My neice's birthday was today and I went to the birthday party. Well, H and Ow also went! It was miserable. I tried my best to stay in the other room away from her, but Julie being Julie sought me out and said "Patti, I'm sorry, I didn't know you were here, I would have said hello earlier" and then she proceeded to hug me!! OMG!! She is ridiculous. I thought I was going to lose it. Another of my SIL's saw the exchange and told me I should have put my arms out to stop her from hugging me and told her to go away. Why can't I do that??? I hate her..that is for sure...but I just can't tell her what I want to say to her. I don't get it!! We were friends for so long and that is probably where this inability to tell her to go to ##LL comes from. She can do what she did to me and family, but I can't tell her where to go...WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME!!! When they were getting ready to leave, she hugged me again!! and said "It was nice seeing you...I'll talk to you later"...YEAH RIGHT!! Then my husband proceeded to walk right past me!! Well, I stopped him and I hugged him!! Next weekend is my MIL's birthday and she told me she "expects" me to be there. I wish they would understand how hard this is for me and let me just go see them on my own. My son thinks I should go to the party next weekend too because if I don't it is letting her win. I just don't know anymore. today was so hard and I don't know if I can go through it again soon. Oh well....just another dilemma to work through. thanks for "listening"!
BH

BH,
Sorry that you had to edure this today!!! UGH!!! I can't imagine!!!

You are not a mean hateful person and that is why you can't say the things that you really want to say!!

How about using some of orchid's babble talk, when Julie hugs you and says "Patti, I'm sorry, I didn't know you were here, I would have said hello earlier" You say, "Julie I did see you."
And then walk off. Who won? You!!! and you weren't mean!! That's the best part!!!

I am with your son I guess and since you have been invited you should go as your MIL wants you to be there. You just can't let Julie get the better of you. Plan what it is you are going to say if an encounter arises. Don't be mean though, that gives her ammunition against you with H or kids or anybody else!!!

Other then Julie how are you doing??

Dawn <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" />

BH,

Did someone say Orchid babble!??!?! LOL!! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

My 2 cents:
1. "J, (sniff) are you wearing Jack Daniels or
Black Velvet again?"

2. When she stumbles to try and hug you:
Hold her off and say: "oh, I thought you only
wanted to hug other men?"

Ok BH now go practice. You have another family function to attend and this time you need to be ready for whatever. Expect her to try to and smooze up to you. Plan how you will react.

IMHO,
L.

Ps: Don't hug your XH. It can make you appear needy and we know you are much better than the both of them.

Hi Dawn and Orchid,
Thanks for the great advice. After talking to my sister, I don't know what to think. She lectured me for 1/2 hour on how I have to stop letting them walk all over me. She thinks that because I didn't cause a scene when Julie hugged me that I let her make a fool of me. The way I am trying to look at it is that I am not letting them walk over me, I am trying to hold my head up high and not let them stop me from going to the things I want to go to. Maybe she is right and I should have caused a scene, but that is just not me. Believe me, I wish I could have pushed her away! Sorry for the vent...I have been crying since I hung up from her and just needed to get this off my chest.

One thing I was thinking of is maybe calling Julie and saying something like "When we are the same party or see each other for any reason, I do not want you to touch me, hug me, or talk to me...I am not your friend nor will I ever be...do you understand?" I think I could say that over the phone, but I don't think I could do it in person.

You gotta love that OrchidBabble! Thanks for the suggestions and I will practice, practice, practice! Orchid..I will try to resist in hugging my H, I think I did it because I was thinking...."If I have to be subjected to a hug from Julie...then you can be subjected to a hug from me!" and it felt great to see him squirm!
Thanks again!

Dawn...I am doing pretty good! I'm still working at Sears but have an interview on Tuesday for a receptionist position at an Insurance company about 2 minutes from my house. Hopefully, I will get that! Thanks for asking! How are you doing? Are you still doing OK after the surgery?
BH

Hey BH! Just let ME take care of Julie, ok??? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> One of my favorite responses to outrageous jerks is "I BEG YOUR PARDON?" with a very stern look. Very simple, easy to remember and works every time!

Either that or you could take Orchid with you next time and let her talk Orchidbabble to her!

Good to see ya!

"I wish they would understand how hard this is for me ..... "

Well .... "wishing" is not working now, is it? Evidently you are not clear when you communicate your feelings of disgust. Allowing the "hug of death" from former friend and current adultress, julie, gives her what message? ..... How does that acceptance of her nasty hug help julie, the adultress, understand your pain?

Personally, I think you should throw up all over her. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

Hugging your husband, the adulteror, is also giving him the message that you are OK with being treated with carelessness and disrespect .....

You convey a very ambiguous attitude, I think. Are you ambiguous on the inside too? Do you have some lack of conviction tucked away that keeps you from being assertive?

This is an area where I think you can probably improve. This may be one of the reasons your daughter accepts the adulterors .... she sees you allowing yourself to be "just one big happy family" .....

What do you want??? Find out. Do a deep search inside yourself. Then, allow your outsides to match your insides.

<small>[ February 02, 2003, 08:53 PM: Message edited by: Pepperband ]</small>

BH, at least tell your Inlaws how you feel about being confronted by Julie and tell them you do not want to make a scene, but you will tell her off next time!
When Julie approaches you, turn and walk away!
If she persist, tell her how you feel. No bones about it. You don't have to put up with this in your face stuff and your inlaws should make sure you don't have to.
Actually, for family gatherings, they're wrong for allowing her to enter their home with your H.
He should be told to leave her at home!
Otherwise, accidently trip her next time. Hehe.
Make your she has a drink in her hand too!
LouLou

Very good, Pepperband!

BH, excuse me if I am mistaken, but isn't your divorce final? My comments are based on that, and would be different if it is not final.

First let me say I know you were treated badly. If your H wanted to leave the marriage he could have done so in a much more respectful and responsible manner. You conducted yourself well, probably deserve a medal. Likewise julie, as your friend, owed you some honesty and restraint, despite the powerful forces that govern human bonding behaviour.

IMO there are two issues when committed relationships end. One, is whether you want to continue to have any relationship at all with each other....the second is letting go of (understandable, but unhealthy) feelings of anger, vengeance, and such. Most have an interest in the first issue, a continuing relationship, especially if there was a long history, and/or children....and less so if there was serious abuse, or pronounced personality disorders. The difficulty lies in accepting that the intimate relationship has ended, and trying to craft a more general familial relationship. Part of the difficulty seems to lie in considering spouses as a sort of emotional property, and their "loss" as some kind of personal affront (rejection of you, theft by some op, failure of character by ws/bs/op etc.). Regardless of how someone leaves a marriage, it is about them, and each of us has a right to do so, marriage can never be anything but a free choice it would seem. This is at least annoying and often devastating if one party does not want the marriage to end, leading to the issues mentioned above. It seems the advice/observations/comments made post-divorce often keep that unhealthy behaviour alive.

BH it serves no purpose, and does you no good to feud with your exh and whoever he has a relationship with, it is his life, all you can do is respect it (as we each want people to respect our relationship choices). I think you know that, we all inherently do, and that is why you "appear" somewhat ambiguous. Nothing is gained by demonizing julie, or nursing illwill. She did not "steal" your H, or break up your marriage. The marriage failed on it's own merits and because the two people in it, for whatever reasons, could not sustain it. It is impossible for any op to make someone leave a marriage if they do not want to do so. Whether a given marriage should end is a subject of endless debate, but in the end is an intensely personal decision, one no one can make for another, not even the other spouse. It is life, and each of us is empowered to live it as we see fit.....from this fact we experience both the special joy of being "chosen" and risk the awful hell of being rejected...one is not possible without the other...there are no gaurantees.

IMO the healthy response to being "left" is to not embrace bitterness, anger, vengeance, ill-behaviour...but to accept the vagaries of life and look forward to the future, with hope, goodwill, and as little self-pity as possible. To that end, assuming ones exspouse is reasonably civil and not a danger (economically, physically, or mind-games) the focus should be on appropriate boundaries, working on letting go of relationship emotions, and civil conduct in return. Such efforts IMO bear the best fruit, and result in the least long-term trauma. The point is, if someone does not want to remain in an intimate relationship with you, it makes no difference how they leave, the grief is pretty much the same, cause the relationship is over, and that fact transcends any possible reason why/how it ended. To focus on how awful an affair was, and how disrespectful to a bs, and how painful and so forth, just keeps someone stuck and focused on a sort of victim mentality...a focus we know is unhealthy.

In your case BH, what purpose is served by maintaining a hardheart toward julie? What purpose would be served by a "scene"? You are both (apparently she is I assume) part of the same extended family, and are going to be in each others presence from time to time, is a feud what you want? What purpose is served by acting in a manner that stresses her relationship with your exh? Would you do that with any other woman he chose? Or single out this woman for righteous judgement? What about other people you come to know and then find out they have a similar past? Is this just about affairs? What about people who have behaved poorly in the many many ways humans can misbehave...how about you BH, and other posters on this thread? The point being julie and your exh should be judged and responded to according to their present behaviour, not in response to (understandable) feelings of anger and vengefullness. Whether their relationship works or not (and odds are against it because it was not entered into in a healthy manner), why not wish them the best, and not be a party to disrupting it?

As difficult as it may be (and it surely is one of the most difficult things one can do) letting him (and your friend go) is the most healthy thing you can do for you, and not contributing to their marital stress (by gratuitious illwill in the family) contributes to your character, and in thusly your healing and well-being.

So what to do? Well, I sure don't think you have to hang out with anyone you prefer not to. So avoiding them is one thing, but don't shortchange yourself or deny yourself activities and such you want (more on that in a minute). Don't involve your in-laws in choosing sides, or abetting a feud, let them make their own choices and respect that. Don't insult, or otherwise agress julie, you are not in compeition, she didn't win anything. But likewise you are entitled to your boundaries, and regardless of whether julie and your H should be together, she did violate your trust. Perhaps it is never possible for a friendship to recover from ones spouse and best friend choosing each other, I don't know, human mating relationships are just plain complicated and hard to figure (and no love is NOT just a decision, it is a lot of things, some very poorly understood). But it seems if a spouse can be attracted to a best friend enough to mutually pursue, it pretty well means the marriage may not work anyways, but that is a heated debate (I am sure) for another day. So the violation of trust may be enough for you to call it permanently quits, but I am curious BH, aside from the conflict over your exH, do you like julie? Or has not only the affair itself, but the greater insight you have had into who julie is been unattractive to you? I realize most people cannot get past the kneejerk reaction to someone "stealing" ones spouse and making that the defining characteristic...but you seem a fair-minded person, and on occassion seemed to have expressed a wider range of consideration (but then I could be wrong, and maybe you hate her guts).

Be that as it may, you certainly don't have to accept hugs from anyone you do not want to, and I find julies behaviour (as reported by you here) to be a bit phoney, but I suspect she is trying to mend fences with you (and clearly does not have a clue how to go about that). I think it very appropriate for you to arrange a private chat with her, and tell her firmly, but civily to respect your boundaries. I don't know that I agree with some kind of trashing, or humilitating response...If she accepts this, fine, if not, then a more aggressive response is in order later....you need to feel safe and comfortable (within reason, right or wrong life is not just about you though) at family gatherings etc. As for your H, and hugging him, well if it was an honest hug, and ok with him, fine...but I hope it was not a manipulative effort to feud with julie, that would not be a good choice IMO. I think you can recover your self-esteem and find joy, and hope again, without doing it over julies body.

BH, I wrote this for you, not to support julie or your exH, I truly believe thinking and wishing the best for people, even when one feels injured by them, is better for you. But by all means have appropriate boundaries and empower yourself to enforce them. This not easy, but in the long run you will be as healthy as you decide to be, and embracing vindictive thoughts and behaviour will not help that effort.

I have to go to work and don't have time to respond right now but I just wanted to let Lurking know that our divorce is not final yet and neither is her divorce is. they are not married but they are living together and are engaged...nice...they are both still legally married but they are engaged! What a world! I'll respond to the posts after work. Thanks for the great responses! Gives me a lot to think about.
BH

LurkingAbout: "Part of the difficulty seems to lie in considering spouses as a sort of emotional property .... "

For some people .... FAMILY is considered emotional property ..... and ruthless tresspassers are not warmly hugged!

I did not hug the man who stole my car either .... was I wrongly emotionally tied to my vehicle?

LA ..... emotional ties to family are healthy in my opinion.

well that is a different animal then BH, and their behaviour (as well as your in-laws) unacceptably insensitive, if not down-right emotionally abusive. I suppose seperation pending divorce is tantamount to an ended relationship (in effect divorce is Biblical, happens when either party says I am done and leaves the "tent").... still we have the legalities which (besides clarifying economic issues) we recognize, as a culture having, marking the boundary between singledom and marriage, and should be recognized in terms of behavioural choices....ie respecting the sensibilities of the other spouse, kids, family, and society in general. I would include myself with those who say flaunting a relationship, particularly one with as much baggage as starting from an affair, in ways such as you have described says a lot about the character of those who do it (and not admirable character).

I still suspect julie may be dealing with a lot of guilt she is burying and is trying to show she wants to "make-up", but then again maybe she is a calculating witch, and is trying to ingratiate herself with in-laws, while simultaneously provoking you into angry outbursts/scenes that push you away from the family. But regardless if her motivation (and heck, she may even be just an emotional numbnuts who hasn't a clue as well), her behaviour is breathtakingly insensitive and reveals her to be dangerous to your emotional well-being. My concern is you, and the best way to deal with dangerous stuff, is to stay away from it. Since you cannot physically gaurantee you are away from her, then clearly telling her your boundaries, while also working on your own internal efforts to relegate her to emotional nonentity status, is the way to go. Any kind of aggressive, or confrontational efforts actually generate a "relationship" with julie. I would not go there unless you seek clarification and continued friendship, and believe she is worthy of such. IMO one is better served seeking "indifference" than conflict with someone you wish as mininmal a relationship as possible. While dislike, hate, anger are not thought of as relationships, in fact they are...In fact they can (far to often) be the basis of marriages as well.

pepper..For some people .... FAMILY is considered emotional property ..... and ruthless tresspassers are not warmly hugged!

la..family is never property, we have a name for that, is slavery. Whether you attempt to bind one with chains, or emotional manipulation (do we really need to go into the myriad of dysfunctional "family" behaviours carried out in the name of "you belong to me" visited on children and spouses) it is still a dangerous mindset. Obsession of any kind is not healthy. IMO the only proper way to actually find marital love, and successful intimacy is realize we are all independent human beings and have a right to choose who we want to be intimate with (and I do not mean sexual, but the whole unique condition we call oneflesh). That has to be a freely made choice, and thusly can change any time. You cannot (IMO) actually love someone unless you set them free, meaning they can leave (if they feel a need to do so) without rancor, or interference (not to be confused with holding them accountable, which is ok). Without rancor means you wish them the best, and will not act (in thought or deed) to hurt them. If you view them as your emotional property, you are not concerned about their well-being, but your own, hardly love is it.

pepper...I did not hug the man who stole my car either .... was I wrongly emotionally tied to my vehicle?

la..I don't know, were you? Many are <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> You are a smart woman, I am sure you recognize the difference between property and human beings. You cannot "steal" a human being (well, guess you could kidnap, or use mind-altering drugs, then I am with you on the response). People leave (and enter)relationships (whether married or not, and there is no difference in that regard) when they feel they must...there are ways to react to that..MB is all about such reactions.

However, considering yourself the "owner" of your spouse, and doing battle with the op does not seem to work real well. Most ws react poorly to being treated as property. IMO it really boils down to something pretty basic. If a bs carries out a course of action that is based on "ownership" of their spouse, the ws gets the message real quick the marriage is about the bs (which in many cases is why the ws left in the first place..not purposefully, but the dynamics helped create that reaction). IMO when a person feels like they are only valued for what they contribute to someone elses life (ie emotional property), not for themself, then that eliminates the conditions needed for successful intimate, interdependent relationships. The first time you say "you owe me" to someone, you have revealed how you view the relationship, a quid pro quo, a contract, property. You can maintain relationships on that basis, but you then accept it will not be anything more. As you know pepper, thinking you own someone is rampant in relationships, it is the basis of stalking (in worse case), hardly a desireable model for relationships. I think (after a lot of effort to understand all this) intmacy comes in several flavors.

The least fulfilling being ownership based, you are mine, and by God I will fight to keep you in my grasp, because that is what I WANT FOR ME. These relationships are often rocky, rarely very nurturing, but they stumble along, and heaven help any op (real, or percieved) that gets in the middle...and heaven help any spouse who tries to escape. These relationships are often marked with lots of jealous, needy, controlling, manipulative behaviours, and based on getting MY needs met (mostly fear of being alone, not taken care of). Such marriages are generally recognized as unhealthy.

The next range would be behaviourally based marriages, following MB type guidelines. This is an attempt to introduce rule based structure that reduces the behaviours of ownership based relationships, thereby createing at least a reasonably safe enviroment. If enough needs are successfully met, then a combination of kids, security, etc. will combine to make it stable. How intimate it is is another story, cause rules have nothing to do with oneflesh issues. I suspect also many people try to apply MB type concepts but are still possessive at heart, and that will be felt, and have consequences.

The last range of relationship are ones where both people are self-actualized, and do not view the other as property, or owing them anything at all. They are ok with themselves, and focused on the well-being of the other. If both bring this to the relationship there can be great trust, transparentcy, and interdependentcy. Because there is no expectation of ownership (or emotional debt), either being free to leave without rancor, the relationship is enabled to achieve the greatest intimacy possible for that particular pair. These are not very common (because it requires people who know themselves well, and in addition are psychologically healthy), but they do happen. I am convinced the primary test of love, is the willingness to let someone go, and that is the opposite of viewing someone as emotional propery (regardless of applying the "family" euphemism...we are all family pepper, everyone of us are kissing cousins essentially to each other, it is a very small genepool).

Anyways certainly it makes sense to be protective of (immediate) family. And to question the motivations of op. Oftentimes they do not have honorable intentions (but then so often do not pursuers in dating, or marriage, such is life), and discerning that and defending against it makes sense. But this is not car theft, and right or wrong, many marriages just are not going to work well, and if ones spouse forms an attachment with op, all you can (and should do, MB seems pretty much to agree) is leave it be, let your spouse work it out for themself, and make their own decisions (as they must). Concentrating on yourself, and letting who you are (at your best) be the choice they see (and likewise the bs is doing the same, don't get "competitive", but really take this time to see who your spouse really is, and whether you really want that). Becoming possessive is not helpful, and reveals a flaw in your own character. If a spouse leaves, let them go with dignity, goodwill, and well-wishes...if you can't do that, you never loved them at all. (and you may come to realize that may be true, and is good riddance, but at least be civil for your own sake).

btw pepper, I agree emotional ties are important, but therein lies the conundrum, if they are important than love is not just a decision. However, hiding dysfunctional emotional property behind healthy emotional connections does not make it ok either.

<small>[ February 03, 2003, 10:04 AM: Message edited by: LurkingAbout ]</small>

LA ~~~~~

I find myself happily married. We enjoy a healthy relationship that nurtures growth and development of the family as a group, as well as the individuals themselves. Ownership of each other, or slavery is not even close to describing our emotional environment. In my opinion, based on my experience, you are incorrect. I realize your life has been very different from mine. Our journeys are not at all alike .... and thus, our perspectives are dynamically different. There is a vast difference between feelings of love and connection ( and BELONGING) within members of a family relationship .... and feeling like a slave or a slave-owner owner. I have not experienced love and connection the same way you have.

<small>[ February 03, 2003, 10:52 AM: Message edited by: Pepperband ]</small>

BH, as long as you are still married, your Inlaws should set boundaries in inviting you all to the house at same time.
They are giving the message this is acceptable behavior!
Quite unfeeling I would say. Since it is their home, it is their responsibility in who is invited and when! And it's their responsibility to not rub it in your face.
Quite frankly, if this were one of my children, I would insist if they want to come to my home, the OP be left out until such time as the divorces are final and they are married!
At least until divorces are final!
I set the rules in my home, and unacceptable behavior is one thing I will not tolerate or allow, no matter who it is!
My children know this and if they cross the boundaries, it's their choice. I love them, and will always welcome them, but only are they allowed if it's in a respectable way.
I would not change my moral values for even my children. But then, perhaps the inlaws don't have any either!
This OW is not a part of the family, yet! She is an intruder!
So have that talk with the inlaws. You may tell them you do want to continue your relationship with them, but you cannot tolerate being in the same room,or house with this Woman. It's too painful.
If they can't understand that, they need a brain transplant!
LouLou

I have been posting here nearly four years now, and I recall only one person who so persistantly claims that committment in marriage is irrelevant. Brokenhearted, I would suggest, for your own peace of mind, that you simply ignore the ramblings of "Lurking."

Of course it is perfectly possible for somewhat to entice one party away from a marriage.

What is not healthy would be to pretend that you were ok with the situation.

Thanks for the responses everyone! I don't know where to start in responding to them, especially w/ Lurking. But here goes....

Melody - LOL! The next time I see her, I will try that! I could think of a few people from MB I would love to take with me (you, Jo, Orchid, Pepper, Dawn, just to name a few!!) Thanks ML!

Pepper - You are absolutely right...being assertive and sticking up for myself has always been an area of weakness for me. I don't know why I couldn't just turn away from her. I was sitting down on a chair and she came up to me and bent over to hug me. I didn't hug her back but I didn't push her away either. As for hugging my husband, I know I only did that so he would be uncomfortable. He put me in an uncomfortable position by bringing her there so I took the opportunity to make him feel uncomfortable too. Wrong way to handle it I know, but it did make me feel better. Maybe by trying to put on a strong front, I have portrayed myself to be ambigious but believe me I am not. My kids know just how I feel about the whole situation and that I do not accept the adulterers. I definately have a problem with assertiveness and know that I have to improve in that area. I just don't know how or where to start! Any suggestions?

LadyLou - I forgot to mention in my initial post that I did tell my MIL that being in the same house w/ Julie was too hard for me and that I wouldn't be going to the next party. My MIL told me that even though Julie was going to be at the parties now, it will get easier for me every time, and she expects me to be there. In her eyes I will always be her DIL no matter what. I agree with you that boundaries need to be set and that I have to do that for myself. I like your idea too...I can say "OOPS...did I do that..amI bad... Thanks for the advice LL.

Lurking - Your third assessment of Julie is probably the most accurate...an emotional numbnuts who doesn't have clue! I know that probably sounds petty, but she really doesn't..you will just have to trust me on that one. I think just by her actions, you can see that is true. I honestly don't know how to respond to most of what you wrote, so I am going to re-read it and try to respond intelligently rather than emotionally. You put a lot of thought into your response and I thank you for that! I don't think I agree with most of it, but as I said I am going to read it again and get back to you.

Nellie - Thank you! I truly believe that everyone there knew I was not OK with the situation. The only one who didn't seem to have a clue was Julie, maybe my husband too, but I think he knows me well enough to know that I wasn't OK. I will set some boundaries this week and one of those will be that I will not allow myself to be in the same house w/ her. If that means I don't get to a party I will not go and my in-laws will just have to accept that.

Thanks again everyone for responding. I appreciate it! I'm going to go rest my fingers!
BH

Hi BH
I allways think of you. I really like the advice pepper gave you that was really good.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">One thing I was thinking of is maybe calling Julie and saying something like "When we are the same party or see each other for any reason, I do not want you to touch me, hug me, or talk to me...I am not your friend nor will I ever be...do you understand?" I think I could say that over the phone, but I don't think I could do it in person.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

I also agree with what you wrote above. I believe you will feel better about yourself, if you verbalize how you really feel.

So if what Lurk is saying is true we have a right to leave marriages. Then why is it in the Ten Commandments Thou Shall Not Committ Adultry.

Please read Matt 19.6 everyone these laws was imposed by the Creator because of mindsets like Lurk and other who think you have the right to leave a Marriages to committ Adultry.

Read chapter Matt 19.6 thru 19.12 This was put there for a reason. Discipline
Also read Matt 5.28 thru 32

Lurk you do have a right to your opinion even though I totally disagree. Our society is already dysfunctional because of this type of mindset. Children are literally being scared for life because of, it's about my happiness attitude and Dam any one elses.

Just my opinion.

I don't want to hijack your thread BH, so won't comment on MALC contention no one is allowed to divorce (too bad for all those in emotionally abusive/neglectful/unhealthy marriages I guess... oh well, just their bad luck I suppose). Also no need to "digest" what I wrote anymore (unless you want to of course), was just a bit of a digression with pepper. Until the divorce is final I agree essentially with the position you are being mistreated. Likewise I agree that adultery is unacceptable behaviour, not to be condoned or sought out (however MALC, that is about a specific behaviour, not the whether marriage is a life sentence, no review allowed).

Pepper, I am happy your are in an emotionally healthy, nurturing, safe marriage, but that really wasn't the point. I agree with your comments about families being a "group" for mutual growth and development. But we were talking about viewing your spouse as your property. Provided you are willing to let those in your family lead their lives as they see fit, even if you disagree, then they are not being treated as property...right? That includes your spouse leaveing (the marriage) if he felt that is what was necessary, without your trying to keep him against his will (for your benefit). That is the test (for everyone), it is a simple one, do you want the best for your spouse, or for yourself? If the latter you will try to own them (through various manipulative efforts), and in that effort will limit the depth of the marriage.

pepper...Ownership of each other, or slavery is not even close to describing our emotional environment. In my opinion, based on my experience, you are incorrect.

la...We weren't talking about your circumstances, but about how one psychologically views a spouse. So I am unsure what I am incorrect about. Does that mean you feel Mr. Pepper is your emotional property, and you would not accept a decision to leave you (cause he has no right to do so, since he is your property?). And you would punish him if he did so?

pepper...I realize your life has been very different from mine. Our journeys are not at all alike .... and thus, our perspectives are dynamically different.

la...I agree, ones experiences do bias us all in trying to understand and apply principles. But you do agree there are principles (psychological ones goverening healthy human behaviour), true? Emotional ownership is a principle. You cannot have an interdependent relationship (and that is the healthy kind I think)...if you feel (and thereby will act accordingly) marriage gives you ownership of someone, they are no longer allowed to decide whether to be with you, they owe you. That makes marriage a power based relationship. Let me ask you a hypothetical, few people are capable of doing this, I understand that, but it illustrates the point. Suppose you became aware that you are not able to meet your H needs as well as someone else could (no one in particular, just realizing your own limitations), would you make it clear to your spouse they are free to choose another without rancor on your part? IMO, this is the basis of love, wanting the best for someone else, despite your own desires, that is not what I see voiced most of the time here. What I see is people wanting what they want for them, and little concern for whether that is the best thing for their spouse....much less, being willing to let their spouse decide for themself free of manipulation, guilt, and anger.

pepper...There is a vast difference between feelings of love and connection ( and BELONGING) within members of a family relationship .... and feeling like a slave or a slave-owner owner. I have not experienced love and connection the same way you have.

la...No argument, and I agree we can each decide we "belong" somewhere, that is healthy. Feeling someone "belongs" to you however, is not healthy...cause they don't. I hope you have experienced love and connection, I don't think it feels any different for anyone (principles again, and assuming people with healthy psyches), and you are correct, I have experienced very little, but I know what it feels like when it is right..and when it is wrong.

BH, again let me register my vote for having a private, civil communication with julie re your boundaries, perhaps she will get the message, particularly if delivered without rancor (which probably would just then trigger a numbnuts to work harder at fixing the relationship, that is how numbnuts work)... as for your in-laws, they are free to make the decisions they feel they must (as are you), it is pointless to enter an emotional conflict with them over this. But I would encourage you not to avoid family stuff (unless you really don't want to anyways) over this. The stress will give you opportunity to practice letting go, and adjusting to the coming (apparently) realities of julie in the family. In the meantime you can (hopefully) let yourself enjoy the family stuff. If julie continues to be a pest, just smile in her face, take her hand gently in yours, then grasping her little finger, bend it backwards just to the breaking point, while smiling at her, tell her you bear her no illwill, but if she does not stay out of your face you will most regratably lose control of yourself. If that doesn't work, always have some kind of drink in your hand (tomatoe juice works well), and somehow stumble whenever she comes near and dump it down her front...passive aggression has it's uses.

<small>[ February 04, 2003, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: LurkingAbout ]</small>

Ok Lurk here goes...
My inlaws are being insensitive, that's for sure, but I don't believe they are doing so intentionally. They just don't know any better. They look at this as something that everyone has to get used to, including me. After thinking about this for the last few and reading the responses, I have decided that it is time to think about my well-being and put me first. I am going to take a well-deserved hiatus from the parties (which take place at least once a month, sometimes two, this month it is 3!) Julie is a unique individual (and I don't mean that in a good way!) She is definately an emotional numbnut who doesn't have a clue, but I also see her as being manipulative. She uses situations to her advantage but I don't think she has a clue what she is doing to the people around her. Does that make any sense?
You are right when you say that divorce is biblical, but I think you missed the point of that particular lesson. I don't remember the chapter and verse of the lesson I am referring to, but my interpretation of that lesson was that if one spouse commits adultery then the other spouse is free to leave the tent. God is not giving spouses the freedom to go out and have affairs just because they have the urge for a "unique condition we call oneflesh". If that is not sex, then what is it?? when you marry there is ownership between you, your spouse, and sometimes your extended families. In our case, my husband's family is one that gets together for every birthday, holiday, etc., and I was there for 95% of those parties. So, yes, I feel ownership in a sense and I feel that Julie doesn't have a right to infiltrate my "family". She has already taken my husband...now she wants to break my realtionship w/ the family. I guess a better word than ownership for me is connected. I am so connected with my inlaws (SIL's, BIL, 15 neices and nephews). I know they love me and I love them and I can't stand the thought of her infiltrating my extended family! My emotions are raw that is for sure and I know I can't put myself in these situations any more. I have to give myself time to heal. I will not "make-up" with Julie no matter what. I may in the future (way way in the future) be able to forgive her, but she will never be my friend again. The way you write seems very familiar to me. Were you ever here under a different screen name? Anyway...to continue, I am shocked at your opinion on the proper way to find marital love and successful intimacy! What I am understanding you to say is that spouses have the right to change partners whenever they choose to do so???? because it feels right???? I don't get that at all!! As I said above, your interpretation of the biblical reason for divorce is off base IMHO, as is this rendition of marital love! I have to stop because I am going to end up getting too angry and most of your post was directed to Pepper and she has a far more eloquent way of responding to people. Thanks for your thoughts Lurking .
BH

Lurking~~~

There is a spiritual part of belonging to your mate I just don't think you've experienced.

If you want to use the word "belong" to convey ownership and slavery, then it is your perogative to argue symantics with me. But, I just don't see the point. If you are looking for a way to "rightfully" end your long term marriage because you feel enslaved, then just say so. Most marriages are not made of the same dynamics as yours was/is.

In healthy relationships, there is a belonging that is not akin to slavery/ownership. It is a caring, a tender cherishing of your beloved , and, you own that relationship together. Equally and joyfully yoked.