never,
I wanted to give you an excellent post that Pepperband had in a discussion about "boundaries" as well as some other recent discussions about "boundaries" from some threads over on EN. Hope this helps:
from Pepperband:Boundaries are all about respect.
Setting boundaries is about respect.
Enforcing boundaries is about respect.
"harping"" or repeating and repeating your stated boundary only makes YOU a liar ... you should never set a boundary you don't intend to keep and follow up by YOUR promised action.
The boundary should be well thought out and livable for you ... and you should state the boundary in NON-ambiguious ways
example of ambiguious boundary ---> "You must show me respect."
not clear what "respect" means
Here is something more specific ---> "If you choose to spend family money on your adulterous affair, I will take action to protect myself legally from financial disaster."
The issue is clear, and your intended action is also clear ... and then, when the boundary is breeched ... you do not discuss anything ... you do the action as promised.
You must teach the WS that you mean what you say and that you are not going to negociate important boundary issues.
some other discussions from EN:slim:
Starfish, while I want to agree with you in principle, my experience has been that boundaries can be bulldozed right over.starfish: What most people call boundaries are usually threats and promises. I think you're quite right that poor or fuzzy boundaries can easily be bulldozed....but real boundaries contain a plan of action if they are disrespected....a plan not about what you will do to punish the other person for disrespecting your boundaries....but what you will do to protect yourself and respect yourself if they won't.
slim:
I understand that a boundary is for yourself and not the other person but in a situation where the other person doesn't respect you, they can either physically force you or make your life such a living ****** that you give up.starfish: Boundaries have more than one part....stating clearly what is tolerable to you is only the first part.....the next part might be a respectful request (for example: I don't allow smoking in my house around my baby. (statement) Please smoke outside. (request)" If that is disrespected....the next part is stating clearly what plan of action you intend to take if that boundary is disrespected....and finally....enforcement of that boundary by carrying through with your plan should you need to. All of those things together....is real boundary setting. Anything else is just an idle threat, and if you tolerate bulldozing of your boundaries without following through....you set up the very destructive dynamic that your words really mean nothing and that you can be abused or trampled.
slim:
That's not healthy.starfish: No chere....it sure isn't.
slim:
That's not where we all want to be. But it's the reality of an abusive situation.starfish: Tolerating abuse is always a bad idea....it is one place where setting enforceable/realistic boundaries is paramount. For instance....if you say "I will not tolerate you slapping me. If you hit me again I'm going to move out." And then when he hits you again....you have no place to go, or the money to do it, and no feasible plan to enforce this boundary....what the abuser has learned is that you can't really protect yourself....and that you are willing to stay inspite of abuse. That's really scary.
slim:
If you feel I am wrong or not understanding boundaries correctly, please help me understand.starfish: I don't think you're wrong at all....I just think that you're describing what most folks believe boundaries to be....just the "statements"....and they are MORE. If they don't protect you because you aren't prepared to follow through with your plan to remove yourself from harm....then it is only a boundary statement....and not the whole shebang.
starfish: I agree with pieta that people get in trouble with boundaries....but more because they overuse them, don't know how to recognize them....when the majority of marital issues
are negotiable and not all
"hills to die on". Pick your boundaries carefully....not trivially....and make them about mutual respect.
The example pieta gave is negotiable (hence the suggestion of using plastic beverages or weighted mugs), so that's a issue for the POJA...not boundaries. It's important to recognize something that really ISN'T negotiable. Here's one of mine: I am open to all kinds of sexual exploration within my marriage, but I will never agree to multiple partners or open marriage and swinging. This boundary has never been tested. H has never suggested or asked. But it's there. And it's REAL. And it's non-negotiable and FIRM. I'd give up my husband before I'd give up that boundary. Boundaries need to be enforced for serious issues that truly define your level of tolerance and who you ARE as a person....but NOT used as a way of controlling someone else over minor issues. But I don't agree that setting the kind of boundaries that really are for protection have anything to do with being a "victim" <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />....in fact quite the opposite....it's a way to STOP being a victim!!
pieta:
Starfish --that's not a boundary. That's the Great Wall of China.starfish: *screen spew* (wiping coffee off the computer) hehehehehheheheheh....you got that right chere!!
pieta:
I guess I have been looking at boundaries a little differently...(as probably have others here which is part of the problem)
For me there are all kinds of boundries in marriage:
Physical boundaries help us determine who may touch us and where (anal sex...eeewwww), mental boundaries give us the freedom to have our own thoughts, emotional boundaries help us to deal with our own emotions and respect our partner's, and spiritual boundaries help us to distinguish our will from that of a power higher than ourselves.starfish: no chere....I see boundaries exactly like you've described....however, where is the REAL "walk-line"....let me explain.
pieta:
Just because a boundary can be negotiated does not disqualify it for as a boundary. The Connecticut River is the boundary between New Hampshire and Vermont and that sucker has been negotiating itself East and West and back East again since the Ice Age.starfish: LOL....actually, I think it does disqualify it....but again, let me explain. The real boundary is the not the "disputed area" or the part where there is room for negotiation. Let me show you with your example about the mass...okay?
pieta:
My biggest boundary--spiritual--attend Sunday Mass.starfish: Is this really your boundary? Or is this really your boundary: "I won't go a week without mass." If "Sunday" were part of your "walk-line" your boundary would look like this: "I only attend mass on Sundays." So the important thing is to recognize where the boundary is....what really really IS non-negotiable and where is the "disputed land"....where negotiation can occur.
Let's try it with "physical boundaries"....those that say who may touch us and who can't. You mentioned anal sex (I agree ewwwwwwwwww....ouch!" Like you, my boundary is "No anal sex". But is it? Or is it "No anal sex with anything bigger than XXX?" Or is it "Nothing goes in my hinny, but I'll be happy to put something in yours". My REAL and true boundary is this: "Sex shouldn't hurt! If it hurts me...I'm done." That is a boundary I will defend....and it is a walk-line for me. I'll experiment....but it can't hurt....that is just never going to do it for me....it's non-negotiable.
What I'm saying is that when most folks use boundaries...they tend to include the area where negotiation is likely to be possible....so they need understand that if they do that....it can seem impossible to find solutions to their partner.
