|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 12, 2017 16:33:58 GMT -5
The fact that if you say something, whoever you said it to can take it to the bank that you mean it, and will follow through on it. This credibility is a HUGE - absolutely HUGE - asset to have in dealing with an ILIASM shithole. When the whole marriage is on the table, the trick is in figuring out the appropriate increment with which to exert pressure to pull toward authenticity. The core problem typically is that (for most people) the threat of leaving is a binary state. It's like operating a warship that has only a self-destruct button as a weapon. You can only use it once, and if you do, what you were trying to save (the marriage) is formally ended. I now think it's folly to establish "save the marriage" as a goal. It requires two people, and usually at least one is already not participating. So the one doing the heavy lifting of changing the status quo is usually the one who has the investment - whereas the other does not. Moreover, there usually, at the point that they come here, have no marriage left to save. The romantic element has left the building, and what's left is a marriage in name only. I do think pressure that gets people toward the truth of their situation - whatever that is - is helpful. A laudable goal. The problem with "I'm leaving you" - at least here - is that most people haven't arrived at that point yet. There's "I'm having an affair" - but that protects the celibate spouse from the information that would redefine the scale of his or her situation accurately. So the trick is in being accurate as to what consequences one is prepared to deliver. While, in my case, the open relationship I had was not successful in saving the marriage, it did at least draw a very clear picture for me - with empirical data - about Mrs Apocrypha's narrative vs reality. I saw clearly that her narrative of intimacy aversion was a sham, and was finally able to let go the "why". I had gotten to the sufficient truth of the relationship. I think in a lot of these things, THAT conversation changes the whole game - providing one is able to follow through - and then decide what it means to you. Or they decide what it means to them. |
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Jun 12, 2017 17:41:01 GMT -5
The core problem typically is that (for most people) the threat of leaving is a binary state. It's like operating a warship that has only a self-destruct button as a weapon. You can only use it once, and if you do, what you were trying to save (the marriage) is formally ended. THIS. IS. A. GREAT. ANALOGY!!! I do think pressure that gets people toward the truth of their situation - whatever that is - is helpful. A laudable goal. ... So the trick is in being accurate as to what consequences one is prepared to deliver. ... As an engineer, I'm absolutely dedicated to accurately characterizing a problem before I attempt to fix it. And once it is analyzed and isolated, you can then evaluate the cost/benefit of different possible fixes, and even the cost/benefit of just leaving things as they are. In my case, trying to apply that to my SM has been a miserable failure... not because the method is wrong, but that my wife never understood this process. As for honestly assessing the problem: when I looked at our flagging sex life, during a couples counseling session, I proposed that she just didn't care much about being a good lover. After all, IF that was accurate, THEN maybe she (or we) could choose to do something about it; address the issue somehow. But this observation and "proposed analysis of the problem" was not met with a knowing nod, nor with an alternate view of the problem. She felt attacked. That I was being mean to her. I was in the doghouse for MONTHS AND MONTHS due to this exchange. (So much for being honest in marriage therapy, no? I really blamed the therapist for letting me drive right over that cliff.) As for honestly laying out the consequences: years later (back in couples therapy, different therapist) when I proposed "I'm willing to work on the marriage. I'm not setting a specific time line, but it is not an indefinite offer. At some point, if things are not fixed, leaving the marriage is an option." Now, again, to me, this is about as UNLOADED as a statement can be. I mean, it is just a mathematical FACT that leaving a marriage is ALWAYS an option. But my wife was TOTALLY AGHAST! Like I had just killed our dog in front of her. She turned to the [female] therapist for some support; the therapist was puzzled at my wife's reaction, and so shrugged and said "I think what he said is reasonable." (So the outcome of that stint in therapy wasn't any better.... but at least I liked that therapist better!) ANYWHO.... the long and short of it is: "honesty" and "accurate assessment of the problem" are DEFINITELY important in attempting to address your SM -- maybe even a requirement -- but they alone still don't guarantee that you'll be able to address the problems. |
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Jun 12, 2017 18:39:05 GMT -5
"the long and short of it is: "honesty" and "accurate assessment of the problem" are DEFINITELY important in attempting to address your SM -- maybe even a requirement -- but they alone still don't guarantee that you'll be able to address the problems."
Very true. You can't address the problem if your spouse is unwilling. However, if your spouse refuses to engage after you are being authentic and honest about what you want, that's a huge signal that you will never attain the marriage you want with that partner. You can choose to grit your teeth and endure it or you can set yourself free....
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 12, 2017 18:52:15 GMT -5
The thrust of the post was about ones credibility and the necessity to preserve it, or try and re-establish it if you have shredded it.
As much as a life skill as anything else.
A skill to be practiced and applied.
In my opinion, saying what you mean, is actually highly respectful to whoever you are saying it to.
And, OTOH, saying shit you do not mean is actually highly disrespectful to whoever you are talking to.
And, the traffic flows both ways.
If you have a spouse who is straight up with you, they are respecting you.
If you have a spouse who is not straight up with you, they are disrespecting you.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Jun 12, 2017 18:53:30 GMT -5
"the long and short of it is: "honesty" and "accurate assessment of the problem" are DEFINITELY important in attempting to address your SM -- maybe even a requirement -- but they alone still don't guarantee that you'll be able to address the problems." Very true. You can't address the problem if your spouse is unwilling. However, if your spouse refuses to engage after you are being authentic and honest about what you want, that's a huge signal that you will never attain the marriage you want with that partner. You can choose to grit your teeth and endure it or you can set yourself free.... Every time I see this post, I think about how difficult it is to honestly communicate with a Narc. It doesn't matter how honest you are, things are going to be heard ,said ,done, acted upon, their way! You may have a 100% victory over the narc, however the sun sets and rises the next day. They treat it like nothing happened. It all starts over again. If your fortunate enough to be a highly skilled communicator and see right through their manipulative control tactics, good for you. Changing it is a whole nother matter. Most likely they will avoid you, dump you, use you as long as possible and move on to the next victim. Now comes the process of healing. Wondering what it's going to be like to be able to openly communicate with someone else, and not have them need complete control of every conversation, and actually accept your words, thoughts, and actions with respect. And not being so suspicious of it being a con job, love bombing, or gas-lighting. Another chapter in the recovery of the emotional damage. |
|
|
|
Post by petrushka on Jun 13, 2017 9:33:36 GMT -5
As an engineer, I'm absolutely dedicated to accurately characterizing a problem before I attempt to fix it. And once it is analyzed and isolated, you can then evaluate the cost/benefit of different possible fixes, and even the cost/benefit of just leaving things as they are. In my case, trying to apply that to my SM has been a miserable failure... I am not surprised. The problem is that human relationships do not work like an engineering problem. They are not a linear progression : state problem, determine cause, develop strategy, repair, arrive at result. inputs a, Q, f, y or r can all lead to state B -- and you just can't tell where it came from (remember: why chasing ...) as well as input A can lead to states J, m,n, y , depending, even if all other factors are apparently identical. And again, you're left guessing. (w.t.f. just happened?) Experience point: "all's great bar the sex" they say and 5 days later it all looks completely different. (a matter of perception and perspective and new input) This is one of the problems with human communication. Concentrating on process and function is more promising, if you want to put it in technical terms. Seeing the relationship as a 3 dimensional topological field with interdependencies and looking for patterns and vectors is much more promising in terms of predictability. If we take the example "so you're not interested in being a good lover" ...punctuation ... "So, you are not interested in being a good lover", or "so you are not interested in being a good lover?" or "so you are not interested in being a good lover!" will have completely different results. As will different emphasis "so, you are NOT interested in being a good lover" vs. "so you are not interested in being a good LOVER" etc etc It just isn't linear. And one thing is clear and well known: what you say, and what they hear, are not the same thing. So you have to factor in what they MIGHT hear, and couch your truth in a way that, as much as possible, avoids their shutting down, getting defensive, getting passive-aggressive ..... That is, supposedly, what the counselor is there for: to explain the process (what just happened) to both parties. But again we strike the old iliasm conundrum that, if one person does not want to listen or won't consider changing their perception upon getting feedback from the 3rd party, then you're screwed from the start. Or, of course, if they simply don't want to change anything. My conclusion is here, that the best way of dealing with "the situation" is to manipulate it in a way that gives the other person the chance to get engaged and want to participate in a solution. I can tell my wife "you pulled a bait and switch on me" or I can tell her "I am terribly sad and disappointed in our relationship because I feel my needs and wants are not being met, I am literally dying of thirst here because I don't feel I am getting any affection". It's the same truth, but delivered in very different forms. No. 2 worked fabulously for me, because it made her want to be engaged. So she still has her hang-ups, and I just have to adjust to that - but I have an engaged partner who looks after me, cares for me, delivers lots of affection and is not afraid of intimacy so long as it doesn't get too passionate (or sexual). |
|
|
|
Post by WindSister on Jun 13, 2017 10:17:48 GMT -5
The thrust of the post was about ones credibility and the necessity to preserve it, or try and re-establish it if you have shredded it. As much as a life skill as anything else. A skill to be practiced and applied. In my opinion, saying what you mean, is actually highly respectful to whoever you are saying it to. And, OTOH, saying shit you do not mean is actually highly disrespectful to whoever you are talking to. And, the traffic flows both ways. If you have a spouse who is straight up with you, they are respecting you. If you have a spouse who is not straight up with you, they are disrespecting you. ^^^^^^ YES!!! ^^^^^^^^ That is exactly how I feel about it all now. And.. greatcoastal --- We can only be responsible for what we say, not how the other "takes it." Part of the recovery is knowing that actually personality and mental disorders run rampant now in our society (I blame our food, but what do I know) and we are only separated from "well or not well" by degrees. I can see some "traits" in me that might fall under "depressive/anxiety" -- but I don't suffer from full on depression or anxiety. We all suffer from something in some varying degree or another. So it's not about "others" --- it is about knowing YOURSELF -- and yes, being honest with yourself -- and then letting others SHOW YOU who they are. We on this board tend to be fixers, pleasers, the ones "rowing the boat" --- as we do that we are trying to control the outcomes. The REAL pleasure comes when you sit back and run the river, just steering, not working so hard against it. Let others show you who they are and then you can take 'em or leave 'em -- (steer). Know YOUR truth. Know YOUR worth. After that, you will be very much allowed to steer clear from full-on narcissists, etc.. (you will see them very clearly). And you will learn it is beyond-freaking-wonderful to have a relationship with a person who is open, honest, self-aware, empathetic, compassionate and willing to work on steering the boat WITH YOU. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jun 13, 2017 11:36:29 GMT -5
I do think pressure that gets people toward the truth of their situation - whatever that is - is helpful. A laudable goal. ... So the trick is in being accurate as to what consequences one is prepared to deliver. ... As an engineer, I'm absolutely dedicated to accurately characterizing a problem before I attempt to fix it. And once it is analyzed and isolated, you can then evaluate the cost/benefit of different possible fixes, and even the cost/benefit of just leaving things as they are. In my case, trying to apply that to my SM has been a miserable failure... not because the method is wrong, but that my wife never understood this process. As for honestly assessing the problem: when I looked at our flagging sex life, during a couples counseling session, I proposed that she just didn't care much about being a good lover. After all, IF that was accurate, THEN maybe she (or we) could choose to do something about it; address the issue somehow. But this observation and "proposed analysis of the problem" was not met with a knowing nod, nor with an alternate view of the problem. She felt attacked. That I was being mean to her. I was in the doghouse for MONTHS AND MONTHS due to this exchange. (So much for being honest in marriage therapy, no? I really blamed the therapist for letting me drive right over that cliff.) As for honestly laying out the consequences: years later (back in couples therapy, different therapist) when I proposed "I'm willing to work on the marriage. I'm not setting a specific time line, but it is not an indefinite offer. At some point, if things are not fixed, leaving the marriage is an option." Now, again, to me, this is about as UNLOADED as a statement can be. I mean, it is just a mathematical FACT that leaving a marriage is ALWAYS an option. But my wife was TOTALLY AGHAST! Like I had just killed our dog in front of her. She turned to the [female] therapist for some support; the therapist was puzzled at my wife's reaction, and so shrugged and said "I think what he said is reasonable." (So the outcome of that stint in therapy wasn't any better.... but at least I liked that therapist better!) ANYWHO.... the long and short of it is: "honesty" and "accurate assessment of the problem" are DEFINITELY important in attempting to address your SM -- maybe even a requirement -- but they alone still don't guarantee that you'll be able to address the problems. What if it wasn't that your wife didn't understand the process, but that you did not characterize your problem correctly? It's tempting to take the "blame" out of relationship dysfunction by speaking about the problem as almost a separate thing from each of the participants's feeling and behavior. I often referred to my wife's infidelity the way I'd refer to a period of bad weather - a thing to be endured and survived together. My thinking was that it would feel better to both of us to be engaged in a mutual struggle against temptations outside. But it was also to avoid antagonizing HER further, at a time of obvious disconnection, because I realized I had a very poor poker hand, and that if I called the game, the marriage would be over. I was trying to preserve "the marriage" as if it was a separate thing from the way she felt and acted toward me. The marriage was a fantasy in which we were both invested in maintaining. In hindsight, it would have been more accurate in characterizing "the problem" by not overthinking it so as to pre-suppose the result of staying "married". I phrased it as "the marriage is in trouble" rather than more truthful statements such as "my wife will not have sex with me", and the reasonable speculation that "my wife will not have sex with me because she doesn't want to". Now, there are certainly reasons she doesn't want to have sex with me. They were her reasons, whatever they were. But after years of listening, of self-improvement, of chasing and ticking boxes - I realized the goalposts were moving. She still did not wish to have sex with me. So, there comes a point where one needs to stop leapfrogging past the assumption that the rightful, natural state is for someone to want to have sex with you, and instead assess what the data indicate - that she doesn't want it with you. It might be posed as "she doesn't want sex at all" if she's invested in the fantasy of monogamy (while being celibate) or in preserving her notion of exclusivity as part of her marriage fantasy - but without any accurate test of that - it's not a viable assumption to make. Once you have digested the truth of that characterization - that your partner does not desire sex with you and, at great cost and risk, avoids it with you - THEN you can decide what that information means with respect to your marriage, as well as your goals in counselling. If your goals in counselling are to get your partner to have sex with you, then how is that going to fit with her goal to avoid it with you, but still keep the marriage? The results of this aren't too hard to predict. |
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 14, 2017 0:50:30 GMT -5
baza , How does this apply to a relationship in which nothing is said? Roommates living together, not fighting. Not arguing, not talking, not really giving a shit. Or in relationship when just one side ever talks (this is closer to mine... I'll let you guess who the talker Like you say, the silence by both parties is likely indicitive of neither giving a shit. Not giving a shit is a perfectly legitimate position to take. Silence is a perfectly legitimate way of communicating that. In the other example, one talker and one silent, it is incumbent on the talker not to say shit they don't mean. "How" or even "if" the silent one responds is entirely their call. This "communication" issue is yet another of those relationship issues where you can only only look after your end of the deal. *You* do not say shit that you do not mean. What the other party may choose to do is completely beyond your control. |
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Jun 14, 2017 5:40:41 GMT -5
"When the whole marriage is on the table, the trick is in figuring out the appropriate increment with which to exert pressure to pull toward authenticity.
The core problem typically is that (for most people) the threat of leaving is a binary state. It's like operating a warship that has only a self-destruct button as a weapon. You can only use it once, and if you do, what you were trying to save (the marriage) is formally ended."
If one has to threaten divorce to get one's partner to make love to you, there is no hope of having a marriage with sex that both enjoy. If one would be happy with starfish sex, then such a threat may work for you. Otherwise, if things have gotten to the point that one feels that pulling out the divorce card is all one can do, unless starfish sex is appealing, one might as well face the fact that one's partner will never be a sexually responsive partner when it comes to sex with you. I read a while ago that someone here told his wife that she had to start engaging in enjoyable sex with him. That was a setup for disappointment because no one can will themselves into feeling lust for another person.
Dan said "As for honestly assessing the problem: when I looked at our flagging sex life, during a couples counseling session, I proposed that she just didn't care much about being a good lover. After all, IF that was accurate, THEN maybe she (or we) could choose to do something about it; address the issue somehow. But this observation and "proposed analysis of the problem" was not met with a knowing nod, nor with an alternate view of the problem. She felt attacked. That I was being mean to her. I was in the doghouse for MONTHS AND MONTHS due to this exchange. (So much for being honest in marriage therapy, no? I really blamed the therapist for letting me drive right over that cliff.):
Her behavior after his honest statement may not have been due to feeling attacked. She may have used his words as a reason to avoid intimacy. She didn't want to be sexually intimate with him. Nothing he did was going to change that. His stating in counseling that she didn't care much about being a good lover wasn't going to change things. Obviously, she didn't care about being a good lover with him. If she did, she would have taken action to change.
Your honesty won't cause your partner to become what you want. Your honesty may, however, allow you to admit to yourself that your marriage is not and will not be what you want. Ending your own denial about the unfortunate state of your marriage may open the door to your taking the steps under your control to have a better life. Those steps could be finding a way to be content with celibacy, cheating or ending the marriage.
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jun 14, 2017 5:53:54 GMT -5
As I look back on my original post here Sister northstarmom , I think I may have got the cart before the horse here. Whereas the original post was Do Not Say Shit You Do Not Mean and was directed at what you might say to other people, it probably needed a lead in post on the subject "Don't Bullshit Yourself". If one is bullshitting oneself it is pretty hard to avoid bullshitting other people. I'll see if I can come up with something readable along those lines. |
|
|
|
Post by snowman12345 on Jun 14, 2017 6:08:42 GMT -5
I deal with confrontation all the time in my line of work. When someone is being confrontational and saying "shit they don't mean", it often helps to take a step back and use a little empathy. What are they really saying and why? tiffanyc saying "I'm fine" is really a way of defusing the situation before it escalates. Sure, it does little to get to the underlying problem, but in the short term it worked. The question I would ask is "what about arguing with the H is so bad it manifests avoidant behavior? Does he belittle you? Minimalize your expressed feelings? Call you names? When he gropes you and says "lets do it" and he knows that you hate this approach - it then becomes sexual abuse and so, you refuse him. Any one of those reasons constitutes abuse. And the only way to end it is first, recognize it for what it is. Second, get help - you can't solve this on your own. I myself used the "D" bomb with my wife and things changed for the better for a few months. Now, things are slowly sliding back to the old ways and I have to do something about it or risk having my credibility shredded. |
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Jun 14, 2017 6:13:33 GMT -5
"Whereas the original post was Do Not Say Shit You Do Not Mean and was directed at what you might say to other people, it probably needed a lead in post on the subject "Don't Bullshit Yourself".
Yep. I think of all of the years I wasted thinking that my husband was too preoccupied/shy/ashamed/unconfident to have sex with me. Truth was that if having sex with me mattered to him, he would have done it with enthusiasm and without my begging him. If he had medical problems preventing our having sex, he would have sought medical attention. If he had loved me the way I loved him, even if he had ED, he would have taken the time to lovingly provide me with whatever sexual outlet he was capable of doing.
The biggest BS the refused tell themselves is that their partners want to have sex with them. All that's needed is finding the magic key -- bacon scented candles, therapy, the right words -- so their partners realize this. In reality, people do what they want to do. Actions speak louder than words. A partner who wants to have sex with you will. A partner who values having sex with you but lacks a libido or has a medical problem that makes intercourse impossible will seek medical attention and will use hands or mouths to provide you and themselves with some kind of sexual satisfaction. Not admitting this to yourself is bullshitting yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by rdp62 on Jun 14, 2017 9:30:27 GMT -5
"Whereas the original post was Do Not Say Shit You Do Not Mean and was directed at what you might say to other people, it probably needed a lead in post on the subject "Don't Bullshit Yourself". Yep. I think of all of the years I wasted thinking that my husband was too preoccupied/shy/ashamed/unconfident to have sex with me. Truth was that if having sex with me mattered to him, he would have done it with enthusiasm and without my begging him. If he had medical problems preventing our having sex, he would have sought medical attention. If he had loved me the way I loved him, even if he had ED, he would have taken the time to lovingly provide me with whatever sexual outlet he was capable of doing. The biggest BS the refused tell themselves is that their partners want to have sex with them. All that's needed is finding the magic key -- bacon scented candles, therapy, the right words -- so their partners realize this. In reality, people do what they want to do. Actions speak louder than words. A partner who wants to have sex with you will. A partner who values having sex with you but lacks a libido or has a medical problem that makes intercourse impossible will seek medical attention and will use hands or mouths to provide you and themselves with some kind of sexual satisfaction. Not admitting this to yourself is bullshitting yourself. How true but no more |
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jun 14, 2017 9:38:30 GMT -5
"Whereas the original post was Do Not Say Shit You Do Not Mean and was directed at what you might say to other people, it probably needed a lead in post on the subject "Don't Bullshit Yourself". Yep. I think of all of the years I wasted thinking that my husband was too preoccupied/shy/ashamed/unconfident to have sex with me. Truth was that if having sex with me mattered to him, he would have done it with enthusiasm and without my begging him. If he had medical problems preventing our having sex, he would have sought medical attention. If he had loved me the way I loved him, even if he had ED, he would have taken the time to lovingly provide me with whatever sexual outlet he was capable of doing. The biggest BS the refused tell themselves is that their partners want to have sex with them. All that's needed is finding the magic key -- bacon scented candles, therapy, the right words -- so their partners realize this. In reality, people do what they want to do. Actions speak louder than words. A partner who wants to have sex with you will. A partner who values having sex with you but lacks a libido or has a medical problem that makes intercourse impossible will seek medical attention and will use hands or mouths to provide you and themselves with some kind of sexual satisfaction. Not admitting this to yourself is bullshitting yourself. ^^^^^^ THIS should be required reading for everyone that walks into this forum. In fact, it should be required reading before every marriage ceremony. No reason people should have to spend 20-30 years learning this simple truth. |
|
