Another thread was from a WS who gave a 2 paragraph description of his problem and asked how long it would take him to get over OW.

From that, he got about 2 dozen posts, none of which answered his question. He did get some excellent advice, but there was also a lot of gratuitous sniping.

For example:
"You are full of yourself."
"Its all about you, isn't it?"
"Aren't you one lucky guy to be given a second chance by your wife!"

There seem to be a repeated refrain that the guy was "selfish". One post suggested that if he did not get his wife involved with this board, that that too would be a selfish act.

It sends to me that some of the BSs here tend to use any WS as a cathartic punching bag. I've noticed that many times a WS makes one post and disappears after he/she gets the seemingly endless and obligatory posts about how bad the WS is.

The problem is not with the accuracy of the statements, but the problem is more about how to get the guy to listen to us. Had someone made those statements to me right after my D-Day, I would have tuned them out and destroyed the radio.

Perhaps if we were a little bit slower to pull the trigger, it might help get the WSs returning.

Get off your high horse, Jimmy.

The "sniping" took place after the poster (ConfusedinMD) revealed some logic that needed not only sniping, but to have it put glaring in front of his face.

Tell me I'm wrong.

Go ahead - make my day.

I suggest you go re-read the thread from start to finish and report back here.

WAT

Jimmy I rarely respond to active WS , first time poster or not. Their frame of reference is too distant from my own for anything useful to come of it.

I read this ConfusedinMD thread and while there are a few comments that are out of order IMO, much of the advice he got was good.

He asked the question you cite, but in giving context he gave insight into his current thinking patterns and they are well broken.

As BS or FBS we have an alarm that sounds in us when we suspect another BS is going to get hurt or is being lied to. those things almost killed us after all.

CIMD appears to want to sweep his EA under the rug without dealing with stuff openly and honestly.

Yeah maybe 2 lines in the whole thread were unncessesary, but the reponses as a whole look appropriate to me.

Maybe FWS will always empathise with WS and FBS will alwasy empathise with BS and ever mote it be.

I pray CIMD sorts his head and heart out and moves to recover his M.

JimmyMac, if you have an issue then take it to the Mods. Otherwise, get off your high horse and quit playing the self appointed behavior cop. It's tiring as hell and no one has to justify themselves to you.

No one appointed you the forum behavior police, so knock off the self righteous sanctimony.

I think the replies were just honest feedback from people who are living/have lived through the horrors of infidelity.

I especially appreciated the one about being given a second chance by his BW. What she is doing by giving him another chance is a true act of love.

As a BS its a very difficult CHOICE we make to let them back into our hearts - but I don't think WS see it that way.

MelodyLane,

Do you think that what I said or how I said it was condescending? I'm asking you because I value your opinion.

Speaking and behaving in a condescending manner was a big problem for me in the past. I'm wondering if I need to do some more work on it, or if it's not something to worry about.

Thanks <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

LB, I did not think it was condescending the first time I read it, so I went back and read it again just to be sure. I still don't think it is and believe it was good, well intentioned advice. I think rather, that some of us just hit an overly sensitive spot, which is something we can't control. Please don't let it worry you and note the person to whom you posted did not react badly and that is all that counts. Take care, my friend. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Thanks for taking a look at it for me <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> .

I don't think I've read the thread in question, but in a general sense I gotta totally agree with what you are saying. Disrespectful judgements, whether deserved or not, are usually going to get a predictable response.

dewt [offers Jimmy a low-rider soapbox instead of a high horse]

Good attempt, Jimmy Mac, but I think too it comes down to how a WS is often perceived...

There are those who are firm believers that the WS is a criminal who deserves what they get. "Let them burn in hell"

Then there are those who see them as sick and afflicted people in need or careful handling so they can recover.

They real answer should be somewhere between. We should all, BS and FWS alike take a firm stance that infidelity is wrong. But I do think you make a good point of meeting people "where they are".

I think your right in that some BS take an opportunity to take swipes at a WS or FWS to relieve their own anger. But only SOME. They're usually pretty near d-day and raw.

Mixing fresh BSs with foggy WSs is an explosive recipe. Unfortunately there's no way to avoid that in an integrated forum like this.

I think some FWSs do need the "2x4" at times...especially when they refuse to take responsibility for what they have done. It's those people that even grate on my nerves that draw the ire.

I've left here in a huff several times, only to come back and realize they were right. Or, I came back with a better understanding of why they reacted they way they did.

It's a fine line between firm help and bashing and I'm sure we all have different ideas about where that line is. I wish we could have a black and white standard (some think they do) but it's always going to be fuzzy.

Low

That was an outstanding post, LowOrbit. I think you very accurately assessed the situation. Good job! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Jimmy Mac,

In general I agree that sometimes WS posters who first come here are treated too harshly by some BS’s and may feel ‘unwelcome’ here. I think this is especially true if a WS is ‘sensitive’ and struggle with self-esteem issues… I for one am a person who doesn’t alwayas have a ‘thick skin’ and are sometimes overly sensitive to criticism (this is one of the reasons I didn’t post much here while I was in early withdrawal and recovery). This is one of my ‘bad’ traits! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/blush.gif" alt="" /> But as a result, I try to be sensitive to other posters too and I try to choose my words carefully not to 'hurt' the posters feelings. Although I’m aware that some of the ‘tough’ post by some BS’s are definately meant well and meant to actually help the WS, I can also understand why some WS’s are sometimes scared away by this. It also depends on how a specific post is perceived and interpreted by the receiver. Again, if a poster is sensitive to criticism and have some esteem & self-worth issues, he/she might interpret a post or certain words differently than how the poster intended it to be...

You said the problem is not with the accuracy of the statements, but the problem is more about how to get the guy to listen to us. I agree with this 100%… I believe it is best to give a message through on an ‘adult’ ‘adult’ basis rather than a ‘parent’ ‘child’ basis. There is a bigger chance that people will listen to us and take in what we want to say if we speak to the person as an ‘equal adult’ (and it doesn't necesarily matter if the person behave like an adult or not – this is not the point). The minute we try and talk to another person like we (the one who wants to give the message) are the ‘critical parent’ and he/she (the one who receive the message) is the ‘child’, there is a bigger chance that the message won’t go through and the person probably won’t listen to us. In fact, there is a bigger chance that the receiver of the message will then get ‘defensive’ and shut us out… In general this is common human behavior. If it’s not possible to give a message on an ‘adult’ basis, we can try the ‘nurturing parent’ attitude in stead. This will also allow the receiver of the message to actually listen to us because he/she will perceive us as caring, understanding and empathetic and then the poster will be more open to critisism as well... Again, it's more important how we say something than what we say...

On the other hand, sometimes it is necessary for certain posters to receive ‘tough posts’ from others and I think this is what make these message boards so wonderful and effective: We have a huge community of posters & advisers on these boars where both the ‘tough’ posters and more ‘emphatic’ posters are needed. Both type of posters help to give a healthy ‘balance’ to these boards (if you understand what I mean). <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Blessings,
Suzet

Melody: Sounds like you went to the "Crossfire" school of debating. Let's just scream at each other for 5 minutes, put in a commercial break, and call it a show.

Someone else suggested we start a thread about this, and it seemed like a good idea. The WS in question did hang around, and he did get some great advice.

Other newbie WSs haven't--they get a couple of replies of the "you are going to hell" variety, and never come back again. In those situations, no one was helped.

I think LowOrbit advice is pretty good--just try to meet the WS where he/she is, rather than where we wish he/she was.

Jimmy, no one is screaming at you. However, you are not in a position to dictate your personal standards of sensitivity to others. I find that most offensive - and unrealistic.

Even so, if someone storms off like a drama queen because they don't like what they hear, that is entirely their own choice. No one here has the power to "run off" others. It is entirely a personal choice and folks are responsible for their own decisions.

And it should be pointed out that on the thread in question, the WS was not "run off" or offended. He greatly appreciated the advice he recieved. So it is clear this has nothing to do with him, but rather, everything to do with *YOU;* that you are simply injecting your own personal discomfort into the situation.

Jimmy Mac,

I think you might have been referring to me when you said:
"Someone else suggested we start a thread about this, and it seemed like a good idea."

What I had actually asked for was that if someone saw how what I said was condescending to please help ME by explaining it to ME.

You started this thread, but you didn't explain how my post was condescending. Please don't credit me with suggesting that you start this thread in the manner you did, or that the subject I was suggesting is the subject you made this thread.

I still appreciate your pointing out to me that you thought my post was condescending and too harsh. Although no one else has yet expressed their agreement with you, returning to condescending ways is something that I would want to have pointed out to me sooner rather than later. Through this experience, I have also learned a little more about how and when to evaluate myself when I'm not familiar with the person (or their history) who is pointing out what they see.

Take care Jimmy Mac

~LOL~

Jimmy .....

I wrote the "second chance" remark ... and isn't it TRUE ??? He IS one lucky guy to be given a second chance?

This chance is a gift, not a right.

Doesn't he have the right to feel special because his wife thinks he is worth a second chance?

Any one of us who is lucky enough to be given a second chance .... shouldn't we feel grateful for that chance to make things right?

Honestly Jimmy, I just can't see how this remark of mine was anything but a compliment !

I think you are incorrect here.

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

and one more thing Jimmy .....


... I feel that you are using ME as a cathartic punching bag, and I'd like you to stop .... please.

Pep

Here's what I don't agree with...

that using language that is not name calling..but certainly direct in defining actions...is some how some twisted in to BS triggers and just a carthartic cleansing....or punching bag etc.....

It is not possible that it is the truth?

I think that it is unbelievable that SOME WS expect posters here to be the ONES that do all the work to CONVINCE a WS NOT to continue in an affair...

and as if somehow saying anything negative to them is CRUELER than the act of infidelity...that's where I can not follow the logic...

or if anything even mirrors that dreaded word...
judging!!!

If I gave something up for Lent...or had a new years resolution...a tiny part of me wanted it to be...
let WS screw who ever and what ever they choose...cause in all reality THEY CAN....

and very little time is wasted with name calling and much disrespect round here...which is different from not liking what one hears....

AND if anything WS get page after page ad-nauseum in my opinion sometimes of people pleading excellent cases and scenarios of the damage their affair can and does cause...infact there are times that I believe too much hand holding and cajoling of a fence sitting WS goes on...and we poster become enablers in some wierd cyber way...

the putting off on ending an affair for one more day of people telling them why they should


the putting off of disclosing to a spouse for one more day of posters telling why they should...

personally I'm pretty much an equal opportunity cut the bull poster...I'm not real interested in the title be it bS or WS...
I look for the calm logic rational path....
in everyone..
and call them on it when they stray equally...

I bet infact more BS feel beat up by me round here than Ws...

ARK^^

"infact there are times that I believe too much hand holding and cajoling of a fence sitting WS goes on..."

ark, that's the way I saw it too when I first started reading here. It seemed to add insult to injury that there was no hand holding or cajoling for me as a shattered BS, just the hard facts of what I needed to do, but a WS would get pages and pages of support and encouragement to not make a freaking phone call to OP and then get pages and pages of kudos for success. It was a bitter pill to swallow at the time.

If I wasn't serious about learning to do my part as a BS, I'm sure I would have run for the hills instead of cried about it. As it was, I very seriously considered a revenge affair for months, but not to get revenge--to get the treatment that a WS seemed to get.

Today, I don't know if I would see it the same way if I went back and read the posts from that time. At that time, I was devastated, terrified, confused, and in panic. My kids were being threatened and my WH was in danger that he wasn't aware of in his fogged out state of mind. I'm sure that had a lot to do with it. In fact, it was the clear and blunt advise that I got that helped to clear my BS fog--and it was a very thick fog indeed!

"I bet infact more BS feel beat up by me round here than Ws..."

I will agree with that---and THANK YOU!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]Hi Jimmy Mac.
You do seem to 'practice what you preach' as I went back and read some of your posts to a participating WH ((not a Former Wandering Husband) on this thread below:

"WH new to MB seeking advice on what to do????"
by Seeking?

You were consistent in your advice of the need to get out of the affair; in a firm but kind way, from your own experience as a FWH.

I thought your messages to 'Seeking' were very good.

I found your posts by clicking on your ID name and then there is a place that says 'read recent posts.'

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Can I just say as a "WS" I find there's much more support here for the BS than there is for the WS. I've come here many times looking for support and have only found a few helpful threads. After getting a stern talking to from serveral BS's I just decided its not going to help me any posting any of my real feelings here.

IMO perhaps FWS should be the primary one's to be counseling WS and BS's counseling BS's. Though I think insight on both sides is helpful I don't think one always knows where the other is coming from enough to be sympathetic to their situation. We can all read eachothers threads to gain insight, but spilling your negative feelings on me isn't going to make me listen to you one bit. I think we all know that a marriage in trouble means neither party is innocent or not responsible. And I don't think we are here to play the blame game. We can do that well enough in our own marriages.

So if you are going to try and help people, then listen, ask questions, don't bring the feelings from your situation into theirs. If you want people to stick around and get help then lets try and encourage them to talk about their situations. I think negative behavior can be highlighted witout personally attacking the poster.

Thats all I have to say.

--win

I am sad that you, LB, did not feel you got the caring support that you needed at the time on this site.

I do think different people have different approaches here. Some people radiate love and compassion, others are better at finding the relevant questions to make people think, others are good at helping come up with a plan, others at encouraging, etc.

I think that everyone on here is giving up their valuable time because they have a desire to help others out of their pain. It doesn't really matter what approach they take.

What helps will also depend to some extent on what the poster is able to hear. I guess this (may be) Jimmy's point. Maybe a first time BS poster, in enormous pain, might not be in a frame of mind to hear how they 'enabled' an A, even if, in their situation, it was true. Maybe just listening to the pain, initially, would be a better approach for a person in this situation.

Still, I think most posters are respectful. We are not trained counsellors, and we do our best from what we know and what we have experienced.

Don't get me wrong, I did get the caring support that I NEEDED--it just wasn't the caring support that I WANTED <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> .

If I could have seen into the future, I would have recognized that the type of caring support I received was preparing me for a much bigger, a much longer, and a much more difficult battle. Had I received caring support in the way that I wanted it, I highly doubt I would have been successful in a much more important battle than saving my marriage.

What did I know? I was a fogged out BS! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Smur,

You are so right. Everybody has a different personality and with that bring different approaches/insights to the table.

The good, the bad, and the ugly. LOL

After all the time I have spent on the board I pretty much know which poster is about what. And it is very refreshing to see them stay true to themselves and their own style.

I just avoid most threads now where WS's are new posters because I am afraid to cause more harm than good.

I will leave that to those more restrained and experienced ones.

Communication Class 101:

Every act of communication carries two messages.

The literal message that is spoken.

The message that is intrepreted by the person receiving the message.

What is intrepreted has a lot to do with attitude.



I took this literally and I agree with statement.

JimmyMac, you took it as sarcastic...why?

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Anyone mind telling me Which thread the discussion is all about?

(Just don't feel like being a detective today). Thanks

If I missed it in the thread, sorry..........but I'm plain flat out tuckered out tonight.

TR~

Got Caught

Here you go

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

This sorta discourages me WinBin ... because as a recovered BS I specifically reached out to you offering help and support

.... I bumped up the thread I started for you as a reminder....

Does this not count as support?

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

My overall impression of this board -- in general, not in reference to any specific thread -- is very similar to JimmyMac's. Though there are many, many people who reach out to other in many positive ways, I've also read many rants that arose out of the pain of the person who was posting rather than as a truly constructive response.

I don't limit that to responses to WSs. I've seen a few BSs get raked over the coals as well, particularly if they're in the insanity rut (do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result) or being particularly destructive to their marriages.

On the whole, though, when I read a "triggered" response (one where the poster really seems to be yelling at someone else entirely), it's almost always a BS ranting at a WS. I understand it. Heck, I think I've done it. And at the same time, it seems to me that other approaches are more effective.

So thanks, JimmyMac -- I think it was a great reminder.

And for those who got annoyed that JimmyMac expressed his opinion: I'm genuinely curious as to why him pointing out that some approaches seem more effective than others would be offensive or triggering? I'm really not seeing it as anything more than a helpful reminder, so I'm a bit confused.

Here J, allow me .... Please explain to me how my saying to someone that he is a very lucky guy to be getting a second chance with his wife, is (according to Jimmy)

"gratuitous sniping" .... ?

gratuitous means undeserved in the circumstances....

sniping means taking a cheap shot at someone ....

So J, you may not be clear about this, so I will try my best to explain to you ...

I said something very simple to a poster with no hidden agenda or intent to harm, and Jimmy says I am part of a gratuitious sniping mentality ...

and guess what?

He's wrong !

And I am saying so, because he is talking about something I said, not something you said.

I am not "annoyed" that Jimmy expressed his opinion. I am not especially happy at being misrepresented.

Jimmy seems to think my motives as well as my methods are harmful.

You J, seem not to be annoyed that I am being misrepresented here. Why is that?

Pep

I think JimmyMac did a little more than suggest that some approaches are better than others. He inspired such offense because he attempted to impose his own personal sensitivity standards on others. Trying to control others usually does inspire wrath. Please note all this dissension comes NOT from the discussion on the thread in question, but from Jimmy's attempt to control others by playing the self appointed behavior police. Nobody likes a behavior cop. This is a very typical and predictable response to controlling behavior.

So, perhaps if Jimmy's goal is to effectively reach people, instead of offending them by attempting to shut them down because they don't meet his personal standards of sensitivity, it might be a good idea to avoid controlling behavior. Remember, we can only control ourselves, not others.

I believe I own the other two remarks, the "it's all about you, and you are full of yourself"

That's what I saw, a man who wrote that he told is BW that the best way to get through this was for her to stuff her questions and do things his way.

Now Jimmy Mac is saying we should stuff our impressions and do things his way...

I respectfully disagree.

T

A "great reminder" .... of what ?

You are thanking someone for misrepresenting my quote .... and I'd like to know why.

A great reminder of how a well-intended comment can be twisted and bent into something that sounds sinister ... but was actually .... completely innocent ?

I am so confused by this attitude.... really <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Hopefully, we can use this thread as a "reminder" of how NOT to "effectively" communicate with others. This should be a monument to what happens when you try to control others by dictating personal standards of behavior.

As they say in AA, ya can't control people, places or things; you can only control yourself.

Ms. Fraggs & Susan:

This lazy a*z Thanks you Both! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

(Now I can see what all the ruckus is about). <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

OK
Time for me to be forthright. I do not represent all FBS/BS just me.

To me as a BS/FBS every SINGLE action and behaviour of a WS reprehensible, evil and foul. Sneaking, cheating and having sex with a person outside their marrige - Foul

Buying flowers/gifts for their unknowing spouse - also foul.

Every action of a WS is utterly polluted by their actions in their affair.

So when a WS gives up their affair.

EVERY ACTION that in some way justifes, sympathises with or supports the now given up affair is STILL FOUL, REPREHENSIBLE. Evil.

Fundamentally I believe that there is never ever a justification for an affair. If I had been a totally delinquent husband 20 years she would have been justfied in having me arrested, leaving me, divorcing me, ANY legal, moral defence. ACTION may be justifed but EVIL ACTION is not.

Why ? Because when we marry we do so exclusively and for better or worse. We commit to each other( an dto God if we have a faith) but ALSO to the union of marriage that we will uphold its tenets. Constructive remedial actions should be EXHAUSTED (IMO) before a divorce is considered.

Unless a BS hold a gun to the WS head and forces them to have sex with another, they are not responsible for the affair.

Responsible in varying degrees for an unsatisfying or poor marriage ? ABSOLIUTELY ! Usually in fact ! But the affair was the worst possible response to any M problems.

When me, as a FBS read any hint that a FWS might be minimising the perceived damage of, or mitigating an affair it makes me angry. I believe that because affairees usually enjoy some extreme pleasure during their affair it is hard for them to ever truly think of it as an entirely bad thing. A BS can never think of an affair as being even the slightest bit positive.

This is fundamentally why I think some WS get a more frosty reception than others.

I am AWARE that many/all FWS may harbour SOME positive feelings about their affair, and also may harbour some perceived justification for it.

This isn't something I can countenance, hence my rarely responsding to WS/FWS who display and hint of such.

I'm not defending my position, just expressing it, hoping to explain why I refrain from response and many BS/FBS and 'lifers' who know a lot about affair dynamics have such a low tolerance for affair-suporting attitudes.

Where Jimmy is RIGHT is that an actively foggy WS is likely to display MORE of such behaviour and so is likely to get a harder time than a more idently 'recovery' minded FWS and so may actually recoil when it would be better for them and their BS if we could make them 'stick' and accelerate the de-fogging process.

In this case I don't think the WS in question DID get such a hard time.
BTW ARK used capital letters so she must've REALLY meant it ! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Bob,

After I’ve read your post, I feel somewhat concerned and I want to ask you a sincere question. You might think it is a stupid question - I don't know... Please answer it honestly and truthfully and don’t be afraid that I will take ‘offense’. (I’ve asked your honest opinion, so I will take what I get! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />) Here goes:

Personally I don’t think there are any FWS on these boards who ‘support’ betrayal and infidelity, but from your post I get the impression that you do think there are some FWS’s on these boards who support, justify and minimize past A’s… I asked myself why and then I was wondering if maybe you don’t possibly perceive sympathy and empathy towards a FWS (the person) wrongly as support, justification etc. for the past A (which from my POV as a FWS I think is definately not the case). And I was wondering if you maybe also perceive some of my posts to other FWS’s this way???

I do experience much empathy and sympathy for the feelings of new FWS’s (especially those in withdrawal) who post here (maybe because I suffered so severe from withdrawal myself), but in NO WAY do I or will I EVER support the acts of betrayal and infidelity (or the past acts thereof). However, after I’ve read your post this morning, I’m concerned that maybe my support & empathy to new FWS's might give the wrong impression to BS's like you... So, if you don’t mind, please take a look at the post I send to ConfusedinMd yesterday and please correct me if you think I’m totally off base here with my concerns! There is always space for self-improvement and that’s why I asked you this question. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Thank you,
Suzet

Bob you make some good points. One in particular sticks out:


In other words, if you feel that you can't come in and be helpful, you will simply stay away. Now there's a nice injection of relevant wisdom, of the kind handed down from my Mother. If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all.

I've been following this thread. I've seen this discussion come up more than a few times, and I'll offer the same argument.

Here at MB, if we decide to use the program, we agree to adopt behaviors that follow a certain code. One of these concepts is to avoid LoveBusters and more specifically, Disrespectful Judgements. As MBers I feel that ideally we would all share the common goal of wanting to improve ourselves and adopt these concepts (which we say we believe in) to improve ourselves. Isn't that what I keep reading? Work on you?

So why then should it go right out the window when we start posting to a wayward who has come here fresh? The kind of statements that they make that inspire ire are usually fog related, no? And yet they are here... and that in itself, is something.

If a foggy WS shows up here, (which is at the very least a step in the right direction) why would we react to that right of the bat with Lovebusters?

(here's something from that page)


It makes perfect sense to me that we have a responsibility to treat the spouses of others by the same criteria that we keep telling each other to treat our own spouses. And not just to save the marriage, but to help each other grow.

Moral argument aside, there's also the bottom line. And that is that the strategy simply doesn't work.

Here's what Harley has to say about Disrespectful Judgements:


I've been at this forum long enough to see plenty of waywards AND betrayeds leave in reaction to gratuitous sniping. Too many to bother quoting or pointing fingers.

My own spouse avoids posting here for this specific reason. She does not need to be told what to do. She does not need to be told how wrong or hurtful her actions were. She needs to be heard and helped through her journey.

dewt

But she does want opinions Dewt, does she not? She does want the "perceptions" of the people who post to her to be their honest perceptions, right?

I don't remember seeing anything disrespectful being spewed at Dylan since I've been here (almost a year), and because I happen to like Dylan I read most posts regarding her or to her.

And as far as disrespectful, that comment you just made to Bob was a DJ in my opinion. His feelings of when he does or does not post to others are his feelings. And the "lack of wisdom" in it is just your opinion as well. Isn't it Dewt? I thought that was a hurtful comment, but again that is only my perception and maybe even Bob would not see it that way.

I try to stay away from certain post because they upset me if people I care about start arguing. And I think that is a wise choice on my part, as I would either make it worse or become more upset.

Dewt, the principles you quote are good principles for our marriages, but we are not married to each other here. I agree that these are excellent principles to use in general life, but to a degree. We should never use those principles on a support board as an excuse to avoid telling someone the truth when they need to hear it. Certainly, tact is warranted, but there are many situtations where a well timed 2x4 saved the day, whether it be directed at a WS or a BS.

Saying nice empty words might make you feel warm and fuzzy inside, but just won't cut it sometimes when one needs a clearer light. Sometimes the most "compassionate" thing one can do is take a well timed 2x4 and apply it.

Good honest, straightforwardness should never be sacrificed on the alter of political correctness, nor should it be sacrificed to ease someone's queasy conscience. And that is how I see the crux of the issue.

This always comes up when someone is straightforward with a WS for some reason. Oddly, some feel that they have a special entitlement to not be offended. We don't see this sqealing and gnashing of the teeth when it is a BS getting a 2x4, who receive the most 2x4's by far.

In the specific thread at issue, it wasn't even the new WS who felt "offended," it was JimmyMac, so it is clear that this is not about anyone else except him. The starter of this thread felt like posters did not meet his personal standards of sensitivity; whereas the new WS had no such issue and was very appreciate of the advice he received. It was an extremely productive, calm thread. This entire blow up has nothing to do with the treatment of new people, but everything to do with JimmyMac injecting his own personal bias into the situation. In other words, he is DEMANDING that we all post in a manner that makes JimmyMac "comfortable" is all it comes down to.

The big problem with that is that we have no behavior police on this forum. Even though many seem to be competing for the ever vaunted position of Behavior Police, as you can see, not many are signing up to be dictated to. In fact, most folks seem quite resistant to the very idea of having another's idea of "sensitivity" forced upon them. Fascism appears not be taking off too well in this forum.

So maybe the lesson of the day should be: we can only control ourselves, we cannot control other people, places or things.

We can only control ourselves. We can only control ourselves. We can only control ourselves. We can only control ourselves.

To do otherwise would be to invite disappointment as a way of life, I fear.

Trying to control others only creates divisive threads like this that take away valuable time that could be devoted to helping the many hurting people on this forum. It is a crying shame we have to be distracted with this behavior cop crap. But that is the predictable outcome when one tries to control others.

Hopefully, we can take a lesson from this [on what NOT to do] and get back to what we came here for, helping people who are in great need.

I don't have much time for a reply but I have to address this...


I was not being sarcastic at all. I think Bob consistently shows excellent wisdom, gives great advice and I thought this was another example of that. I should go back and edit what I wrote so I'm not giving the wrong impression. Thanks for pointing that out, Weaver.

dewt

Dewt,
If we are going to look at this from the MB concept standpoint , where does The Policy of Radical Honesty come in?

Couldn't 2x4s (delivered of course w/o DJs, AOs or LBs) be considered the boards PORH?

As others have said, this thread is about communication - and people's individual perception of others' comments. We all have our own perception - and on a board such as this - certain nuances are not possible; tone of voice, body language, etc. - which can lead to skewed perceptions of what the comunicator "meant" by a statement. I think people need to ask for clarification if they are not sure (or are offended) by their perception of a statement.

Weaver,

I can't speak for her, nor say exactly why she would post. My point is more centered around why she wouldn't post. I know she posts elsewhere, where the 'behaviour cops' are more vigilant. She feels 'safer' there, and yet I can assure you that no one there is supportive in any way of her affair.

Melody, you said:


No, that's true. And perhaps by that reasoning, we are relieved of any responsibility to any code of conduct. My point is that whether these people are our spouses or not, how we treat them is going to have an effect. They may not be your foggy spouse, or my foggy spouse, but they are someone's foggy spouse and I personally think we should try to help them.

And certainly, a well timed 2x4 is often just what the doctor ordered. I'm a very good example of that. In fact, as an interesting historical aside, Dylan herself first introduced that term here on MB in 1999 in a post to, you guessed it, me. And those 2x4s helped me a GREAT deal.

The point here being that they were well timed. My issue is that very often these are NOT well timed, not thought out. They are reactive snipes made from an emotional place. Most certainly understandable, condsidering the mix of posters we have here, but hardly helpful.

And being right or wrong, truth or not, has little or nothing to do with it. These disrespectful judgements that we avoid levelling at our spouses, are they not based on truth? Don't we all have a valid point, even if it is disrespectful? The issue is not truth, right and wrong, it's helping to save marriages.

A wayward, smacked upside the head with the truth is no more likely to see it. He/she is more likely to be focused on the smack upside the head.

Melody, you said,


This has got nothing to do with political correctness or facism. It has to do with human behaviour and building marriages. THAT is the crux of the matter.

I still have not read the thread, and am not familliar with JimmyMac's story or posting patterns. I just agree, in a general way, with his position in the original post.

Fraggles,

I'm all for honesty. Totally. But honesty delivered in a DJ, SD, or AO is still a Lovebuster and still going to have predictable results on your typical WS.

I totally agree with you that Honesty delivered without LBs is a good thing. My issue is with the LBs that are often enough not fueled by a desire to be honest, but by a reaction to the posters own personal hurt.

And I also agree that this board is about communication. My comment to Bob, misinterpreted by Weaver is a perfect example. After her comment, I reread what I wrote and changed it. See, what good is a great message if it never reaches the recipient, or if the form in which it's delivered actually drives the recipient away?

dewt

Dewt,

I went back and read how you reworded your statement to Bob, and I can see it was me who interjected sarcasm onto it. Sarcasm wasn't your intent at all.

I have a blinking, blasted, eye splitting headache today so my perception is most likely a little askewed.

In other words I am taking things the wrong way. Good thing I asked about it, as Fraggles has said lest I continue with the misunderstanding. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

You are incorrect.

I did not snipe. I did not post from an emotional reaction. I had a reason and a purpose with the newbie in mind.

My thought was well thought out (although no one has yet to ask me what my thought was before criticizing what I wrote).

Dewt, you are speaking about my intent without asking me about my intent, just as Jimmy did.

STOP using me and my methods or my style as a punching bag for what is wrong in YOUR relationship.

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

But no one is saying that we are "relieved" of a code of conduct of behavior; you are taking my point to a ridiculous extreme. However, I would disagree with you that the conduct towards one's spouse must be exactly the same. We can say things to one another here that are best not said at home to a foggy spouse. Common sense dictates that different approaches are required for different relationships/situations. Even so, I do not view straightforward 2x4's as a "disrespectful judgement." We don't gloss over the truth with our spouse and we shoudn't do it here. We may approach it differently in our marriages, depending on the situation.


And whose idea of "help" would that be? I see some that beat around the bush when one clearly needs forthrightness, so it is clear we all have different ideas of what constitutes support.



But in whose opinion? Yours? I think what we think constitutes "helpfulness" varies from person to person. We can't appoint ourselves the arbiter of what constitutes "helpfulness" because it is a completely arbitrary and subjective judgement.

For example, in the thread in question, the WS recieved the help he needed and was not treated badly at all, yet JimmyMac himself took offense and deemed many responses as "unhelpful" because they did not meet his personal standards of senstitivity. Yet, the WS was not offended and found the advice most helpful. My point is that we have no Grand Arbiter of what constitutes "helpfulness" on this forum. I see many posts here where nice phony words are substituted for the truth and I deem them as "unhelpful." But my opinion is only that: my opinion. I would never be arrogant enough to believe I could DEMAND that others follow my style.


We can and should address bad behavior or sick rationalizations when we see them here. It is not a disrespectful judgement to point this out in this forum. Nice words simply will not cut it sometimes. Like I said earlier, it may make you feel warm and fuzzy inside but it helps no one.


Much better to be focused on that, that to enable them in their own sick rationalizations. We should never become enablers, there is no "compassion" in that. I have found, after being in AA for 20 years, that the most compassionate thing one can do with newcomers is to reject their sick rationalizations and insert some sanity into the discussion.They might not like it at first, but they sure begin to think. On the other hand, plying them with phony nice words acheives nothing good, but only reinforces their sick thinking.


It very much has to do with some folks trying to control the behavior of others and dictate standards of political correctness. That is the crux of the matter. Behavior cops come in all forms, and their efforts to dictate the behavior of others should never be rewarded.

We can see how effective JimmyMac has been trying to do this very thing on this forum. It is a crying shame that we have to deal with his very offensive attempts to dictate the behavior of others when there are people here who need real help. It might be more productive if he focused more on helping hurting folks on this forum than trying to control others.

It always comes back to this simple concept: we can't control people, places or things. We can only control ourselves.

The world would be a much better place if folks would stop worrying so much about fixing others and work on themselves, don't ya think? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Melody, I would like to have some of the stuff you are smoking. Could you send some over my way? I guess I better rename myself "Darth Jimmy" and work on perfecting my though control techniques. "Come to the dark side, my young apprentices..." (Hey, is LowOrbit wan Kenobi around?)

I didn't realize my posts made Melody so uncomfortable. (Gosh, I must be doing something right...) Every old time poster on this board is trying to influence behavior (including Melody, who is not hesitant to give specific instructions to everyone and anyone). If we weren't, we would simply write letters to ourselves.

[color:"navy"]Dewt, your above message was very very good.

And very very true how our reactions to posters is so IMPORTANT!

And on the issue of giving our spouses a second change;
of course we should.

Us BS also spoke marriage vows that we are to follow; 'for better or worse' and that applies to how we react if our mates have an EA or an actual PA.
(Which is right there with the 'Worse' heartaches we will ever experience in our lives.)

Forgiveness is a necessary gift in order to have a happy marriage; forgiveness of little as well as BIG things.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Taking cheap shots does nothing to defend your position, my friend. Perhaps you should apply some of that "sensitivity" you are trying to dictate to others to yourself? It's hard to take someone seriously who DEMANDS grand standards of sensitivity when he is nasty himself.

Instead, why not respond to the many valid points that have been made against your position? Can you not defend your postion?

And there is a huge difference in giving SOUGHT FOR advice on marital problems and trying to dictate your personal standards of sensitivity on others. I don't see old timers trying to dictate their sensitivity standards on others. They try to help folks understand and apply MB principles.

I would also add that trying to enforce speech codes is very much a trait of political correctness, ie: FASCISM.

BRAVO !

Pep

blink blink

Uh, Pep...

I have not read the thread that started this one. I'm pointing fingers at no-one. I'm not saying anything at all about you in particular nor anyone else in particular. My comments are directed entirely towards the issue itself; not any specific actions by any specific person. I don't know what you said nor who you said it too nor what you meant when you said it.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

dewt

Dewt said :


Do not forget, I am discussing what I personally said to the new MB member. This is personal, and it is about ME.

I did follow the rules of conduct as expressed in this site's TOS.

I am responsible for following TOS, and if I did not follow this board's code of conduct, I would have been told so by the moderators.

I was not told so, therefore I did follow the code of conduct. Just not the way Jimmy would have liked me to.

Pep

Dewt said:

Then why comment at all if you are not aware of what is being discussed?

Pep

Jimmy Mac wrote:


Jimmy....

I would like to ask you what your intent was by writing this to Mel.

I am giving you the benifit of the doubt that your intent was NOT to insult or harm.

The benifit of the doubt Jimmy .... and asking for clarification Jimmy ....something I did not get from you.

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]Pep and ML, you sure seem to like to argue

You don't seem to know when to STOP trying to get YOUR POINT across if anyone's opinions are DIFFERENT than yours!

Just MHO. I hope you don't start attacking me now! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I see it as a discussion not necessarily arguing.

If someone quoted something you said and blatantly criticized your intent, would you just walk away and say "whatever..."?

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]Um, I guess...whatever.

Did you read what I wrote earlier about giving our mates second chances? (Yes, I thought the remark on the thread in consideration, was a bit of a flippant remark.)

I don't really think it is hardly considered a choice, as our marriage vows are 'for better or for worse', for the BS AND the WS.

An affair is, for sure, considered 'the worse' times a marriage can ever face.

We can never have a healed marriage, without having a forgiving spirit towards our unfaithful spouse.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I am waiting for Jimmy to talk to me and not talk about me .... and YOUR comments seems fairly disrespectful, since this is not about you but about something between Jimmy and myself.

I will stop talking about it when I have nothing left to say, that is, if I have your permission to do so

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Thank you Julie, I appreciate your comments. A lot is to be said for forgiveness.

Pep, I'm commenting because I have an opinion on an issue and I'm feeling hopeful that I can bring some of the defining tenets of this site to bear on this problem. Ideally we can discuss it, come to some sort of amicable resolution and move on to the next conversation.

I am specifically avoiding pointing fingers because I feel it is a pervasive issue and getting wrapped up in he said/she said and what was meant over a specific comment is to miss the point of the general topic.

Jimmy, in his original post quoted some people on a thread that I did not read. None of my comments refer to that thread or any other specific thread, but are all in response to the meat of his original thread which was:


And I stand behind this statement %100. I don't see it as controlling, facsist or offensive in any way shape or form. I feel that it accurately and fairly raises an issue that needs to be addressed. (over and over again, apparently)

Melody, I am not in favor of molly coddling the waywards or glossing over the truth. I'm not in favor of enabling affairs, or allowing sick justifications to continue. I believe in truth and all my experience says the road to recovery is a tough one that needs integrity, patience and perseverance and above all, an accurate and honest assesment of the challenges involved.

What I'm saying, is that with the above in mind, we should refrain from lovebusting, disrespectful judging, selfish demands and angry outbursts.

That's my argument and I'm sticking to it. And it's not really even MY argument. It's the stance that I have to choose because I've agreed to adopt the Harley principles as they relate to relationships.

You said:

Not completely. My stance, my points and my cites are drawn directly from Harley principles. They may be arbitrary and subjective, but I'm sure that they were put together based on a great deal of thought, experience and research.

Harley says:

In this context, the number of waywards who are driven away by 'gratuitous sniping' would be an excellent indicator. The fact that this thread keeps reappearing under different posters and forms is an indicator.

Also, Harley puts forward these questions:

Obviously these are questions that relate to a spousal relationship, but I feel that the concept is transferable.

I invite you all to participate in a little refresher... here is the link to Harley's page on Disrespectful Judgements. He is pretty clear that it's not only not effective but also a form of abuse.

I don't understand the resistance to the idea of applying his principles beyond the confines of our own Plan As.

And I still don't get the fascim references. It's a form of government, no?

dewt

BlessedTIME, this is what Pep said on the original thread:



Are you sincerely saying that you think this is flippant? You don't see it at all as sincere and congratulatory?

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

Julie wrote:

yes, I agree.

and the WS also needs to have a forgiving heart toward the BS .... and a part of that begins with gratitude that the BS is offering a second chance.

being grateful for you spouse .... IS what I said to the WS

The essence of my "offending" comment, according to Jimmy..... is being one of the lucky ones with a spouse offering forgiveness.... MY high crime here on MB!

BUT no one has asked me what my intent was ..... including YOU!~

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Dewt said:



Jimmy did point fingers .... and THAT is my point.... he pointed his finger AT ME and I have the right to discuss what was said about me ...

WHY not discuss that now?

That my words were interpreted as "sniping" without asking me FIRST about my intent?

Want a good discussiona about giving someone the benifit of the doubt before trying to tear them apart?

Why aren't you defending me?

Pep

Heck, I'm not even defending Jimmy... just parts of his original post.

Pep, I have a great respect for you. Since I had not read the post from which you were quoted, I did not feel the right to defend or attack either you or anybody.

However, after reading your most recent replies, I'd like to just say that I agree with what you are saying. (How it was said in the original post is beyond me to address or comment on - simply because I am ignorant)

And in respect to that and on a personal note, my biggest hope is that my wife, as a former betrayed, can find forgiveness for me. My second biggest hope is that one day she will accept and appreciate my forgiveness of her.

I want to reinforce that I do not support any attacks on anybody.

dewt

This is funny to me:
"getting wrapped up in he said/she said and what was meant over a specific comment is to miss the point of the general topic."

Are you aware that I asked that if anyone could explain to me what JimmyMac saw in MY SPECIFIC COMMENT to please start a thread?

Are you aware that JimmyMac started this thread about THE GENERAL TOPIC of posting to WS's?

Are you aware that JimmyMac seemingly credited me with suggesting this thread topic? Also, he never did explain why he thought what he did about my comment.

That's why this....
"getting wrapped up in he said/she said and what was meant over a specific comment is to miss the point of the general topic."
....is so funny to me! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Ah-HA!!!!

So YOU are behind all this!!!

dewt <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

"In this context, the number of waywards who are driven away by 'gratuitous sniping' would be an excellent indicator."

I don't think it would be a good indicator at all. Many of those waywards are really looking for something like TOW. The waywards (and betrayeds) who are serious tend to stay even though the truth is painful at first, or they find another site whose principles they are more comfortable with.

Dewt said:

Isn't Jimmy trying to straighten me out?

Pep

No I wasn't behind this, but I was supposed to be! And it was supposed to be ALL ABOUT ME! MY comment. MY learning. ME, ME, ME, I tell you....ALL ABOUT ME!!!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

But, alas, it's been all about the WS <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> and boo hoo hoo.

Heh heh heh, I did sneak in a post about MY comment. It was answered too---on page 1! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Turning thread back over to the WS issues again now. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

****Edited because it looks confusing----the <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" /> and boo hoo hoo is not about the WS's, it's my feeble attempt at a pretend pity party. Guess I'm only good at the real ones?

Hi Suzet

My post was in no way accusatory. I caveated it saying I spoke only for myself.

In short, I used a lot of words to say that FWS and BS have different attitudes to WS, which we already knew.

I know how hard earned the F is in FWS and commend them for so doing. I'm married to one in fact ! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I do not know of any FWS who condones or supports infidelity.

Awwww.... there there.... {{{{{LovingBoundries}}}}}

Pep... you too... {{{{{Pepperband}}}}}}

Maybe Jimmy's original post was an effort to straighten us out. I'm left wondering if he hadn't quoted examples, would his message have gotten through without being detracted from by the reactions it inspired. In other words, if his post hadn't been perceived as a disrespectful judgement, would the message have gotten through? Hmmmmm....

dewt

Dewt said:


again, incorrect assumption .... speaking for myself

I do not object to Jimmy having an opinion of what I said, and expressing his opinion about what I said .... However, I want him to discuss it with me personally .... and ask me about it before he uses my words as an example of "gratituitous sniping"... Is that an unreasonable request?

I want to speak with JimmyMack "mano a mano" and have a conversation !

If he does decide to talk to me rather than post about me, I would be most grateful.

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

As I said before, being forthright is not a "disrespectful judgment," it is often a necessity. The way we relate to our spouse is obviously going to be very different to how we relate to folks on this forum. The issue is that you cannot enforce your standard on others. Harley doesn't try and neither should you.

You said:


Well, no. Harley does not set a standard for “helpfulness,” he sets principles….to be used in marriages. You have given the principles, which we all agree on; but the point is what constitutes "helpfulness." What we don't agree on is the application of principles. My idea of "helpfulness" is dramatically different from yours and we should respect those differences rather than trying to force others to comply with our style. Your idea of "helpfulness" is no better than mine - or anyone elses'.

All situations are different, and folks will respond to situations according to their own style and understanding of the situation. The way you might respond to a given situation is probably not the way I would, because we are different and have different things to offer. However, you are not in a position to dictate your style to others. To even try would be arrogant.

Harley says:

And folks should ask their spouses that very question, but we are not married here, so your context is inaccurate. No one has control over who leaves or doesn't leave. I see just as much, if not more, gratuituous sniping directed towards their victims, the BS. Still, if one chooses to leave, that is entirely their decision.

I would also add that this thread is a "disrespectful judgment" against the BS' who posted to the WS in question. It’s intent was to "educate" and lecture others for not meeting Jimmy's personal standard of sensitivity. That is a HUGE lovebuster, yet I don't see you pointing that out. Nor do I see you ever pointing out hateful statements made by WS to BS, often you sympathize with the WS instead of the victim.



Obviously these are questions that relate to a spousal relationship, but I feel that the concept is transferable.

I invite you all to participate in a little refresher... here is the link to Harley's page on Disrespectful Judgements. He is pretty clear that it's not only not effective but also a form of abuse.[/quote]

And I would invite you to begin to apply these principles to everyone, not just select posters. A good start would be the originator of this post, which is a disrespectful judgment against BS.’


One of the key traits of fascist governments is suppression of opposing speech. It is a fascist trait to attempt to dictate speech – or sensitivity – codes to others.
This would be an accurate description of the disease of political correctness.

And who is being "argumentative?" hmmmmmmmmmm <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I would only comment that one is never obligated to stay with an adulterous spouse. It is an entirely personal decision and is never an entitlement. If the WS is not grateful then I question their sincerity in their remorse. Part of true remorse is being grateful for the second chances you have recieved and realizing they are not entitlements.

There is a reason that counselors don't jump in at the first session and tell the WS what an a**hole he/she is. The WS generally is in no mental state to tolerate it, and there is an inordinate risk of alienating the WS.

Please, please understand that I agree with what the BSs are saying...what I am suggesting is that you should exercise some caution in talking with a newbie WS.

PEPPER: If someone would have told me immediately after D-Day how lucky I was to have my W, I think I would have thrown-up. You might be failing to appreciate the *tremendous* amount of resentment that some WSs have toward their BSs. My response right after D-Day would have been something on the order of, "My W? You mean that insensitive, uncaring b****? You don't know sh*t."

LOVING: I didn't want to get into a specific discussion. I understand you were trying to help and you did it with best intentions. So, I am not attacking you, but rather what you wrote. [As a pre-emptive post, I would not have done this without LOVING's repeated requests...]

You said, "If you don't invite her [to this board] and instead keep this to yourself, you would just be continuing selfish behavior. Which will you choose?"

First, it is not selfish to ask for help, as this sentence implies.

Second, it is not selfish to get help without the BS. This, IMHO, was what was so objectionable.

For a newbie WS after D-day, it is quite possible that the worst thing in the world is to have BS listening in. A WS has a lot of stuff to vent about, and he desparately needs to get it out. Having the BS looking over the WS's shoulder can hinder the free flow from the WS. (Of course, the WS's statements will be stupid and silly, and those statements should be critiqued.)

Third, your post attempts to "shame" him if he posts here without his BS. The easiest way for WS to avoid that shame is simply not to post. Since following the path of least resistance is one of the hallmarks of a WS, it seems reasonable that he won't post any more.

Fourth, the pre-supposition that the board is the fountain of knowledge is a real stretch. At best, we can point out some inconsistencies, make some general suggestions and get the guy/gal to go for some real help.

Fifth, the line, "Which will you choose?" is ludicrous. The only thing missing was the statement, "the path of wickedness or the path of righteousness?" at the end.

Jimmy said:


Really? Thrown up.


OK ... tell me about it.


and today how do you feel about your wife?

Are you lucky to have her?

Is she lucky to have you?

Pep

Thanks for responding JimmyMac <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> .

I didn't say it was selfish to ask for help, I said it was selfish to not share MB with his BW who is probably in at least as much pain and confusion as he is. Would you have seen it differently if I had stated clearly that IN MY OPINION it would be selfish to withhold it from her?

I believe that the BS is entitled to know where and from whom the WS is getting help for the BS's marriage.

I had no idea I was "shaming" the poster. I wonder if he felt the same way you do about it. I hope he tells me if he did.

I believe that the info pages are indeed a fountain of knowledge. If you don't believe that too, then why are you here instead of at another marriage building site that is more suited to you?

"Which will you choose" had nothing to do with righteous or wicked. I was just curious if the poster was for it, against it, or undecided at the time.

Thanks again JimmyMac for sharing your view. So far, no one else has expressed their agreement but I will definitely keep this in mind if I post to another WS.

First off, we are not counselors here and secondly, you do not know what a WS can or can't tolerate "mentally." You can only speak for yourself. No one called the man any names, that is your own exaggerated spin to justify your personal position. He was not offended, so this is all about YOU - not him. You can see for yourself that the WS was not "alienated."


And I would suggest that you can only control yourself. You are not in a position to dictate your own personal standards of sensitivity to others. We are grownups here and perfectly capable of discerning where "caution" is warranted. Ya can't control people, places or things, Jimmy. If you don't ever learn that, then I fear disappointment will be your lot in life.

So glad to see a topic like this discussed. Thank you Jimmy for bringing it up. I have been disheartened many times by how folks respond to the newbie WS.

I have always figured if I was in an affair and wanted to stay there, a MARRIAGE BUILDING sight would be the furthest from my mind or heart. I would probably be more inclined to look for sights on how to keep an affair going to keep it hiden or how to get out of my marriage.

I think if a WS comes here and braves a post, even with probably faulty thinking that they really want help--Even if they are acting out, even if they are still in the affair, even if they haven't told their spouse even if they say that the OW/OM is the love of their life....etc...I think they must be here for help. I think they must have a flicker of hope that there is a way out of the affair and a way to save their marriage.

It makes me sad ever time I see that flicker stomped out. Not saying we shouldn't rough them up once we get to know them though. I just think some gentler understanding when they first arrive could very possibly help them out of the affair instead of drive them away.

Just my humble opinion of course though.

Tiggy

JM

Good post...although I have been treated well. I have seen some of "us" get pulverized
H

PEPPER & LOVING: I am lucky to have a W who would put up with me generally, and especially put up with me during the A. Imagine a mean, irrational and angry Jimmy Mac, with no compassion for anyone but himself. "Psycho liar" would be an accurate description of me during the A.

I am NOT saying your advice was bad. What you said was good, reasonable advice. But, a newbie WS isn't a reasonable person.

(My W tells me that she is lucky to have me, but I am sure I got the better deal out of this M.)

MELODY: I raised three girls. I am well aware that I can't control people or "bend them to my will," although my daughters seem to have little difficulty getting whatever they want from me.

This thread seems to have stuck in a groove of 'how NOT to handle the new WS'. I'd be interested to hear ideas of how people think such posters SHOULD be handled? Any suggestions? Jimmy Mac?

The fear seems to be that tough talk will scare them away. Will it? I would hazard a guess that, for each WS who takes offence at the toughness of the responses, there's another who is actually LOOKING for such firmness. Most human beings know at some level - even if it's suppressed and subconscious - that they are doing harm to themselves by being unfaithful. So I wonder if it is entirely accidental that they post on a site - and on a infidelity forum within that site - where the slightest research would show a hard-line attitude to betrayal? I wonder how many are looking for exactly the kind of tough love that they get.

And for each WS who takes umbrage and leaves, does this necessarily mean that they will reject all that was said to them? How many of us angrily reject unwelcome advice, only to turn it over in our minds and, in time, slowly come to accept it?

If the unwelcome advice was never given, we might never reach that enlightment under our own steam. Was the period of angry repudiation worth suffering for the growth that it engendered?

It strikes me that, until the moment of exposure, the WS's only source of advice about his / her A has usually been someone who approves of the infidelity, who supports the WS's rationalisations, and who encourages the WS to maintain his /her foggy thinking. The OP, in other words. Under those circumstances, are there ANY words we can say which will not be shocking and unwelcome?

TogatherAlone

"Aren't you one lucky guy to be given a second chance by your wife!"

Color me ignorant...I happen to think that this would be what a WS needs to hear. Afterall, shouldn't that be one of their first concerns if they are determined to work toward saving their marriage? A truly contrite WS would want forgiveness and a second chance from their spouse. This comment should literally be music to their ears...IF forgiveness and a second chance is what they want.

Now, an unrepentent WS would come on and post ad nauseum about ME ME ME...MY wants...MY wants....MY wants...and it could rain pigs before they would acknowledge that they should even seek forgiveness. Those are the ones that still go on and on about their affair partner and how much they miss them...and what sole (think bottom of shoe) mates they are....and how they are so confused about what to do.

Well, I happen to think it's not the purpose of the board to "convince" someone that they need to leave the affair person and return to their spouse. The purpose of the board is to help the ones that has already DECIDED to end the affair and have taken action and ENDED the affair

I don't usually post to the ones that are not repentent..it seems like wasted words. They leave the affair when they are ready and not before.

JMHO
committed

TogetherAlone, your brilliant posts never fail to make me think. I so enjoy your intellect. I have been thinking about what you said all the way home from work and would like to give my thoughts.

First off, I have an admission to make. I relate much more to our WS' than I can a BS. That is because I am also a former infidel. As a recovering alcoholic and former professional liar, I know them, because I used to think just like them. I understand them because we are fellow addicts. Although the source of our fogged out brain was different, I very much relate to them. Much more so than a BS.

That being said, I have been in AA for 20 years on April 27th. I have sponsored lots of women over the years and was a circuit speaker for several years. AA very much believes in and practices tough love. There is never any molly coddling or political correctness foolishness. We tells it like it is. And that is why the program is so successful.

An alcholic is pretty much assured that he is amongst fellow bullsh**ers so he quickly learns not to even try his bullsh**, because you can't bullsh** a bullshi**er. When they quickly learn it won't fly, they knock it off. That crap might work out in the world at large with non-addicts, but it sure doesn't there.

But I have learned one simple, but important, truth over the years: wild horses could not drag away those who truly want help. It is only the ones who weren't really serious about changing that left in a huff. The latter looked for any and all excuses to never come back because they did not want to change. But of course, it was always "someone elses fault" they were "run off." NEVER THEIR OWN! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> A bullsh** artist always finds someone else to blame, and that is what we often see here.

I have seen lives go through dramatic changes because others cared enough to tell them what they NEEDED TO HEAR rather than what they WANTED to hear. I believe the ones who are truly compassionate are the ones who will take a risk and tell a person what they NEED to hear. The ones who don't care, simply them what they want to hear at the expense of the truth. Those folks are not the friends here and help no one.

The bottom line is that folks who really want to change are not going let anything run them off; those who don't will look for any and every excuse to continue their sick behavior. If folks are too "sensitive" to hear what they need to hear, they probably don't have what it takes to change anyway.

Nevermind.

I think this is a true statement.

Susan

Oh how true!!!!

Dis here Recovery stuff tain't no job for SISSIES! Dis is some tuff stuff!! (said with my best Texas twang) <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Post deleted by Tiggy

Ohhhh puhleeeezz.

No one claimed to have the right to decide who could or could not recover,,nor who was too sensitive. Nor did I read anyone equating themself with God.

Getting alittle carried away? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Jimmy, you say this:


and on your opening post you said this:

"gratuitous sniping"

and then sited a quote from me as "an example"

so, I remain somewhat confused as to just what you are saying...

But, nevermind.... Jimmy, what is important is that you and your family are happy and you are back in love with your lucky wife

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Post deleted by Tiggy

Tiggy said:


I know, I feel so ashamed to have verbally bashed a guy by telling him he is one lucky guy to be given a second chance by his wife .... what was I thinking?

Tiggy ...Can you help me reform my evil ways?

Pep

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> I can! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

You bet your [censored] I was "labled" a drunk at my first meeting, because IT WAS THE TRUTH. It was the TRUTH, not nice empty words, that yanked me out of that black hole of misery I was trapped in. That is why we are at AA, we don't go there for princess training or pedicures, we go there for help with our ALCOHOLISM. We are to carry the message of TRUTH, not the message of tell-them-whatever-they-want-to-hear. We don't enable people or encourage them in their own delusions. They can be enabled and enouraged in their own delusions at home - and usually ARE.

I was never treated "hostily," people loved me enough to tell me the truth. That is not hostile. And because they cared, they cared enough to NOT tolerate bullsh** You are equating being truthful with being "hostile" and that says alot about your own personal bias.

And that is why AA is so successful. Nor did I have to be shamed into anything, I had plenty enough shame for 10 people because I should have been ashamed! And was.

I don't know what AA and Alanon you have "been around," but this alcoholic is very thankful that she never encountered any of the so-called "groups" that sacrifice tough love for nice words.

And I will say again, in 20 years of going to AA meetings, wild horses couldn't run off a person who was SERIOUS about the program, but just about anything could run off someone who was NOT serious. And that is exactly what we see here. They were just looking for an excuse to be run off in the first place. If one leaves, they have no one except themselves to blame.


No one EVER said it was "always the best way," but it is in many cases where the person is foggy. The bottom line is that folks will respond to posters how they see fit. What makes this place great is a diversity of opinion and approaches. I will always respond in the manner I see fit, just as you should do the same. We cannot dictate our personal standards of sensitivity to others. Sorry...

You SHOULD feel hopeless if you would allow your "sensitivities' to stand in the way of confronting your problem. Because you are the impediment; you are your own worst enemy and only have yourself to blame.


I believe this is called the BLAME GAME. No one has the POWER to recover except the addict himself. Others don't "judge" who recovers. If one CHOOSES to let their tender sensibilities stand in the way, that is their choice entirely. BUT, they only have themselves to blame and no one else.

Again, if someone is too "sensitive" for well intentioned, much needed straight talk, they probably don't have what it takes to get better anyway. A person who is serious about recovery would never let that stop them.

I would also add that alcoholics are probably, collectively speaking, the MOST sensitive, self centered people on the face of the earth. The ones who are serious about recovery never let it stop them.

[color:"red"]~LOL~ [/color]

[color:"blue"]if that aint the truth! [/color]

[color:"purple"] .... I know you can reform me coz you've seen how reeeeely BAD I am ! [/color]

[color:"brown"] lead the way sista ! [/color]

I am your willing student <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Pot...meet kettle. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Follow me!

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

P.S. You are still the best!

Pep has some evil ways? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

I love your bawdy BAD side...cuz I know your reeeely good side...your true intent...and it's awlllll good!

She's gotta heart big as TEXAS!

Suz <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

GOD BLESS TEXAS!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

I already knew she was darn-near perfect...

Has to be...

she's a "left-coaster!!"

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Nerly, has anyone told you you are just about crazy? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Worse than crazy, she is a left coaster.... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

A PROUD left coaster,,,and a nearly crazy one!!

Suz,, if you want to tell just exactly HOW crazy I am,,you'll need to get in line. Take a number and the line forms to the left,,no pushing or shoving or you'll lose your place in line!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Melody. We have been through this before. You would not respond to my arguments then and you are steadfastly refusing to respond to them now. You are twisting my words and evading my points. You and I agree that being forthright and disrespectfully judging are not the same thing.

I am not trying to enforce my standards. The standards that I'm trying to support are the standards set forth by this website as an effective way to deal with interpersonal relationships.

And why in the world do you keep accusing me of trying to control anybody?


Ok, let's use the word principles. Thank you. And yes, they are to be used in marriages. I personally find many of them to be excellent examples of a good general philosophy to be applied to all my interpersonal relationships. A Disrespectful Judgement is just that and it's going to get me no further with a stranger or my cousin than it will with my own wife.

I believe that many of these principles are good ones to adopt as a general code of behaviour in all ones interpersonal relationships.

And you are most certainly right. We do not agree on the application of these principles. That being said, I've largely tried to keep my own feelings out of this and rely on Harley's description of how they should be applied. I made my own feelings quite clear last time we discussed this subject, but I'm respectfully trying a different tact this time.


Hmmm. Well, in a reasonable effort to be clear, I've previously quoted the specific parts of the post that I supported. I believe I also disclaimed enough of my replies that it's pretty clear I don't support Jimmy's critique of any specific posters. As for Jimmy's personal standard of sensitivity, well, what can I say? I agree with him on this particular point. Harley agrees with him. The Bible agrees with him. Plenty of other posters feel he's got a point. As for the rest of his personal philosophy... dunno. Sorry.

How 'bout this?

Hey JimmyMac... over here a sec, if you please. If I may be so bold as to offer a bit of advice... (which is something I sometimes do on this board)

I think as a matter of etiquette and to avoid undue conflict between board members perhaps in the future, if you take exception to a particular posting style, you could generalize your comments accordingly. If you have an issue with a particular poster or particular reply, there might be a more polite and effective way of addressing the issue.

Just a suggestion. Thanks for listening.


As I posted before, I've been here too long to point out any individual statements or call anyone specifically to task for it. Not only that, but the log in my own eye makes it tough to see the speck in my brothers. What I'm doing here is posting in support of a concept. A principle, if you will.

Furthermore, I do not sympathize with the WS. I empathize, yes. There's a difference. I can relate to them, yes. I have the unfortunate experience of having walked enough miles in both sets of shoes. I'm wondering if you had a point here or if you were just taking shots at me...


Please allow me to restate my base position in this discussion.

Disrespectful Judgements are not only ineffective, they are a form of abuse.

I can't make it any simpler. They apply to everyone. You, me, the originator of this post. The originator of this website... everyone. I personally try to implement these principles in all aspects of my life. A DJ is just as unhelpful at work as it is at home or on a forum for that matter.


One of the key traits of ALL governments is suppression of opposing speech. LOL. I have a vision of Musellini's troops taking crash courses of MB principles as part of boot camp...

dewt

Most judgements are not abusive or disrespectful, they are simply perceptions, beliefs or opinions formed by reading the words presented by the poster. If a person does not like the perception of their readers, they have all the power to change it rather than whine about it.

Harley refers to DJ's as both "sophisticated" and "stupid" strategies. How's that for a mixed review?

I actually see very few real DJ's on this board. Most perceived DJ's are actually pretty accurate assessments.

MelodyLane,

I read your 6:35pm post shortly after you wrote it. It touched me, especially the last two paragraphs. I teared up--tears of gratitude for those who have helped me with what I needed instead of what I wanted.

I have reflected on your post throughout my evening--the serene kind of reflecting that happens when you know that someone's post was God's way of talking to you in plain English. Thank you ML.

Dewt, I think you have it backwards, you seem to have ignored my points and are simply saying the same thing over again. You may not have liked my response to your post, but I did respond and you have ignored it. Which part exactly do you feel I missed? Please post exactly what you mean because all I see here is a rehash of your last argument that I refuted in my last post.

However, I think we disagree on what constitutes a "disrespectful judgement" and what constitutes forthrightness. You appear to lump most truthful statements into the former category which is probably what causes you so much trouble. There is a huge difference that you seem to not understand.


Again, you mean your interpretation of said standards. No one disagrees with those standards. You are tying to enforce your interpretation of said standards. It is the application of said standards on which there is disagreement. And of course, the application of those standards would change dramatically according to one's audience and one's understanding of the principles. For example, application of those standards would be much different in a marriage than in a friendship or casual acquaintance. And even more so on an internet support board.


When you attempt to dictate your own style of communication on others, AS YOU DO BELOW when you even go so far as to suggest what "words" I should use when approaching Jimmy,<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> that is called controlling. Or rather, a failed attempt at controlling. Lecturing others on their communication styles is exactly that. It is very condescending as it presumes you are in a postion to do so, you are not.


Sorry, but according to Harley - and YOU - what he is doing is clearly a disrespectful judgment. It is a lovebuster to judge the communication styles of others and attempt to educate them. The Bible does not agree that one is not supposed to be forthright. Jesus himself rebuked others when necessary and encouraged others to do the same. I doubt that Jesus would have lived up to your personal standards when he called people "vipers," "hypocrites," "your father the devil," etc. He never hesitated to call something exactly what it was. So please don't play the Bible card to support your personal interpretation of Marriage Builders principles. It is most unseemly.

Love is not found in parroting nice words at the expense of the truth, but rather in truth and deed. Nice words are never a substitute for the truth. 1 John 3:18 "Little children, let us love not with word or tongue, but in deed and truth."

Or....as we say in Texas, talk is cheap! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />


How bout this, Dewt? I communicate in the manner which suits MelodyLane and you communicate in the style that suits Mr Dewt. Would that be alright with you? I won't arrogantly suggest that you adopt my style [a lovebuster] and if you don't mind, I won't adopt yours. Thanks, but no thanks. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

With all due respect, yours is not a communication style that I find desirable or effective. It is certainly suitable to you, and that is just fine, but it wouldn't be a style I would ever personally admire. I am quite happy with my own style, thank you. I won't begrudge you your communication style, if you don't begrudge me mine. How's that, Dewt? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />



You must not have heard of America. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Thank you so much for the kind words, LB. I learned that lesson the hard way through the School of Hard Knocks. If loving, compassionate people at AA had not cared enough to tell me the truth when I so desperately needed to hear it, I don't think I would have ever drawn a sober day.

When I went into AA I was so full of crap, excuses, blame and bitterness that it took a few 2x4s to get through to me. A few 2x4's from a little tiny Dominican nun named Sister Anne, who was my first sponsor in AA. [since deceased]

I thank God that she didn't buy into this "sensitivity" nonsense and loved me enough to tell me what I NEEDED TO HEAR instead of what I wanted to hear. That old broad just flat REFUSED to accommmodate my delusions in any way, shape or form! And sure, I was so mad at her sometimes, but deep down I always knew she was right so I would put up with it. And I wanted to get better so bad that I would tolerate anything! And here I am almost 20 years later. My last drink was April 27, 1985. I am not a rotten, lying stinking drunk anymore because of the grace of a merciful God and that feisty little nun.

And it's funny, I remember the people fondly over 20 years who cared enough to shoot straight with me,[even the ones who made me mad!] but I don't ever remember the people who just told me what I wanted to hear. They didn't care if I got better. I meant nothing to them and they are long erased from my memory. I have heard others in AA say the same thing.

OK I'v esaid my piece on thsi thread but I will also comment that the truth isn't a disrespectful judgment told accurately.

I did a GOOD plan A, yet when the topic arose I referred to my DEAR Squid as a liar, an adulterer and an abusive mother.

This wasn't DJing her,it was FACT.

Squid tells me now that she would get angry THEN cry later in misery and realisation when I said such things in gentle tones.

Some of the FWS on this site would have me say :
"much of what you say is factually challenged, you have sought solace with a person outside our marriage and our children are not thriving in the current climate of our marriage" but such is [censored] during life events such as adultery.

Truth said in love and gentleness is not a DJ. In fact avoidance of such in our M previously contributed to our inability to deal with some issues that Squid used to justify her affair.

To mince words to one who needs to look their actions face-on is to enable an affair.

Mel and Pep are VERY forthright here, but MANY MANY FWS as well as FBS thank them daily for their loving candour.

This is NOT an excuse for DJing peope, but such should not go so far as to obfuscate the truth IMO.

I know what you're talking about. For me, it was Alanon back in the 80's. One time someone knocked on my head like you would knock on a door and called Hello? Hello? Is anyone in there yet? Yep, I was working on doormat issues <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> .

Unfortunately my H went into a dry drunk and when he got so miserable that he either had to go back to AA and start recovering again or start drinking again, he chose to drink (after 10 years). That started the chain of events over the past few years.

Your last paragraph of that post about the bottom line is so true.

I'm saying the same things over and over because you don't seem to be 'getting it'. If these were MY opinions, perhaps I could be a little more creative, but I've been mainly trying to support what Harley says about DJs, MB principles and their application.

In the last post (and in this discussion in general) I do not feel that you have actually refuted anything I had to say.

You said that being forthright is not a Disrespectful Judgement. My stance is that honesty is important AND we should not engage in Lovebusters. Nowhere do I suggest that we should lie to or mislead fogged out people who are fresh here. What I do suggest, in support of (parts of) the original post is that we should practice what we preach and not drive them away with LBs.

Then you infer that I'm trying to enforce my standard on others.

Then we reach a minor agreement in that we both feel that we disagree on the application of these principles. And we also agree that we have different ideas in regards to what 'helpful' is. You do not address the issue that the ideas that I'm supporting are not really entirely my own but drawn directly from this site's philosophy.

Then you again imply that I'm trying to force others to comply to my style.

Then you inform me that I'm not in a position to dictate my style to others. Again.

Then you try to draw the argument totally off course by bringing the argument back to Jimmy and the idea that being honest is equal to lovebusting. Two positions which I refuse to defend or even to discuss any further because neither is anything I've ever claimed to stand behind.

Then you reiterate your position that we are not married to the posters here and that BS get just as much, if not more, gratuitous sniping.

Ok. We are not all married to each other. That does not address in any way my argument that ALL Disrespectful Judgements are ineffective and hurtful. The fact that BS get sniped at too does not support or detract from either of our positions.

You say no one has any control over who stays or who leaves. That it is entirely their decision. I say what we do and what we say is going to have consequences. This site is mainly about education and support and if we are going to call ourselves MBers I feel we should make a commitment to promoting those ideals.

Then you veer off from the discussion we are having to take shots at Jimmy again and shots at me for not taking shots at him and then another shot at me for 'sympathizing' with WS as if to detract from my credibility. The purpose of my posting is not to take sides or call anyone specific out. The purpose of my posting is to support the MB principles and it is these principles that I refer.

Then you invite me to apply these principles to everyone, which I do and which I've been very clear about right from the start. The tone of your statement makes me feel like you have not read the page in question. I wish you would, because it expresses what I'm trying to get across to you way better than I apparently can.

I've gone back and reread and I really don't see that you've refuted anything I've said. But even though you won't/can't refute my arguments, you've steadfastly clung to your own without supporting them with anything other than your own value system and your experience with AA.

In regards to your last post, the pattern is continuing. This is causing me to dispair of coming to some sort of reasonable conclusion with this discussion. You are saying I'm lumping statements into categories, but I've referred to no such statements. I've chosen a philosophical side of an argument. The specific posting habits of specific posters are NOT what I'm here to discuss, but rather the principles involved. If we could stick to this, perhaps we could get somewhere. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I would like to say that I have taken offense to your statement:


That was a very mean and rude way to open a statement.

If we are really going to introduce scripture into this discussion, I suggest we refer back to this thread (Topic: revised to: ML ..... please check this out.) where we already kind of tackled this discussion. This was back in November and I was defending the same principles, but based on scripture rather than MB articles.


Melody, I think I see where we are going wrong. I am not suggesting that you specifically, nor anyone else adopt my posting style. I'm supporting the position that we should be circumspect in our posting in general. That we all make an effort, as MBers, to support and apply MB principles. I don't see that as arrogant. If I have come across as arrogant in my posting, then I must sincerely apologize. I've made every effort to be forthright without lovebusting and if I've crossed the line, I beg your forgiveness.

Thus far I've said nothing at all about your posting style. To mix my own feelings in this would be to detract from my points and my stance. I do have a personal opinion, yes, but I have not been asked about it, it is not relevant to this discussion, and I don't feel the need to express it.

dewt

[color:"navy"]Dewt, I agree with everything you just wrote.

And also, this is a marriage building site and has nothing whatsoever to do with recovering alcoholics.

They may both be catagorized as 'addictions' but they are
Completely Different.

There is a tale about the Wind and the Sun....The wind tries to get the man to remove his coat by blowing harder and harder and the man just wraps his coat tighter...Whereas the sun 'gently' shines on the man and the man WILLINGLY removes his coat.

I believe it is that way here with people asking for advice.
Backing anyone into a corner by arrogant pushing words, does just that.
BACKS THEM INTO A CORNER.

And when they are tightly surrounded, what they do is just stop posting!

"A soft answer calms wrath and harsh words stir up anger."

That is what has happened here on this thread.
Lots of harsh words.

The 'helpers' that are kind yet FIRM in their replies, are like outstretched hands saying:
"Come with me, I will help you escape from the destructivness of this affair."

JMO and Sincerely, Julie
<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Thanks Julie. I like the reference to the wind and sun.

As an interesting aside, (and suddenly I'm going to offer my personal opinion) I'm currently dealing with a pot addiction and of all the posters on this forum who I'd go to for advice on this subject, MelodyLane would be my first pick. In my one and ONLY reference to her specific style of posting, I want to acknowledge publicly that very often I appreciate her forthrightness and no-nonsense approach and would seek it for myself.

dewt

Post deleted by Tiggy

This thread seems to have become a slugfest. In my experience, there are two key reasons why arguments degenerate in this way. First, because the basic premise has not been properly defined (so everyone is working to a different argument). Second, because debaters are working to assumptions which, in fact, are not held by everyone.

So could we get this discussion back on course? There are a number of genuinely useful points being ignored here.

First, I believe that the very first post presented several flaws which went unchallenged. In it, Jimmy Mac made the assumption that there is a 'bad' way to handle the first-time WS poster. Rather than justify that assertion, he instead gave examples of posts which he considered 'bad'. Further, he showed that he was working to an assumption that the purpose of responding to such a WS poster was 'to get the guy to listen to us'.

(Jimmy, this is not a dig at you. You made your point in good faith. The fact that it has descended into name-calling is simply a testament to our weaknesses in debating.)

Since that first post, no-one has challenged the original assertion, although it is highly subjective. How would we evaluate the success or failure of 'styles' of response? Have we collected statistics on the number of WS posters who disappear forever following a 'brisk' response? Would we measure that by whether they posted again (although they could still be lurking anonymously)? Or by whether they posted a hostile response? Do we have empirical feedback on the number of xWSs who report that they were glad to have been told brutal truths?

If we haven't got a firm basis to judge the reactions of new WSs, then any assertions we make are purely subjective, based on our own feelings and how we think we would respond in that situation. It is erroneous to assume that all WSs would feel as we do, convincing though it may seem to us. If we have no basis to know what approach has been 'effective', there is little point in debating levels of effectiveness.

Second, I think that we are all working to a different set of assumptions about what the purpose of a response to a WS is. Jimmy asserted that the purpose was 'to get the guy to listen to us', and no-one has questioned that. But what does it mean? To get the guy to engage in dialogue until he feels safe enough for harder truths? To be hit with hard truth straight up when the shock factor might work best? And what's the PURPOSE of getting him to listen to us? To save the WS? To save the marriage? To protect and support the BS? To seduce him into MB dogma whether the marriage survives or not? I suspect that we are each working to a different set of intentions.

In posting to ANYONE on MB, I work to the assumption that I am simply presenting a viewpoint and opinion based on my own experience, which the reader can evaluate, accept, ignore as he / she wishes. I do not assume that it is my responsibility to effect change in the reader. I don't see how an ad-hoc, anonymous, non-professional, unaccountable community like this can work any other way.

We're not a service. We're not trained professionals. We're not charging money. No-one has a right to depend on any poster for support. If a therapist goes under a bus, the client knows about it and can make other arrangements. If one of US goes under a bus, all that will happen is that they won't post for a long time. We don't spend hours evaluating our 'client' to get their history and make observations of their person and their presentation. We have no 'service standards'. Even if every person posting today was to agree a set of guidelines for dealing with a specific problem, at 6am tomorrow there will be a new member joining who knows nothing about those standards and has every opportunity to jump into a thread and lambaste a new WS. All we can ever be is a bunch of disparate and highly personal opinions, presented in a highly personal style. We might as well accept that.

But there is one standard that I think we should all incorporate as a matter of life management. We should observe proper boundaries. That means, we do not JUDGE others. We do not pin labels on them. We do not reach across their boundaries and try to control them. We can present our own experience and opinions of what happens in such situations, we can ask uncomfortable questions, we can express our own anger at our own sitch WITHOUT projecting that onto others. We can behave decently (and, believe me, I am aiming this advice at myself first).

So, can we get this discussion back on track?

TogetherAlone

But there is one standard that I think we should all incorporate as a matter of life management. We should observe proper boundaries. That means, we do not JUDGE others. We do not pin labels on them.

totally disagree

too nebulous

I will continue as always to call a spade a spade...
I will not cowtow to political corectness of fear of offending....
I will not jump on the slippy slope of changing the definition of reality to meet some sappy standard of not offending...
I will over and over risk the chance of being labeled mysef as that new terrible horrible bad bad word..

JUDGER

I will adhere to the rules as set by the owners of this board
I will not call people names...(unless they are already named melodylane and are from Texas..then I know they can handle it....)

But i will not change my advice even at the risk of someone thinking they are being judged...

I have always stuck to this standard..and while people may find my OPINIONS tough at times...
they are only that
OPINIONS
and
people can always take and leave what they choose...
as they should...

and people these days love self labeling ..
pop psyche mumbo jumbo most of it..
sex addict
co dependant
abusive
etc...
all over used over played words to defend poor choices and poor actions
self victimization....bleeech....

we are the generation of accept all bad behavior because we might be called a judgemental...
and label everything to give the excuse needed...

ARK^^

Hey Ark,

I would like to point out that you have been doing this for as long as I've been reading your posts. And without fail, you implement this paradigm WITHOUT being disrespectful.

Your posts are powerful, honest, thought provoking and challenging and what's more, they are consistently so and yet I've never ever read a post in which you come across as disrespectful or judgemental in a disrespectful way.

You are honest and forthright without ever being rude.

I dunno how to wrap this reply so I'll just say that I'm glad you posted.

dewt

Dewt, we seem to be talking past each other because the discussion IS very much about posting styles, as there is no disagreement whatsoever about principles. And this would be why it appears to me that you are talking in circles and making no sense. You do not address my points - ever - rather you attempt to DEFINE my stance, but always miss the point. And my main point is that telling someone the truth in a forthright manner is NOT a disrepectful judgment, and trotting out all the Harley quotes and scriptures will not change that. That is the point and that is what you continually avoid answering.


I think that your issue is that you find the TRUTH to be very mean and rude, Dewt. And again, you don't even address my points where I demonstrate that even Jesus himself felt it necessary to harshly address injustice. He did not classify the truth as a "disrespectful judgement."


Well no, "we" didn't tackle this "discussion." I had left the forum and you waited until I left to post that.


I accept your apology and would only point out that when you suggest to someone HOW they should approach another, even giving exact verbiage, you are suggesting that your posting style is preferred and to be adopted. And again, we all agree on Marriage Builders principles, but how you apply them will be based on your personal interpretion, style, situation and audience. All of our communication styles are different and we should respect that.


Telling someone how they should post and even supplying the verbiage very much is a statement about your target's posting style. It says: "your posting style is faulty; does not live up to my standards, so please use mine." Otherwise, there would be no reason to supply "another" version, because we don't need to fix what is not broken.

I don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about here because no one has ever suggested any such thing. Exaggerating my point out of all recognition contributes nothing to the discussion, Tiggy; rather, it detracts.


Don't people NEED to hear the truth? If someone is deluding themselves, the truth is usually a good start. Some sponsors tell people what they WANT to hear because they want to be liked, they want to get along - AT ALL COSTS. Others risk their wrath and tell them the truth, because they really do care.

I very much agree with ark on this point. It seems that the only ones we can judge, according to the dictates of political correctness, are "judgers." For some odd reason, this little rule against "judgments" does not apply to judging them. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> I would point out that we very much should be judging right from wrong and that our prisons are full of folks who could not. If ya can't judge right from wrong, that is probably where you should be. And if you WON'T, well then, the term moral coward very much comes to mind.

How did we ever get to this looney place where it is WORSE to say something is bad, that it is to actually DO something bad??

Dewt, I very much appreciate what you said. You know where to come when you're ready, my friend. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Im sorry you feel this, Ark. Perhaps you've had trouble hearing this because you're smug, pretentious, and giving to issuing quasi-mystical utterings full of ellipses which are meant to impress us? I mean, what do you think this is, a poetry competition?

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

Before everyone piles in to support Ark, let me explain. I didn't mean what I just said. Apologies, Ark; sorry to use you as an example. Your protestations were unnecessary, because you're one of the most respectful posters here. But being JUDGED isn't pleasant, is it? Especially when there's a smidgeon of truth in it, amid a lot that's false? Having someone else's scornful opinion of you presented to you as truth is not terribly useful, because all it makes you do is feel attacked and want to defend yourself. What I said was unreasonable, and very unfair. You would be right to take offence.

However, if I said that Ark's style of writing often confused me and made it difficult for me to work out her message, that is NOT judging. That is not pinning a label on her. It is simply pointing out the consequences of some of her actions. If her problem was that she felt that people didn't always understand her, what I just said would be useful feedback. She might still take offence, but I would not have crossed her boundaries. I would have remained within my own.


Judging. That word has rattled a lot of anti-PC cages. There is clearly a lot of anger about the current trend towards permitting inconsiderate behaviour out of a fear of being seen as 'judgemental'. This is especially true when the inconsiderate behaviour is actually hurting someone else, not ourselves directly.

OK, let's look at an example. Say, a father screaming at a child in a store. Many of us think that shouting at a child in a public place is a humiliation to the child and is poor parenting. But some people probably think that imposing parental control is an important part of parenting - that they're being responsible parents.

How do we deal with it? We could look away, insulating ourselves from the distress and being 'non-judgemental'. Or we could intervene, to protect the child. But for me to say "Excuse me, but this is disgraceful. You simply mustn?t do that to a child!" may be an honest attempt to defend the child's interests, but it assumes a parenting standard OF MINE that the father isn't reaching. The father may well be so taken aback by the intervention that he will think twice in future, but there is just as good a chance that he will think "Who is this arrogant biddy to tell ME how to parent my children?", because he feels UNFAIRLY attacked.

However, if I say "Excuse me, but I'm feeling very distressed watching you with your kid. I know how hard it is to manage children in a busy store, but from my own experience I also know that kids are often deeply affected by being yelled at in public settings. I know I used to find it very humiliating.", then I am not imposing my own parenting standards on him, and judging him lacking. I am not crossing his boundaries. I am describing my own reactions to his actions, and suggesting some consequences to what he's doing. He's likely still to be angry, and react with hostility to my intervention, but he's less likely to feel UNFAIRLY attacked, and therefore is more likely to go away and think about what I've said.

If a poster is telling us that they are being unfaithful, that they can't find it in them to care about their spouse, that they long for the OP and can't give them up - then clearly that poster's life is in a mess. They are out of integrity in a big way, and creating a gravity field of misery and confusion. They need to be woken up, and that's probably why they're here. It's a desperate, perhaps subconscious, cry for help. They need words that get through to them. But trying to wake them up by telling them that they're selfish scum for doing what they're doing is counter-productive. The WS knows that they're not actually wall-to-wall scum, that they're not TOTALLY selfish. So the message comes across as inaccurate and unfair, and the well-intentioned poster as vindictive and not worth listening to.

However, if the responder points out the facts - the consequences of the WS's actions, the gap between the WS's promises and what he's actually doing, if it suggests that he think about his feelings if he were to find himself on the other side of the fence, if it holds up a mirror to him so that he can see himself - then the WS may still be hostile, but it is much more likely that he will listen. Because deep down, he will know whether the message is honest and fair. Reaching across his boundaries and telling him that he should NOT be doing what he's doing will be picked up as dishonest and unfair. I am not setting his standards for him. Society is not setting his standards for him. The standards he is breaking are his own.

The majority of posters observe these boundaries. Pep, Mel, Ark, Orchid and all the other 'tough' poster almost always stay within their own boundaries and hold up a mirror to the WS. Some posters are superb at holding up that mirror with its cruel but honest reflection. But sometimes all of us stray close to the line, and sometimes we cross over, just a bit. That's inevitable. Let's cut each other some slack.

... and Ark, if I'm honest, I do sometimes get a little tired ...

...of the ellipses...

... because it makes me work too hard ...

... and because it's catching...

... even Pep ...

... is doing it now...

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

TogetherAlone

Jimmy,

I think there is a wider problem - of generally disrespectful posting that is done on this forum - and I also think there is no real cure for it - except to remind people that anybody in the world can post here, and none of us should assume that any other poster knows what he/she is talking about - or that any other poster's judgemental postings have anything to do with the thread on which they appear.

When I first came here and started my first thread, almost 4 years ago, I backed out pretty quickly and edited away all of my posts on that thread - mostly because one poster, who I would recognize now as simply a reckless person who knew nothing about MB, said some hurtful things. (basicly he said "your wife is no good. Ditch her and get another.")

And I was a BS, not a WS.

So, I know the problem from personal experience.

I have been amazed many times to see people who keep coming back and facing the fire in spite of some ugly posts on their thread.

-AD

ONG, I LOVE that phrase!

I'm not good at debating, or even good at reading for that matter <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

But I just love that phrase.

Not to come to Arks rescue (because we all know, rescuing she don't need) but I think she is by far... the brightest star! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I am enjoying reading your posts TA. And I'm not missing your point, just really like that phrase.

TA, what you just said to Ark does not reflect what I view as "judging." Rather, it reflects a false accusation delivered with scorn. [ad hominem attack, perhaps?] The points were basically false and delivered with scorn. [albeit to make a point - understood] Neither of which are traits of "judging." No one would react kindly to a false accusation delivered as an attack.

You do make a good argument for the importance of delivery methods, and I would agree 100%. Although, we all have different approaches and different ideas of "tact." [myself being at the outer edge, admittedly, because of a deficit of patience when it comes to bullshi**ers <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />]

However, I would never dream of calling an individual a "scumbag," but I wouldn't hesitate to point out that he/she acted selfishly in a certain situation, and would proceed to lay out my reasoning. The latter situation is an example of "judging," the former an example of abusive name calling. It would be unreasonable and unfair to call him a "scumbag," it wouldn't be unreasonable to point out his selfishness, provided it is a true and accurate assessment of his behavior in the situation.

And I have to say, that while I used to be confused by Ark's ellipses, they seem to have grown on me over the years. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

Mel,


And so here we sit, facing each other across the proverbial table, feeling pretty much exactly the same way...

So, let us pause a second... reassess, re-address and reset.

You said,


I can't find a single thing in this statement to argue against. I don't feel that telling the forthright truth is the equivalent of a disrespectful judgement. I don't think sugar coating the truth, or covering it is beneficial or helpful.

If you believed that this was my stance, that honesty = disrespectful judgement, then I could not fault you for becoming irritated with me and indeed would commend you on your restraint in your posts to me.

Please let me assure you that we are in agreement that honesty is the best policy.

However, I am of the position that a disrespectful judgement is ineffective and often counter-productive, and as MBers we should try to practice what we preach. I don't associate DJs with any particular posters 'style' but advocate that WHATEVER our style, we should avoid DJs and other lovebusters.


I'm going to ask for an apology on that one, Mel.

For one, I don't find the truth to be mean or rude. Hard to swallow, but the 'truth' actually amounts simply to a factual account of something. 'Mean' and 'rude' are emotionally based attributes and in this case reflect on the poster of the offending statement.

Secondly, not only did I interpret your statement as both mean and rude, but it is ridiculously far from the truth. The actual truth is that I look to Jesus and the Word of God for guidance in setting my standards. To declare, in such an insulting tone that I would presume to judge Jesus is not only inflamatory, but false.

In a way, I outta thank you, because you reminded me to add this extention to my posision. A disrespectful judgement is such regardless of whether it's based on truth or fiction.

Yes, even Jesus himself felt it was important to make a fuss. Yet his basic message was that he came to save the sinners and the sick. His message was to love and forgive one another. He did not berate the people who came to him for healing, he met them with Perfect Love and Perfect Grace. He allowed himself to be tortured and nailed to a cross and sacrificed so that we could be forgiven and accepted into God's presence.

And we did tackle that discussion. My reply to you was made only two hours after your last post on that thread. The converation had been going on previous to that post. 'We' did not finish the discussion. If you want to, we can.

Oh, and that little note to Jimmy was from me, by me, and on my own behalf. Nothing to do with you.

Take care,

dewt

Hey !

[color:"red"]is it just me ....?

anybody else starting to think

"Hmmmmm.... Mel and Dewt have a little thingy*thingy going on here"...

I mean....

they just cannot seem to be able to resist each other !!!! [/color]

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" />

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Well, Dewt, it appears that we actually disagree on very little after all. I very much did believe that you did equate honesty with disrespectful judgments and I am glad to hear you clarify that you don't. I apologize if I misunderstood your position. As you can tell, I sure don't equate honesty with dj's and have no respect for those who do.

And if you don't equate the truth with meanness and rudeness, then I, by all means, apologize. I equate the truth with beauty and justice and believe it is a gift from God to be able to discern the truth in the first place.


Jesus never minced words, as love is found in the truth, rather than nice words. When kindness was warranted, He was kind, when harsh words were required, he levelled harsh words. Nothing wrong with that, as sometimes it is necessary. Injustice outraged Him, as it does most Christians.

As far as your other post from months ago, I had already left the forum and believe I posted to that effect before I left. However, I have no intention of rehashing that old ugliness and would prefer we leave it behind us. Take care, Dewt. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Go to bed, you dork! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Just for that, you earned a little present from Texas: just for you, honey <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I remember an excellent post once send by knewbetter after there was a similar discussion on this board… She talked about The Rule of Protection and how we can violate that rule if we are not careful of the choice of our wording on others. It all boils down to the following:

The truth MUST and SHOULD be spoken but there are many different ways to express it. Some are healing and others are not but the best way is for truth to be spoken in love. It is the best way to assure that the truth can be *heard*. Truth spoken in love is healing and helpful, the other way only sows discord. It's just not good enough to be hurtful and then say "Well but it's True!", and rubbing someone's nose in "Truth" definitely doesn't build good relationships whether they be marital or between board members.

I think the following is a good rule of thumb to examine what came out of our mouths:

1. Is it true?
2. Is it necessary?
3. Is it kind?

People can say hurtful things and defend themselves by saying they were being honest & truthful, but in reality they have been rude and inconsiderate of how others might perceive what they wrote simply because of the WAY they wrote it...

If a person (and it includes me) expresses him/herself without regard to the feelings of others, he/she is the cause of pain and unhappiness because it violates the Rule of Protection in regard to other board members. He/she then violate the *spirit* of the rule not the letter of it of course, as we MBers obviously are not married to each other. It's also a matter of common courtesy...just because this board is anonymous doesn't mean we have the right to be mean and/or insensitive to the feelings of others. As I've said before, it's not WHAT we say, it's the WAY we say it...

Pepperband et al:

There is a newbie WS over in the "In Recovery" area that could use some help.

Thanks,

Jimmy M.

Jimmy ... I think I will sit this one out. You're doing great. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Thanks.

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Just wanted to put in my two cents...

If I've learned ANYTHING at all from the mess I got myself into by committing adultery, it's this:

No matter what anyone else says or does, I can control my own reaction to that. I am not a mind reader. I am treading dangerous territory when I assume I know the intentions behind a person's words, or even actions. I did that to my husband for years, and look what happened. That is my own fault. It was a hard lesson to learn, one that was NOT fun, and one that is still ongoing....but I am REALLY glad to have learned it.
Perhaps some of the responses I have received on this board were less than kind, and maybe even the intentions were to be cruel....I have no way of knowing. But, it doesn't matter anymore! I am fine, either way! It matters less how I got to this point, than it does that I got here.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />


NOW

This will be my last post on this thread. This is just seems to be getting no where. Most everyone (including myself) is just reinforcing their own position and we seem to be going in circles.

I did want to respond to Mel's post.



I just had to say I am sorry if it seemed like I was exagerating your point. It wasn't my intent. It's funny I thought the same thing about some of your responses to me. I felt a few times that my words were twisted and what I was trying to say got lost. If that is what I did to you, I am sorry. I was simply trying to relate my life experience to the arguement you are putting forward--AA and the 12 step program. And I am sorry if you don't understand what my experience has been with the 12 step program. It's just that my experience. I will say one thing in light of alcoholic vs infidelity. Infidelity hurt far worse than living with an alcoholic. Just my experience though.


I have concluded a few things for myself in light of this thread:

I think everyone here cares about the people on this board and we just disagree with how the MB principles apply to the board.

I am grateful that my husband didn't post here, when foggy or later. He is sensitive and is recovering just fine without MB forum input.

I appreciate those who have shown me tough love with the 'love' part included.

Truth + tools on how to rebuild my life was the best combo for me and my marriage.

All above is just my own opinion.

Peace all.

Tiggy

Apparently, MelodyLane and I have reached perfect accord on at least one issue.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" />

dewt

She deserved that so bad! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

LOL <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Together Alone,

Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed your post!

I find that for me, if I have the goal of more fulfilling relationships (with H and others) it requires constant internal questioning about whether I am speaking the truth or whether I am judging. In some cases (ie I am revealing my feelings and where they come from) its easy to tell the difference, but beyond that, it can get murky.

I am quite capable of slugging others with my fantastically well thought out and informed opinions, whether they asked, whether they are interested, whether it will help them, or not! After all, my intention is to help(him/her/them)! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

One thing I am noticing is that I often get a little nervous when I'm about to reveal something truthful. Its more of a risk. Its easier for me to say "You are being lazy in not doing XYZ!" than "I am frustrated because I want more help from you."

Sorry slight threadjack here.....

Thanks, Smur. I know what you mean. My mother is the Queen of Judgements, and I have been the Princess. I find it hard work, too.

Just to point out to all who have read / contributed to this thread - there is a first-time WS posting on Recovery, who has not been responded to by the posters on this thread, as far as I can see. However, he has already been called a 'scumbag' by a well-intentioned and doubtless quite sincere poster, who believes the WS 'needs' to hear it (and who apologised for his tough talking).

The WS seems remorseful, shamed, and anxious to heal his marriage. Many aspects of his behaviour have lacked integrity, but he is not a wall-to-wall scumbag.

Perhaps one of us could use our experience to help this WS respectfully?

TogetherAlone

Perhaps one of us could use our experience to help this WS respectfully?

TA, I have no experience of being a WS, only being very very hurt by one. My advice to one would be at best limp and at worst imbued with unintentional spite at my own experience. I ACTIVELY stay away from WS posters , not PASSIVELY if I explian that correctly.

TogetherAlone,

Yes, I’ve also noticed the “scumbag” remark to the new poster and it was very disappointing. The new poster indeed sound very remorseful & repentant about his past actions… He sounds like someone who genuinely & sincerely wants to make amends in his M and help to heal is W…certainly not a “scumbug” type who needs ‘tough love’. Well, certainly he acted like a “scumbag” in the past, but it’s clearly not the case anymore…

TA, and there are first time posters on this forum that have not been responded to by posters on this thread. So what?

Hopefully, you aren't implying that we all have some sort of moral obligation to respond to each and every new person, regardless of whether we have something to contribute or not. I post to those to whom I think I have something to offer. If I don't think I have something to offer, then I don't respond. It's real simple. However, that doesn't stop you or anyone else from responding to whomever you choose. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

edited to add: I looked in on at thread and saw that several posters on this thread, [and not on this thread] had in fact, posted to the new person, so am not sure what the problem is.

Melody Lane

The point I was making was that the poster in question had been referred to a a 'scumbag' - a term that has been discussed earlier in this thread. I mentioned it because it illlustrated the point that was raised at the start of this thread. The fact that few of the 'standard' posters-to-WS's have posted to that thread is indicative, I suspect, of bruised feelings created by THIS thread, which is worth thinking about.

I am not suggesting that any poster should feel obliged to respond. In fact, my earlier post made clear that this forum is NOT here to provide a service; no poster should feel a sense of obligation because no postee has a right to expect specific or continued support. I did not ask that posters respond - I simply suggested that someone more experienced might find it possible to respond with respect.

The 'problem', as I should perhaps make clearer, is that the term 'scumbag' - while true to the poster's feelings - seems to me disrespectful, inaccurate and ineffective. Although the WS in this instance has not objected, I suspect that pandering to his self-loathing is not the best way to get him out of the hole he's in.

TogetherAlone

TA, thanks for clarifying your point. However, I do not equate forthrightness with calling someone names. The thread that started this thread had no name calling, it had some very direct talk that made the originator - of this thread - uncomfortable. Perhaps it also made the new person uncomfortable, but that's ok.

The bottom line is that we all have different ideas of what constitutes respect and very different sensitivity levels and we should respect that. We can't dictate to others how they should post. Respect is a 2 way street.

[color:"navy"]I re-read Jimmy's first post. I think what he is basically saying is to be kind and thoughtful when we reply to anyone. And that doesn't mean to 'softsoap' what is right and wrong.

"Soft words calm wrath and harsh words stir up anger." (One of my favorite Bible verses.)

What I think about posting to ANYONE is we should never hide behind our anonymity (sp?)to say cruel things.

(Like 'Together Alone' just pointed out, saying: "You are a scumbag" to a hurting & sorrowful WS is not a good way to help them.)

We should advise as we would if we were sitting beside a hurting friend. Perhaps PRETEND we are holding their hand, better yet, kneeling together... as we are discussing what they need to do in their lives to make things right in their marriages.

Bottom line I guess would be to never say ANYTHING we wouldn't say to a friend or relative
in the same predicament.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Like I told Jimmy, I'm going to sit this one out.

If telling someone they are lucky to be given a second chance in their marriage is seen as hurtful to the poster, I just have no idea of what to say.

You do it.

Pep

Julie, I make it a point to talk to people the same in person as I do here. And I rarely use "soft words." In person or on the internet. That is just not my personality. I am straightforward and direct. I am sorry if you don't approve. Not ALL situations call for "soft words," especially at the expense of the truth. Jesus himself did not use soft words when the situation warranted otherwise.

Just to reinforce this point, a trawl of my past post would show Mel kicking my [censored] soundly several times, much harder than she has any WS in my memory. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I remember to thank her every time I sit down ! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

In truth, firm words can cut through fog and despair.

Bob, strangely I don't recall all this uproar when a BS gets a much needed 2x4 between the eyes! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Do you know, that's true! Why did no-one rush to my defence when Twyla used to slap me left-and-right?

I think I can feel a flounce coming on...

TogetherAlone

I will protect ya, honey!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Blessed Time said:


I went and reread aforementioned first post after reading your interpretation.

I did not find the words "kind" or "thoughtful" anywhere, nor did I find synonyms for these words.

How do you know that was his intended meaning if he did not say these things?

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]I don't know Pep, I guess I just took it from what he said in the above quote, that if we could be, kind & caring, in our replies, it would do more good...(And remain true to our beliefs of right and wrong)

I realize I did kinda analize his words with my OWN take on their meaning. However, that is the meaning I received from his post. I guess we each interpret messages differently.

No one can ever ever convince me that harsh or critical words could ever help anyone. I think (and this is JUST what I think, doesn't have to be how others think) that advice should be given with a loving and caring attitude.
Words can be FIRM but IMHO, should never be harsh or cruel; using name calling (Like: Pond Scum etc.) Very childish and unnessary.

I learned this a long time ago:
We learn kindness from the unkind."
In other words, how we DON'T want to act.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I think we would probably "do more good" if we remembered that we can only control ourselves and not others. If we spent a little more time trying to improve ourselves instead of busily scrutinizing others, imagine what we could achieve! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

We might be spending an inordinate amount of time helping those in need on this forum instead of being distracted with threads like this.

right....

As far as I can tell, no one is even trying to!

The point in question is interpreting the intent and words of others without asking them what they meant! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" />

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

And how do you tell someone's attitude Julie?

Pep

[color:"navy"]Well, generally, we can tell if a person is giving a sincere and caring post versus an argumentitive post. Do you agree?

And Very Very Few people use harsh, demeaning words to get their point across.

While out hoeing in my garden, I was thinking of what ML posted to me. (page 10)


[color:"navy"]Melody, if you go back and read my message, not once did I say I did not approve of your straightforward and direct approach.

I guess that is just another case of reading something into a message that wasn't there.

I guess that is one reason, if we have a doubt about the understanding or intent of a message, it is best to say something and get the correct meaning meant by the person posting it.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Just so you know Julie,
I have my personal display preferences set to 40 posts per page...
coz I hate pages and scrolling...
and there is no page 10 on this thread on my computer.

We are all different...
We set our displays like we want...
We respond to posters like we want...
We all intrepret with our own filters...
It is our personal right.


Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]Susan, I didn't know it would be a different amount of pages for different posters.

Mine shows there are 11 'pages' on this thread so far.

Could you tell me how to get 40 'Thread Topics' when we click on General Questions II? Do we just type in 40?

Mine says the limit is 30 but I would prefer 40.

Thanks, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Perfect, Susan. Quite perfect. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]Nevermind.
I went to Display Preferences...Edit and we can now type in 40,
whereas before, we could only have a max of 30.

Thanks for pointing that out.

And Susan, I agree with what you said:

We are all different...
We set our displays like we want...
We respond to posters like we want...
We all intrepret with our own filters...
It is our personal right.

And we ALL have those same personal rights, including me.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Not always.

I once (for fun) said "la-de-da" when I bumped up a post, instead of saying the usual "bump up" .... and it was interpreted as a rude comment ....

So, no, "we" can not always tell what someone's attitude might be ... Because "we" are missing some of the most important parts to communication ... the non-verbal clues like body language, tone of voice, facial expressions.

In a face to face encounter, I agree with you. On a message board, it is not possible to be so sure of the other pperson's attitude without asking about it.

Pep

"And Very Very Few people use harsh, demeaning words to get their point across". - Blessed Time


This was Blessed Times' idea of how to help me when I was a near suicidal BS in the depths of despair.

Read and choose whether to take supportive posting lessons from her or not.

[/quote]Pepperband said: So, no, "we" can not always tell what someone's attitude might be ... Because "we" are missing some of the most important parts to communication ... the non-verbal clues like body language, tone of voice, facial expressions.[/quote]

Like I said way back on page 3 (or would that be 2?)

This seems to be a no-brainer to me! I think this applies in real life too! How many understandings start IRL because we misinterpret what others are saying? Why is it so hard to just ask for clarification? And/or admit when we took something the wrong way??

Well, that's MY perception of this sitch <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

BlessedTIME, what exactly did you mean by this? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

Were these soft words?

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Hardly. You stated that we should use "soft words" - and NEVER harsh words - when we communicate and I responded that I do not use soft words. Sometimes I use harsh words when I feel it is appropriate. You stated you don't approve of that behavior.

I don't think that "kindness" is epitomized by nice words. Sometimes the kindest, most compassionate thing we can do is take a baseball bat to someone's head. There is no virtue in parroting nice words at someone when the harsh truth is clearly warranted. Nice words just don't cut it sometimes.

As we say here in Texas, talk is cheap.....

The verse in my signature is very appropos: It is better to hear the rebuke of the wise, than for a man to hear the song of fools

[color:"navy"]No Susan, those were NOT soft words and they did stir up anger.

At the time, I was feeling sorry for Bob's wife since she had no voice in the discussion about what kind of person and mother she was. What I wrote was sincere and it was what I was feeling but it just goes to show we don't have to post what we are thinking, if the words are not going to be beneficial.

Bob, I have asked for your forgiveness many many times and you have told me that you will not forgive me.

I ask you again, here on this thread, will you please forgive me. My words hurt you and I am truly sorry.

I will tell you now as I have told you before, you did an exceptional job at helping to rescue your marriage.

Sincerely, Julie
I am the first to admit that I have MANY shortcomings.

Edited to say I just read Melody Lane's post. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

Oh, Bob... I am sorry you were not handled with more kindness than this post reflects:


But, I am willing to give her the benifit of the doubt and hope that she did not intend to sound so cruel and harsh .... she intended to be kind and loving while saying you were tiresome in your whining...

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

My blood boils just reading that cruel, unfair missive again.

BT~ Are you for real?

Gee, I go away for work for a week, and look what happens. Quite a thread!

Just for informational purposes, part of the TOS says this: "You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law."

We can debate back and forth about what all those mean. For myself (and myself only), I interpret the meaning to be that disrespectful judgments, name-calling, and generally hateful stuff is not okay. I try very hard not to engage in those behaviors here or anywhere else. (I don't always succeed.)

I, too, believe that the truth can be expressed fully and completely without being disrespectful. It's really difficult and I'm still learning how to do it. I'm also learning not to be a doormat; I didn't even know I -was- a doormat! But I am, and it's tough to learn respectful non-doormathood. (Lordy, what a description; I wish I had a mental image to go with it.)

I never answered the questions posed to me at the beginning of the thread -- I've been gone and just read them. And I'm about to be late for a work meeting, so am not going to get to them now, either. Pep, would you still like an answer or are you ready to be done with the conversation? And I think there was something from ML, too?

So you decided that you would be that voice and verbalize Bob's wife's position? How do you know what Bob's former cheating wife might want to say?

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I do not require a response, thanks.

Pep

That's ok, JustJ, we are pretty much moved on from that point. I very much agree with the rest of your post, though. Well said. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]I didn't know, Pep.
I only knew as much as Bob told us of her and before her one month affair, she seemed like she had always been a good wife and mom, actually, quite a remarkable lady.

Maybe that is what I was seeing, that IN TIME, she could be that lady again.

I would like to think that I have 'improved' since writing that post to Bob.
Do you think I have?

I try not to give very much marriage advice, mostly just stuff about the message board; to make it work better.

If I could do it over, I would have never written my thoughts to Bob. But I can't undo that post. It has stayed in Bob's mind, as he had only a handful of negative posts.

Maybe it can be used as a lesson in forgiveness.

Who am I? I am a nobody on a message board that spouted out an opinion that I should have kept to myself.

Is my 'wrongdoing' forgivable? I sure hope it is.
All my life, I have always wanted for people to like me.
I appologize to anyone reading this, if my words have ever offended you.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I donno about that. Your opinion was just that, your opinion. So what?

What I don't "get" is your attitude that the rest of us need your advice of how we should post ... as if you were the final authority on this subject.

Without your seeming to lecture and scold here on this thread, I think BobPure would have NOT dug up that old post of yours.

To be scolded about "disrespectful judgements" by you, and then reading an example of your posting .... well, it's not a very good example, is it?



Idonno... what wrongdoing you refering to? .... ask your husband bonasera!

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Here is a part of a post to a newbie FWS in a thread from "In Recovery". The FWS said in a post before this that he deeply regretted what he had done and he wants to get his M back on track:

"You hurt her beyond reason and she will never truly recover. You are a low scum bag that deserves nothing and perhaps that is exactly what you will get."

Comments?

My comment is why are you posting it here instead of to the person who posted it? What does this have to do with anyone here?

Would it be too controlling if I suggested that his comment was inappropriate? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

If it is, consider me guilty. I just posted my feelings directly to the poster. I was very offended.

Best regards,
Scumbag GS

JimmyMac, at last you have found a truly inappropriate comment! JACKPOT!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> I would rush right over there and set that poster straight! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Jimmy Mac

Keep up man! I raised that particular thread many posts ago, and the 'inappropriateness' has already been addressed in the thread itself. You need to address the question to the poster who made the remark, don't you think?

TogetherAlone

Without your seeming to lecture and scold here on this thread, I think BobPure would have NOT dug up that old post of yours..

Right on the money Pep.

I felt the lesson in empathic posting techniques from her needed to be received in context by other readers.

I am in shock BT.

BlessedTime,

This is totally off topic, so please forgive me, but I am wondering how old you are.

Thanks,
Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]Susan, I am 54 years old.
We have 4 children. 3 daughters and 1 son.
I am a grandma with 8 wonderful grandchildren.

Our middle daughter's loving H and Daddy, was killed last summer in an automobile accident, leaving her with 3 little children to raise.
The youngest was just 2 months old.

His death has given us all a renewed appreciate of life and family.

My H and I have been married for 36 years.

My H is a forgiven, FWH. (D day was in August of 2003.)

Love, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

P.S. I really am sorry for the post I wrote to Bob a year or so ago.

And do you also go by Sarie or Sarah?

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"] No, but I do remember Sarie and I have posted to her before.

She is rather unforgettable because she was unwilling to repent and tell her husband. She argued and argued with people that were trying to help her.

She even fooled us by telling us she DID tell her H about her affair.

But at least she confessed that she lied to us.
I think Mrs X did the same.

Not nice. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Hmmmmm * strokes chin *

I think you may be on to something Susan.

[/color]

Sarie .... why are you hiding?

[color:"navy"]My H and I just came back from a walk with our dog.

I read some of Sarie's thread. I had printed the poem she had posted. I was thankful to have it when our son in law was killed this summer.

Our only son is alive and well, married with 2 children.
They live just 2 miles from us, on the family farm.
(My parents farmhouse.)

I remember way back, someone saying my writing style was similar to Sarie's. (The way I signed, Sincerely or Love, Julie.)

Love, Julie

Whatever

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Here

Sarie says "I need to leave now and get some of that expensive gas for the farm truck."

hummmmmmm

Susan (not as dumb as she looks) <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

awwwwww so cute

bless your heart

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[color:"navy"]Pep and Susan.
Why are you being so sarcastic?

Yeah, Pep? Why are you so sarcastic?

I loved you when I met you in person. And now you seem so cruel and harsh.

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I have sinned ..... again.

Can you forgive me?

Pep

Let me ask you Julie/Sarie, why are you here?

This is a marriage building site. We don't need a board IT person.

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" />

Pack you handbasket.

Susan <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

I have seen so much perceived disrespect in this thread. It sometimes makes me wonder just how many DJ's and LB's a WS can take before they, too, throw their hands in the air and give up trying to salvage their marriage.


Nor

[color:"navy"]Ok, Susan, Pep, Trix, Melody and Bob.
You have successfully driven me away.
So go ahead and cheer and clap your hands.

It has been time for me to go for a long time.
H and I are doing wonderfully. Better than before the affair.
The painful past A is almost healed.
(It will never be forgotten but truly forgiven.)

I have sincerely enjoyed reading and posting here.
I don't know how I could have survived without
MB friends. I am sure I will still be lurking for awhile.

My H's affair was never told to anyone except our pastor.
It was a SECRET.
Our children never knew, our parents never knew.
I didn't even share it with my sisters.

Nobody but friends here at MB.

I will not post anymore.
This makes my heart beat too fast.

One confession before I go.
I am not 54...I was so wanting to keep our identity a secret that I took 5 years off my age. I am actually 59, H is 60.

We do have 4 children and 8 grandchildren and we do live in the country and I do love flower gardening.

I am NOT Sarie, Sarah or whoever she is.
I was even fooled into believing her. I once started a thread to SKIM because I thought Sarie had confessed to her H.

So goodbye everyone. I am not being dramatic;
I just can't take being made fun of.

Sincerely, Julie <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Ok, I know that there's something being illustrated here, I'm just not sure what it is. And now that BT is gone, I don't think it will be played out to the end.

Care to splain? It's like the VCR breaking down before the end of the movie! Whodunnit?

Oh, I donno LB ...

I doubt this is really over. Stay tuned.

Pep <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Ok, Susan, Pep, Trix, Melody and Bob.
You have successfully driven me away.
So go ahead and cheer and clap your hands.

I quoted your post. How can this 'drive you away'? I haven't made fun of you.

I don't know why you have posted as ( at least) two different online personalities. It was only pointed out that you are Sarie AND have a history of mean posting because you were lecturing the boards. OK Pep & Susan had a little mean fun with you but having gone through an affair, surely you have sand enough to handle that without flouncing off ?

You have every right to post as Julie, Sarie, Madonna or Tammy faye Bakker if you wish - we are all anonymous on these boards unless we choose to reveal ourselves.

Don't worry about it. Just remember that 'people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones'.

I hope it's over soon. Clearly there is a strong need for board police. (Fortunately there's a little button: 'notify moderator')

Put aside the Harley concepts and the abusive pointlessness of disrespectful judgments. Put aside the Biblical arguments that we should love each other and treat each other with a basic respect. Put all that aside, and refer back to the TOS, (as posted by Joanna):


This thread is rife with it. And it's coming from people who should really know better.

Blessed Time, I've enjoyed your posts I'm dissappointed to see you being treated this way. In fact all in all, this thread has been the source of much dissappointment for me. That a poster be judged by what side of the 'clique' they are on rather than the content of the post is surprising and discouraging. I will be sorry to see you leave.

In retrospect, looking back over this thread, I'm feeling a great dissappointment. Some very good points were raised, but missed and ignored because the desire to snipe, to out-post, to bury the 'opposition', has overcome and overwhelmed the desire to learn and grow from our interactions. Very sad, especially considering where we are.

dewt

I agree there is a need for board police, they are called moderators. We can see the disasterous result when folks sanctimoniously appoint themselves "board police;" this thread is a testament to that. Dissension is the inevitable result when one tries to control others. We should leave the behavior policing to those whose job it is and concentrate on our own behavior. We can only control ourselves.....

Whoa... ML and I are agreeing all over the place...

This is creepy!

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" /><img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /><img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /><img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />

dewt

Ah, Jimmy Mac,

We accursed Morlocks slink back to the comfortable shelter of our subterranean lair.

Perhaps we are less than fully human. Perhaps there is something inherently ugly about us. We acknowledge this.

But, joyfully, we remain assured that there plenty of scrumptious Eloi about on which to feed...

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> Low

Wow, what a disappointing (sp) turn of events on the the last page or two.

It seems the original point has been made perfectly clear with the last accusations and snippiness towards a poster.

Maybe the TOS should have a warning: Beware, even the seasoned veterans may turn on you without warning and make unfair and unfounded accusations for their own fun and entertainment. Sign up at your own risk!

Sad.

I can lock this thread, or delete it, but for the moment I am going to allow the discussion with one comment.

In my long experience with MB, threads started to tell other posters how to post ALWAYS turn into a brawl. Someone will take offense, no matter the intentions of the thread originator.

GQII is filled with posters who either are in one of the worst times of their lives or have that time in the past. On any given day posters are in pain.

Keep your discussions respectful.

And just a side not to let you know MB "board police" are alive and reading on the forums.

We DO get your alerts and do try to follow through, however we are not online 24/7. Many times, by the time we read the alert, the forum members have "handled" the problem. Many times it has escalated. Please be aware the new format does not allow the "alerter" to comment on the reason for their alert. Sometimes it is not obvious. Is it a comment, an attack, a negative history between certain posters, the entire thread? Please feel free to email any or all of us with an explaination if you feel it may be necessary. Our email addresses are available at he bottom of each forum by clicking on our names.

Archuletan, thank you for coming. I feel much relief that a moderator is overseeing this thread. I'm glad you are not locking or deleting it because I feel that this topic is an important issue that really needs to be addressed.


That's because it falls right into the category of disrespectful judgements... (or is it selfish demands) and a typical and predictable reaction is likely to ensue as this thread amply demonstrates.

However, the originator of this thread did raise a valid point in his post.


I don't believe that this was attempt to control. Maybe I missed it because I didn't read the thread that was originally refered to. As someone who just clicked open a thread, I viewed this post as an attempt to get people to look at their own posting patterns and perhaps consider another perspective.

That people would react so violently to this post has me scratching my head in confusion. 2000 yrs ago, a guy came along encouraging us all to be nice to each other, to treat each other with love... and we nailed him to a cross. Is this human nature? What's the matter with us?

dewt

Well Dewt, I don't think I would equate Jimmy Mack to God. [nor would Jesus live up to Jimmy's sensitivity standards] JM is a nice guy and all, but I would not equate him with Jesus.

Suggesting to others how they should post and lecturing them on their posting styles is controlling behavior. It is manipulating behavior that most normal folks don't take kindly to. It would be like if my neighbor appointed himself the lawn care cop and went around measuring grass heights and demanding that others adhere to his personal yard care standards.

But, even if you want to call it a baloney sandwich, it is a disrespectful judgment that never fails to bring on the kind of angry response we see here. It was inevitable and very predictable. And the crying shame is that much valuable time and energy has been wasted on this foolish thread instead of helping others.

Hopefully, we can use this as a lesson on the folly of trying to control others and move on. Let this be a testament to the pitfalls of controlling behavior.

Well, that's your opinion. Your totally entitled to it.

However, its apparent that the posters on the other side of the issue feel differently.

I tend to think that statements such as the one you just quoted by JM.....are basically telling others (that he DOES NOT agree with, mind you)......"what" THE problem is (In his opinion) ....and what THEY should do to correct it.

YOU agree with him.
Others don't.

It makes no difference to me if energy and time is being spent Debating pure Opinions.......but it does sadden me that this thread is Now 15+ pages long......unlike the original thread that sparked all this debate.

Seems out of balance somehow!

Any way, My take:
[color:"blue"]Give YOUR perspective to the author of a given thread and let THEM sort out the differing styles and perspectives. [/color]


Thankfully we already have mods.......if anyone wants to be one, then please contact the Harley's.

Next,
If you do disagree, then state it once or twice.......then move on.
ITS highly Unlikely YOUR GOING TO Change someone's mind on Here.
{sure haven't seen it happen very often ....if ever}

And I have to agree with Mel, on not real keen on the Jesus and JM comparisons.
Just not a good fit, IMO.
Should you disagree, so be it.

I think that one of the basic issues here is that I have not read the post. So when, for example, you say: "Suggesting to others how they should post and lecturing them on their posting styles is controlling behavior." I read that, and 'others' to me, means a general, non-specific others. To you, 'others' refers to a specific group of people who you feel were publicly disrespected.

Here too, top rope, "I tend to think that statements such as the one you just quoted by JM.....are basically telling others (that he DOES NOT agree with, mind you)......"what" THE problem is (In his opinion) ....and what THEY should do to correct it."

Same thing. I had no idea who 'they' where until this turned into a flame war. I understand why some people might have been offended by some of the posts on this thread, but for me the discussion was never ever about Jimmy, or Mel, or anyone... it's about the principles involved.

I still haven't read the post that sparked this. I don't know who said what in what context. Jimmy didn't name names in his original post, so to me, AT THAT TIME it was a generalized statement that he was making, not a deliberate jab at specific people.

My arguments, throughout this thread, have been based on that perception. Yours have been based on another. Hence our agreement in principle, but not in practice.

Communication is a wonderful thing. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

As for equating Jimmy with Jesus, well, that certainly wasn't my intent. I was actually trying to point out the similarity in our reactions. I guess I could've picked a better example. Sorry to have offended.


I see why it would seem that way.

But remember, I haven't read the original post. My posting and position is based on the things I quoted in my last post. These are issues that have been raised repeatedly here on MB.

I feel very strongly about them because 6 years ago I came to MB as a wayward.

I was welcomed wholeheartedly and made to feel cared about by the people that were posting here. It was a caring environment. Somehow, over the years, that has changed and while I don't start preachy threads on this subject, I certainly won't back down from a discussion in progress. I am not a behaviour cop, but certainly have a right to express my opinions.

Especially if I can do it in a way that is respectful.

John

I wasn’t around yesterday but after I’ve catch up on the thread this morning, I was deeply saddened and disappointed to see how this thread turned out... However, I’m glad to see the moderators stepped in…

Blessed TIME, I hope you are still lurking and will see this message… I want to say, I for one, also enjoyed your posts and I’m also disappointing to see you being treated this way by ‘veterans’. Please remember, ALL people make mistakes and NO ONE is perfect, and therefore NO ONE in this world have the right to point fingers to you and keep your past mistakes against you…especially not if you have acknowledged that you were wrong, seek forgiveness for it from the person you’ve hurt with your words, learned from your mistakes and improved & better yourself as a result thereof... And Blessed Time, the fact is, you have take all the necessary steps above. If people still want to keep those things against you and dig up things from the past which is not relevant anymore, it’s their problem, not yours… I hope you will stay and keep contributing to these boards. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Blessings,
Suzet

Suzet
If people still want to keep those things against you and dig up things from the past which is not relevant anymore, it’s their problem, not yours

Do you REALLY not see why BTs vicious post to me was relevent when she was lecturing posters on how to post nicely ? Do you not see her hypocrisy ?

Bob, I specifically went back and reread that quote. And yep, you were right, that post crossed the line.

However, a) that was one post, a year ago.
And b) BT has apologized.

It may be relevent, but I certainly don't believe that it justifies the treatment dealt out to BlessedTime. She's here, participating in a (somewhat haggard) discussion and bringing up good points and has been flamed right off the boards.

You may have had a point in quoting her post, but it was a stale point, and the way BT has been treated overshadows and drowns any point you were trying to make.

I'm seeing astounding levels of hypocracy. BT's post is a very very small example. Nearly insignificant when compared to the other overwhelming, blatant hypocricies that fill this thread.

dewt

Bob, I see BT’s past post to you not as relevant anymore since she has acknowledged her mistake and seek your forgiveness long ago… And since she has learned from her mistake and the hurt she has caused you, I don’t see her posts on this thread has hypocritical… The fact that BT had made mistakes in the past don’t meant that she can’t point out that same behavior in others if she recognize it now… If she would still post vicious & insensitive posts to members and not practice what she preach then yes, I would view it as hypocrisy…but this is clearly not the case with her here.

To make my point clearer to you: The fact that I’m a FWW doesn’t mean that I can’t point out infidelity/betraying behavior in other WS’s now… I’m also not a hypocrite if I recognize and preach/lecture about such behavior now. It would be hypocritical if I would still continue betraying my H and preach/lecture to others about infidelity at the same time…

Can you see what I mean?

BT has persistently attacked me on these boards, the only reason I couldn't repost THOSE is because they violated site terms and conditions so were deleted. Most recent one was a few weeks ago.

Whatever lesson she learned from her "mistake" evidently did not lead to her stopping personal attacks on me.

If BT had said 'treat posters nicely except Bob because I have taken an active dislike to him" that would have been fine, but to coo about niceness to posters when she has repeatedly attacked me on the boards is hypocrasy IMO.

Bob, I wasn’t aware of this and I’m sorry to hear this… I understand your feelings now... I really thought it was over a long time ago… <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Suzet

I wasn't aware of it either. I too have a better understanding of your feelings.

And please understand Bob, I'm not defending nor attacking anyone in particular, just the concepts.

I do understand your feelings, and wanna use them to further illustrate my point... using a disrespectful judgement to convey a message is not only ineffective but often enough will have the opposite effect of what you're looking for.

Also, in light of the above, using DJ will eventually come back and bite ya in the....

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

John

I guess it helps to practice what you preach, huh? Bob, I know you aren't looking for sympathy, but I am so terribly sorry that you had to endure that abuse from her. My blood boils just remembering the mindless attacks you endured at the most despairing moments of your crisis. It's a testament to your strength that you didn't leave and a shame on her.

Mel

I've endured a lot worse, and the recent attacks were easily repelled. Its no big deal, except that BT offered herself up as some bucolic gardenin' "grammaw" when in truth she was either THAT ( Blessed Time) OR an unapologetic infidel (Sarie) and in any case an unrestrained deliberately hurtful poster ( my sit).

It reinforces teh wider topic nicely IMO.

To deliberately and knowing say sonmething that can only hurt is a bad thing to do particularly when posters here may be very low.

But to WITHOLD strong words when strong words are due is not a kindness. YOU know you ( and others) kicked my [censored] back in the day Mel and I was no fan at teh time, but I did what was needed.

Somedays you have to turn the other cheek and some days you have to physically THROW the moneylenders out of the temple.

If its done with love and is appropriate I see no problem with giving or receiving firm words. And the only peron who can judge appropriateness is the receiver of the words.

I would die in a heartbeat to defend my kids but that doesn't spare them firm correcting words from me if they are needed.