Originally posted by lurking24:
Some of you seem more comfortable zoning out on anti-deps

LOL <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> .... Anti-depressants have NO STREET VALUE because they do NOT "zone" you out.

Sorry, this is just an incorrect statement.

You may have been misinformed along the way.

Pep

lurking24 said...
Why not take Glenn's question at face value and stick to discussing the pros and cons?

I think people are ...some don't like me don't see any pros to the idea...

The question, to me, is whether its a good idea to pursue an independent social life during plan A. I'd say its a great idea, even if it gives the appearance of 'dating'. This way you're in good shape regardless of which way the marriage goes.

the question was should one pretend date to try to get the WS back....

and actually LOR nailed this one...
dead on...

Say you even PRETEND date with a friend and it works...Ws sees the error of their ways...and comes back...

but you can't have that person as a friend anymore...

certainly the WS believes you romantically dated..because that is what you set out to show or say to them....so he or she will want them out of your life...

and the BS certainly will say no contact to the WS's OP who wasn't pretend but the real thing...

now whats the BS gonna say now that WS is back...
about their "pretend dates"
oh honey we were pretend dating just to make you jealous...
ofcourse I can still be friend with my "pretend date"...
now lets talk about your dishonesty issue.... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

seriously...
even if pretend dating works...you've sold you own beliefs on honesty...and marriage vows...


If what you're doing isn't working then change tactics. There's more than one way to skin a cat, isn't there?

changing tactics and skinning cats is a good thing...selling yourself and what you believe is right and wrong is a whole other ballgame...

ARK

Point taken, Ark. But to clarify, I don't see why, in the event of a reconciliation, one has to ban opposite-sex friends who invited you to dinner, a concert, whatever. (Nancy Reagan did it all the time.) It's good to have some opposite-sex friendly comfort, as long as the friends know what the score is and what the limits are, so no one feels used or betrayed and one isn't sexually luring someone with fake availability. And as long as going to a concert with the friend is legitimate as an event in itself, and doesn't "count" only if one's spouse sees one.

Again, I think the point is to begin having your own life, not having one's WS seeing you have your own life.

MS. MARTIN...

point well taken....except the first post is all about 'pretending' to date to win a spouse back...
using a specific person who is on the secret to pretend to be interested romantically with the BS in an effort to delude the WS into noting that others will want to be with you...

a person used even when they are in on the secret would no be welcomed by the FWS...as a friend...

and I would argue/debate that going out with male friends even for companionship while dealing with a WS who one wants to reconcile with is playing with fire...
that the boundaries of male/female relationships are so out of tune with the marriage...that it just invites more chaos....
one on one...that is...

more other stuff for the WS to use to deflect responsibility from their own actions on to the BS...

more wasted time on "other stuff" than the real core issues at hand....

Now I am all for having your own life...and being independant...
and not being accountable to a WS for where you are and what you are doing...
but actually using another person to make a point to the Ws crosses a line that I think is playing with fire....


I amazed at my willpower to never debate on this board...
isn't everyone... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" />

ark

But to clarify, I don't see why, in the event of a reconciliation, one has to ban opposite-sex friends who invited you to dinner, a concert, whatever.
For the same reason the bs bans opposite sex friendships the ws has with the op, especially if it “appeared” you were dating. How is the ws to believe, “nothing went on”. The bs doesn’t believe it when the ws says nothing went on.

It's good to have some opposite-sex friendly comfort, as long as the friends know what the score is and what the limits are,
That’s the “slippery slope”. Most of the time the ws started out EXACTLY like that with the op.

Also, Harley specifically says to stay away from this type of “comfort” because it DOES tend to lead to things getting out of hand, because you are getting something from them and you are in a stinkhole of a marriage.
“I’m having fun with this person and my spouse is a turd.” This builds more resentment against the spouse and builds the LB with this “fun” person.

Again, I think the point is to begin having your own life, not having one's WS seeing you have your own life.
But the point of the thread was to let your spouse see you dating (you’re becoming “unavailable”) so they would want you.

Homer McDonald (the person who says to date) also says one thing you should do is agree with EVERYTHING the ws says. Not that you shouldn’t be confrontational, but literally agree with everything they say. Then when you are not defending yourself, they will do it for you.
I see where this may work (same as dating may work, but so will kidnapping the ws and brainwashing <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> ) but if you agree with everything (same as lying), then your spouse will not understand anything you want.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Chris -CA123:
<strong> kam,
Well said. Work on your side of the equation and WALK THE WALK.
Me? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" />
Cause, yes I do see that post could be directed at some of my posts.
If it wasn't posted to me, then never mind... <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />
. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Since I seem to have confused you, let me clarify...I was agreeing with you. LOL!

Since I seem to have confused you, let me clarify...I was agreeing with you. LOL!
Couldn't tell if you were telling ME to shut my word hole & walk-the walk.

<small>[ January 27, 2004, 02:52 PM: Message edited by: Chris -CA123 ]</small>