Susan:

Yeah. But don't quote me. I get confused a lot by all this "personal stuff"! Probably why I got into this mess in the first place. I was one of those "fairy tale" types. Figured that the hard work was "done" 27 years ago. Boy, what a bumbleheaded knucklefoot I was! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" /> <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

-ol' Qfwfq

Q:

Sounds like you are doing.....reasonably well today. As I have said before ( at least I think I have,) it took a long time for us even though *both* of us were supposed to be working on things together. The NSA was an important part of that. It took months of NSA for her to begin to understand that I could be nice to her and not ask for SF. Kind of a "I can finally see that you still love me even when you don't get SF" deal. I wonder if I had read the books years ago if I could have prevented it from getting that bad. Oh well, I had no reason to read them at that point in time. Or at least, I knew no reason, and that's about the same as a motivator.

Since you call it the Lobotomy box, I get the feeling you don't watch it much?

SS

sS:

it's weird. I used to watch the news a lot... until the Clinton/Lewinski nonsense dominated the news. I didn't know that my W was having an A at the time.

I used to watch some of the movie channels. I never watched commercial TV, because the commercials are just too distracting. I liked Farscape, on the "Skiffy" channel, but that's been canceled, so I'll probably not watch that channel anymore either. The only things I'll watch with commercials anymore are the home improvement shows. But even they can be a bit annoying.

Been watching too much of the war news lately. Am cutting back on that so I can read more when I'm home. Stuff like that.

-Qfwfq

I agree with your name for it, I watch about 2 hours a month. Mostly when the kids talk me into watching something with them.

Other than that, I work in the garden, spend time with my W, play with the kids and read. Lots of reading.

And work, did I mention work. I do that sometimes.

SS

Ahem, meaning no disrespect to Peppers H, of course.

<small>[ April 14, 2003, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: still seeking ]</small>

Good plan on the NSA!! My bet is it will lead to positive results in the bedroom. It makes a woman feel secure and loved, not just like a sexual outlet.

I'd do anything for more NSA. Heck, I would've done anything for more NSA prior to my A last spring.

I feel like I'm just a sex object when any and every hug leads to my H groping me sexually.

Jen

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Page 339...Don't identify with your feelings. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I believe I can shed some light on this...maybe?

Q, you'll recall our conversations about the Emotional Self vs. the Real Self, right?

I believe Schnarch here is referring to that exactly when he says "...the feelings we defend usually aren't the ones we want."

When we identify ourselves and base our perception of who we are on our feelings, we tend to be ruled by them, and many of these feelings are ego-driven, and make no sense. Things such as being a victim, blaming others for our problems, etc.

When we learn to separate those ego-driven feelings from our real feelings, then we can become more honest and less victims, we can take more responsibility for our own failings rather than blame othersa for them, etc.

I firmly believe in this, as I've learned to see it in myself. One can "observe" oneself, see the anger rising when an event occurs, we can hear the words that we say in response, and we can then more coldly, with detachment, analyze what happened. Most of the time we'll find this was unjustified and was a purely defensive or attacking posture, entirely not necessary or "real", an ego-driven reaction not related to the person or event that occured, but a learned reaction based on our interpretation of that event, based on past history, not necessarily on the current occurence.
When we see this, and we continue to do it as much as we can, become present, we will soon see that there is a clear distinction between this "self" that reacts and attacks, and our "real" self...the observer, the one who can less emotionally view the event and logically reach conclusions about it. THAT is our real self, not the one who lashed out in anger or frustration...that one is a product of our ego.

I believe this is what Schnarch means...don't identify with those feelings that are the product of your ego, identify rather with the "real" feelings...those that are reasoned and true...that come from your real self. Those are the important ones. And more importantly, don't believe that "who you are" is those emotions arising from ego; recognize that there is another more real, more honest "self" in there and identify "who you are" with that one.

SC:

Cool! I was going to look that up! But you did it for me!

I think you're analysis is right on. Thanks a herd!

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> Qfwfq

Thanks you two...excellent explaination.

You made it sound so clear and simple. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

Susan

<small>[ April 15, 2003, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: Susan ]</small>

Perhaps this merits some expansion. This s part of a post I wrote somewhere else, but it's my view of this very theme:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">...“who am I?”. Am I the “thinker”? that being which is constantly generating a stream of thoughts in our mind? That being which is so tied to the physical body; its feelings, emotions, pain? That being which experiences touch, sound, smells, and all our emotional reactions and physical acts?
If so, how is it that we can “observe” that being? Because we can, right? We can observe that being and see how “it” reacted to something, how the emotion that was brought on by a given experience came, what it “caused” that being to do, say or feel, and how the emotion subsided or mutated into something else. We can observe it and see how it screamed or jumped, or did something. Many times something we later regret. Something that says “why in the world did I do/say/think that!?”. Well…so if we can observe that being, who is doing the observing? It can’t be the same being, can it?....I believe “the observer” is our soul, our “real” being, the one we REALLY are. But that one is not always present; that one is more ethereal, less tangible, less present in our daily activities. I think this is because that being is NOT tied to our physical body. That being, who we really are, is part of a larger whole, that community of united souls that is part of the universe, part of all we see, feel, touch, and all that we do not see, feel, or touch. It is outside of our physical body, so it is not always present where our body is, certainly not always present in our conscious mind.
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">

Uh, Oh! Did I get a little TOO weird there? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />

I don't think so, SC. Just everyone got drawn away about the BBQ!

<img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" /> Qfwfq

Sounds VERY Eastern Philosohically speaking -

I think therefore I am capable of getting back to being one with the universe. I have MUCH respect for DEEP thinkers....

More about Schnarch and "feelings":

""Many people assume we are our feelings. It sounds validating and accepting of feelings, but it creates other problems: If you identify with your feelings - that is, if you get your identity from your feelings - then you cann't afford to have them change. You'll feel like you won't know who you are. When you have a stable sense of self, your feelings can come and go like the weather. I've seen people who have an identity as a "hot head" start to get angry when they encounter a novel situation even though they're not really mad. Getting angry reinforces their identity and organizes whatever is unfamiliar into familiar patterns."

-Schnarch, p. 60.

-ol' Qfwfq

To your post on the prior page Space, yes- getting philosophical... I liked it. I loved philosopy and that was one thing I was so drawn to about my current WH,... if anyone can believe it... he was at one time quite deep... we read books together, and had many deeper level conversations... he was attracted to my intelligence first.. more later. Me too.

Anyway, I am glad you ananlyzed this theory, thanks to Q and the others here too...

I feel a little better being reminded that I am not the emotions I feel... If I 'feel' depressed, down, angry, sad, low, mad, etc. - it doesn't mean I am. Who I am is different than all of that...thanks for the reminder, b/c WS at times would have me be- angy and depressed, as a definition of me....WHATEVER? FOg is blaming me.... I know, I know...

Sorry to ramble.. I have been on the rollercoaster these past few days and I am having a lot of trouble knowing how to respond to wh when I do talk to him, which should be later today b/c the kids will be with him....or are suppossed to be for friday - sunday.. ugh. Anyway have to have lunch with parents today and I was only in the mood for a short lunch thing, and now they have called to inform me they have heated their pool so we can all swim... woohoo... my kids may like it, but I am so NOT in the mood for family...

Sorry for the digressions.

Thanks, H

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Qfwfq:
<strong>More about Schnarch and "feelings":

""Many people assume we are our feelings. It sounds validating and accepting of feelings, but it creates other problems: If you identify with your feelings - that is, if you get your identity from your feelings - then you cann't afford to have them change. You'll feel like you won't know who you are. When you have a stable sense of self, your feelings can come and go like the weather. I've seen people who have an identity as a "hot head" start to get angry when they encounter a novel situation even though they're not really mad. Getting angry reinforces their identity and organizes whatever is unfamiliar into familiar patterns."

-Schnarch, p. 60.

-ol' Qfwfq</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This is excellent. A very clear way of putting it, and the truth, through and through. Thanks Q!

I would say "whoops" that is what I get for skipping around, but I actually read p. 60. I have a bookmark on p.151 and over on p.347 <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

There is so much information in this book, it is hard to absorb it all at once.

Thanks Q!

XOXO
Suz

Susan:

Hey, there you are! Now all we need is for Pepper to come back!

Hope your time away was good!
-ol' Qfwfq

I'm here, I never really left...just got a bit busy. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="images/icons/tongue.gif" />

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> Now all we need is for Pepper to come back </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Her work/job is probably saying the same thing! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> I think Pep is dealing with a lot and probably not at a computer lately.

Hopefully she will be back soon. I hope she didn't break her MB addiction in all this time away. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

We luv you Pep!

Suz

<small>[ April 18, 2003, 12:59 PM: Message edited by: Susan ]</small>

From: Schnarch, p. 60.
I won't quote it again, as I worry how many 1's and 0's the MB server can hold.

It is interresting to see this discussed.

All of us have to learn to let go of these conterproductive feelings and the actions that come from them if we want to improve ourselves.

This more or less shows what Q has done as he finds better ways to react to his W's troubles. She hasn't learned it yet, so she isn't growing as fast.

My expernance is that it is actually fun once you learn you can do it. I still shock my W some days. If she makes a really bad blunder she *still* expects me to get angry. When I comfort her and help her instead I can sometimes see the wonder in her face. I know she is asking, " where has my old H gone?"

It is fun to know I can change what I used to think was *me*. Self improvement is fun! Especially because it results in a much better relationship with my W.

SS

SS:

You are so right! Yesterday, after my W and D got home from work, she was tired as usual. My D made dinner, and my W made strawberry shortcake for dessert (Yum!). No big things for the evening, just watching the Lobotomy Box. But I noticed that she was actually a bit cheerful last night. Probably the first time I can remember feeling this from her in years. Not like laughing at jokes on the tube or anything like that. Just an observation, a feeling. It was nice. She's also becoming incrementally more affectionate (NSA, that is) than in the past (very slight, but with this new "observer's" viewpoint, I can SEE it better). She fell asleep holding my hand.

But then, she woke up in the middle of the night crying from a nightmare about the house. She told me about it, and it was pretty bad. I have nightmares like that some, too. But most of mine were about RM or something else related to her A. I even had one of those for the first time in a while just 2 nights ago. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Frown]" src="images/icons/frown.gif" />

But today is another day! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> With more "opportunities!" <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="images/icons/cool.gif" />

♥Qfwfq