csl wrote: You aren't trying to say that someone’s track record, someone’s day-in and day-out writings are not to be taken into account, are you? As of 11/4, in this thread,
northstarmom had 3,409 posts. Are you suggesting that her posting history should not be taken into account when she makes pronouncements?
Plainly, I'm suggesting that she has posted her observations and comments, which are there to be challenged as you see fit.
In none of the ones I read, did I see her post "this is objective truth", or "these remarks are offered from an omniscient standpoint" - which seems to be a claim you've invented and are railing against. Or "just accept that you aren't the fount of all wisdom" - which AGAIN - starts with the assumption that you have a special insight into the mindset
behind the remarks presented.
One of the most valuable insights I learned in marriage counseling was that it is rarely helpful, nor accurate, to characterize another person's intent in a dispute.
"He just thinks he is so <adjective>"
"She is just trying to <verb> me"
The counselor asked, "How are you able to determine what that other person thinks?"
"A little humility goes a long ways" you say?
What could possibly be more presumptive or arrogant than telling a person what they think, even as they dispute your characterization, and then criticizing your own characterization of their motivations?
People do their best most of the time. I'm still not getting the specific nature of your objection. Are you suggesting that the forum isn't serving the function you think it should serve because some or most of the advice is not accurate? How are you able to determine the accuracy of the advice or observations?
By all means, if you have The Answer, please share it. I'm sure this forum and all psychology, psychiatry, and family counseling social work would be delighted to cut the chaffe of inaccurate answers and skip to The Correct Observations and Advice, if you have them. Until then, is it ok if people talk it through and try to work it out?
If you have something you disagree with, other than "your history", why not use the pixels available to discuss it specifically? The statements you disagree with can be quoted. There's really not much to be done with "
your history" or your general ungenerous characterizations of people's motivations. I've invited you a few times to offer a specific disagreement for consideration - but you haven't bitten so far. I'm not sure what to do with "your history" or what appears to amount to "you think you're so smart".
What is your intent in objecting to the objectional characterizations of intent you have assigned to other people? What would a satisfying response to that look like to you? How do you think I or northstarmom should go about responding to "your history" in any meaningful way to you?
I don't know. Are you feeling that my asking you questions about what you think and my admission of "I'm getting a sense of ... I'm not sure ..." is the same as
mindreading ?
Telling someone that they are posing their observations and perspective as omniscient fact - that's assigning an intent.
But literally asking you what you think, admitting my struggle in understanding, inviting you to clarify or correct my paraphrase - or repeating what you've written (about it being "mostly wrong" that refusers don't want to fuck ther partners)? Not so much. Usually when I ask questions, it is because I'm curious about the answer.
So most refusers change? I did, so I know it's possible. And most of my advice, which you seem to be posing as part of what everyone says, I perceive as opposing what most people say. Do you find that that "Refusers can't change" is mostly wrong advice?
So, refusers mostly want to f*ck you? Ok, that's a really interesting claim. I'm interested in your perspective of these refusers who really want to bang their partners.
More than the three options? Stay (celibate, or take other partners) or leave?
These are mostly wrong? I'm really interested in what's right then. Where were you when my marriage was on the block?
Great! I don't think anyone has said they think you believe that, and I haven't seen you say that.
Has someone claimed that no marriage can be saved though?
Maybe I missed it - I don't know. I don't generally see people talking about "all marriages". I see people mostly responding with questions and observations about specific marriages - others, their own, and raising general questions or pointing out general patterns observed in situations where marital conflict or dysfunction has reached such a high degree that one partner has become averse to intimacy with the other.
I don't think shibboleth means what you think it means.
A shibboleth isn't a mantra, nor a truth. It's purpose is solely to identify oneself to others of a tribe. The shibboleth itself is meaningless on its own.
I also see a fair amount of disagreement on fundamentals - at least with my view vs many I see on here.
Though when I see a point I disagree with, what I do is offer a counterpoint and supporting evidence, rather than a vague criticism of their motivation for posting. Given that I've sat both sides of the refuser/refused equation, I assume people are doing their best to sort through some things that are hard to digest.
ok, but going with that then, earlier you were stating that the advice here (akin to palliative care) was wrong, in your non-omniscient view. Terminal patients tend to attend a hospice, though perhaps miracles have happened.
Going by the analogy - would mean the palliative care that ushers people toward being more comfortable with the inevitable result of their condition, would actually be the correct care. So advice or questions that allow people to arrive at and accept the truth of their marital situation and prospects, if they've become celibate and that bothers them enough to seek help - isn't necessarily aimed at rehabilitation.
But what about "my history"? unfair maybe - Perhaps you weren't on the old board, prior to this iteration of the forum on EP. I spoke about it all the time, and that's also why I held faith that my partner would change and compromised myself to a degree that I have come to regret.
But whether or not it is the first time you've "seen me" say this, it is a true fact, and it goes to my motivation. And I can definitively say that I've never once posted that people cannot change. I've pointed out the difficulties, traps, pitfalls, common mistakes that people make in trying to change, or to make others change, but I've never said it isn't possible.