed to Anthony Robbins, Einstein, Henry Ford and Mark Twain. The abbreviation I came up with simply to cut down on typing. It's something of a mantra on my blog, and I just didn't feel like typing it over and over. Proper attribution for the abbrevations would be Curmudgeonly Librarian.
|
|
|
Weekend
Oct 18, 2016 21:58:06 GMT -5
Post by csl on Oct 18, 2016 21:58:06 GMT -5
Hope everyone had a lovely weekend!! Shut up. Surely you meant that in the Pickwickian sense?
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 16, 2016 18:40:12 GMT -5
Asexuality, intimacy aversion general, intimacy aversion specific to you. All as good a "whys" as any other. And, all the "whys" end up with a common consequence to you, the refused spouse. Disenfranchisement. - And your road out of disenfranchisement is the same, irrespective of the "why". Which I carefully acknowledged when I started this. But it's a fact that 2nd marriages have a higher failure rate than 1st marriages. And 3rd marriages have an even higher failure rate than 2nd marriages (something like 70%!!!). It is obvious that most people don't learn from their mistakes. I suspect most people subconsciously keep picking the same personality profile that got them into so much trouble the first time... This proves the truth of "no matter where you go there you are." Most think that a new spouse will be different, but if they bring the old self into the marriage, they are bringing 50% of the problems from their old marriage into the new one.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 16, 2016 8:26:31 GMT -5
I haven't read extensively in FW's site, so I'll take your word for it Brother csl. - I have read very extensively in the old EP/ILIASM group - since Feb 2009 actually - and out of that, the instances of an ILIASM shithole turning around are abysmally few. Something like less than 10 out of 50,000+ members. - I'd 'suspect' that the examples in FW are marriages that have not gone as far down the chute as the examples in EP/ILIASM and this group. - Possibly the two groups attract a different demographic. FW's might be "marriages heading for terminal dysfunction" ILIASM's being "marriages that have reached terminal dysfunction" "not as far down the chute" - 25, 26, 28 years far enough? "different demographic" - yes. FW and I write for Christian audience. So amongst our lot, the threat of a divorce to a Good Christian Wife is really an earthquake. Plus we actually have scripture on our side, for having sex.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Oct 16, 2016 8:23:18 GMT -5
That's why I gave the link to first-hand stories. Plus FW's entire site is a first-hand story. Hence my challenge of absolutist statements like "Refusers never change" or "ah, she's just faking it." People CAN change; but it takes a Damascus Road moment for it to be a real change. Like AA, I guess. And most people don't have Damascus road moments. They have "oh shit they're serious" moments. Which is why ILIASM shitholes don't change until there is an ultimatum. Then one may begin to enjoy the freely available bad duty sex and carry on in their repaired marriage. You can't make someone like sex!! DING, DING, DING, DING!!!! And the man wins a cigar! Well, mostly true. Which is why, on my blog, in my series about addressing sexless marriages, I talk about boundaries, ultimatums, and destroying facades. (my one caveat to your "without an ultimatum" is because of the Janna Allen posts, in the link above. No ultimatum, just realization of wrong.)
|
|