Guys and Gals,

I am not having the best day today, and I'll do my best to explain everything as factually as I can...but since I'm smack dab in the middle of it, it's a little hard to be objective.

I really love my new hubby. He is absolutely the best thing in my life and I sincerely believe he feels the same way about me. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> Here's what happened though...

Yesterday he sent me an ecard that he had created using one of his own photographs (he is a graphic artist). It was SO COOL because I could tell he put some real effort into making an ecard that was unique--just for me. I was thrilled (for obvious reasons) and was really looking forward to getting home after work. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> While I was at work, he had a completely crazy day driving everyone all over the place (a food bag for our church food pantry, to the bank, two kids to this place, one kid to that place, pick me up from work, one kid to the DMV for an ID, the grocery store, etc.) So, since I thought he was just sick and tired of driving all over, I thought I'd do a couple of nice things for him and stay home from my lady's bible study, sit and read with him, help him with dishes...you know, a nice quiet night at home. When I did get home from work, I heard some REALLY good news--he had received a paycheck from one of his recent websites (he was cleaning up their site), so I was so very proud of him...told him so...and got him some little presents: some dark chocolate cherries (his favorite sweet) and his favorite movie (Baron VonMunchausen). I thought he would be THRILLED.

Well...we had dinner, did dishes, and we have a bible study we lead for brand new Christians on Wednesday nights, so he wanted to review the lesson and go over questions and stuff. Sounds prudent, right? Quick review the night before! So we started reviewing and there was one sentence that said, "We have to do more than just study the bible..." Now, I believe the author was trying to say, "Some people could read the bible for just scholarly facts or just reading the words and never learn more about God or the Christian life. We have to discipline ourselves to read regularly; we have to pray that the Holy Spirit will enlighten us; and we have to actually investigate to get to know God more intimately." That was NOT what my DH thought it meant!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />

Without hearing what I was trying to say about the sentence, he literally launched off into this diatribe about how " ... THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO! STUDY THE BIBLE!! IT'S NOT ABOUT EMOTIONS AND HAVING FEELINGS...IT'S ABOUT KNOWLEDGE AND FACTS AND YOU GET KNOWLEDGE FROM STUDYING! THIS IS FALSEHOOD! WE ARE SUPPOSED TO EXAMINE THE LOGIC OF THE BIBLE AND EXAMINE THE PROPOSITIONS AND THEN ASCENT TO THEM! HOW CAN YOU LEARN ANYTHING IF YOU DON'T HAVE KNOWLEDGE! DOESN'T THAT MAKE SENSE?..." Anyway, on and on (and on and on and on) like that for like 10 minutes!

His tone of voice was harsh--the volume was loud--and the attitude was FORCEFUL (as in, he was trying to force me to see it his way because there was NO POSSIBILITY of it being any way but HIS way!) From what I could tell, I don't think he could even see me there at all--I suspect he was arguing with himself or someone else or something. In addition, I felt like he was extremely condescending (as if only HE knew the truth and what I had to say was irrelevant) and he was pretty adamant that feelings meant nothing and the only thing of any value is THINKING (can you tell he is the Thinker and I am the Feeler?)

Anyway, when I got done with his diatribe, I was extremely upset, and I told him so in clear, descriptive terms--not in swearing or name calling--I mean I explained to him VERY CLEARLY what I was upset over and why. Since he is a Thinker, I tried to lay it out logically with sound reasoning (which is kind of hard when I'm feeling all hurt).

Anyway, his initial response was "Fine. I'll never have strong convictions with you again!" I told him that was just a threat and an attempt to make me the bad guy--he is welcome to have strong convictions, but he is NOT welcome to attack me because of them. N

Next he tried the "...Is attacking you really the only option? Because I wasn't attacking you. There was some other option that you are not open-minded enough to consider." I said, "What is this magical other option that would make the way that you spoke to me ALRIGHT?" He said, "I am a Thinker and I was just running through the objections out loud and trying to avoid every argument that anyone could make about how we are supposed to FEEL God and not know Him through study." To which I replied, "Did it ever occur to you that I might agree with you, and that I ws going to suggest that we more thoroughly explain this kind of quote to the folks? Did it ever occur to you to let me finish ALL of what I was going to say before you jump down my throat and launch off on how thinking is the only thing in the world? No. You were not running through the arguments and objections. That sounds like this...hey honey, let's look together at all the ways people might object to this and come up with a response. What you did was an attack."

Finally, he tried the, "Well it may have FELT like an attack to you but that wasn't my intention. There must be something from your past that makes you perceive attacks where there are none. But since you perceived it as an attack, I don't want to hurt you." Now, this one REALLY made me mad, because in effect he's saying that somehow it is MY mental health issue that made a "non-attack" seem like an "attack" and that really it never happened. OH NO YOU DIDN'T JUST SAY THAT! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/mad.gif" alt="" />

So to that one I just said that I was not going to take responsibility for what was not mine. In FACT, he had chosen to stand on a soapbox and yell at me for about 10 minutes. In FACT, the tone of his voice was hash, his volume was loud, and his attitude was FORCEFUL. In FACT I had not done one thing that day or night that justified that kind of treatment. And in FACT, I had not "made it up." So he was going to have to be responsible for what he had done.

After that it was somewhat like a lightbulb came on...but kind of not. He did say he was sorry for hurting me and he hates when he does that. He did say that he can see how I would perceive it as harsh and forceful. But he still contends that it wasn't personal--he wasn't on a soapbox about me--but rather he was going through logic arguments out loud.

Here's my question. First, I do not get that whole, "going through logic arguments" thing. I do know what logic is and I have studied it. I understand the concept of looking at a statement for every conceivable angle and preparing sound responses to people's possible objections. I do NOT see how somehow that makes harsh, forcefulness justifiable! Are there any Thinker Male types out there who can help explain? My thought is that I am a pretty strong Feeler type but I'm not completely absent of Thinker capabilities! This...I do not get it!! It's like he was debating "the enemy" and I just so happened to be the one who was sitting in the seat!

Next, I have no idea how to get beyond this. I have thought and thought all night and day how to work through this, and I can not think of anything. Just yesterday I was all happy, in love, and proud of my Dear Hubby. I had thought about jumping his bones all day and was even going to suggest a new idea in that regard. Today...I don't feel like being smooshy--hugs and kisses seem fake--and I sure as heck have little or no desire to jump his bones!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> All that stuff that is usually so wonderful between us is now pretty much afraid. And usually, like any couple, if something comes up we can apologize and work it out and get over it--you know forgive and move on. This one...I'm STUCK. I don't know how to get over it!

Sooooo...give me your thoughts and ideas here folks. How do we get beyond this? Right now I feel like I am numb and in shock. How do I get back re-engaged emotionally (cuz right this minute...huh uh! No way I'm heading back in there!)?

Your faithful friend,


CJ

(Edited to add) BTW, I don't want this to be like a "punishment" thing or some sort of revenge. It's not like that. I usually figure there are just prudent steps that a couple takes to resolve issues and I can not think of what they would be in this case.

the tides of marriage sometimes provide a wild ride

From what you posted, it did not seem like his "diatribe" had anything to do with you nor was it aimed at you. It seemed that what he read triggered him somehow. Why not ask him why that particular passage brought about such strong feelings? Ask him to tell what he was really thinking about when he started the "diatribe" and what really upset him.

I don't think this had anything to do with you and now he's even more upset because you think it did but he can't convince you otherwise.
Mulan

Yeah--Mulan--just so you know, I don't think it had one little thing to do with me either! That I can tell, that day and night I had been a good little wifey. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> Thus, I agree with you, that it was entirely a "triggery" response and I was not even really present as he was in the midst of his diatribe.

The thing I have a problem with is this: somehow, in his mind, it is acceptable, alright, okay (something to that effect) to have a trigger and aim it at me! See, if this was a trigger from when he got yelled at from his exW, and he accidentally got defensive with me, he would see that in a bit and say something along the lines of, "Hey honey, I'm sorry. That wasn't you, it was me. I got triggered from XYZ and then responded like I would have to exW" and things would be resolved between us...because we would have an idea where it came from and because he would be acting as if it's not okay to treat ME that way!

In this instance, he says he's sorry but keeps acting like, "If only you understood what running through logic arguments is...then you'd realize that it was okay to yell at you. But since you don't understand and it hurt you, I guess I'm sorry you see it that way."

*sigh*


~~CJ

CJ,

I'll take a crack at this being a "thinking" kid of guy. I must first tell you a few things to set what I am going to say in perspective. I am a scientist and if anything we are accused of thinking too much. But, I must tell you the most "fun" I have is getting together with a few colleagues and really hashing out some problem. Good science can be and is often done at 'high volume'. It is something one can be passionate about and still be thinking.

That is the point, thinking does not mean correct, but it can be passionate.

Now let me offer you something to consider. You have called your H's comments a diatribe, suggesting what he said was without merit, just a mental flush so to speak. If you used that term with him, my guess is he is NOT going to back off of this. The issue is how did you frame your response?

Here is why I asked. Let's say he is passionate about some topic that was/is triggered by this passage. Let's say his rather loud view of this topic was not really directed at you. IF this is all correct, as soon as you responded to his "diatribe" you made it about you. He may not have made it about you, but you did.

If you response had been "interesting point of view" as you walked out of the door, it was and would be all about him and you leaving might have suggested to him, that you found something <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> not to your liking.

The problem is it is now personal. You felt attacked and you defended. He felt justified and he is defending.

I really liked the suggestion of asking him what occasioned such an impassioned response to that passage. I would take it further and ask him how he was going to approach "feeling" members of the group with the concept that logic and facts should be paramount in studying the Bible. Then sit and listen, don't say a word.

Wonder why I am suggesting this? You said and asked
What is it you think you need to get beyond?
His tone of voice? His passion? His volume? His point of view? First you need to define what it is because from your post you sound confused.

You say you are not going back "in there". What does that mean? You want to reengage emotionally, but other than his tone what made you think disengaging was a good idea?

My point! Define your problem. Crystalize it and then examine it. Finally, how can his opinion about a Biblical passage hurt YOU?

Your feelings are your own. You are entitled to them. You also control whether or not your are hurt by YOUR feelings. His words about the Bible surely cannot hurt you. They are his opinions about what is in the Bible.

Do you want him to refrain from stating strongly held opinions to you? Do you want him to refrain from expressing his ideas his way?

I ask all of this because in my "scientific" <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> discussions, it can get hot in there, but what we all know is that it is about the science NOT the other people. We would never interact in that way with strangers or with people we did not trust.

Don't know if ANY of this is of help, but perhaps it will help someone else offer you what you need if by no other means that someone reading this and going "what the heck is he talking about? He missed the whole point." and then proceeding to offer what you need by counter example.

I do hope something is of help.

God Bless,

JL

JL,

Your post was GREAT!!

That is not exactly but really, really close to what DH was saying! I can understand the concept that a good debate can get heated and even loud--due to passionately held beliefs--but don't the two parties usually understand they are engaged in a thought debate ahead of time? I mean, doesn't someone say at some point, "Hey, let's look at this from all the angles. I'll be devil's advocate."

Okay--you're dead on right about the diatribe thing. It was not an argument without merit. In fact, his presentation had LOTS of merit! If he had allowed me to finish my statement instead of starting right in on his soapbox, he would have seen that I agreed and had a suggestion! But instead, without hearing it all, he jumped in with his impassioned argument with merit. HOWEVER, I do see that by using the word "diatribe" that takes it from an impersonal debate to a personal attack against me.

Next, you asked some questions:


This is the typical Feeler response, in that during those moments of the most emotion, the Feeling switch is ON and the Thinking switch is OFF. But to summarize I hear ya saying, "Define what it is that bugged me and then see if it's my issue or his and then finally, if there's something I need to request, ask for it."



"Going back in there" is being emotionally close with someone. I thought disengaging was a good idea because I was being hurt by someone I was close to and so I made a little more distance to be hurt less. I want to be in closer...so that's "going back in there."

Sooooo--I will consider what you've said because it's GIGANTICALLY helpful. It was passion about the topic that created the "loudness". Using the term "diatribe" turned it personal. He defended/I defended. So figure out what the problem was--define it more clearly. Decide if it's on my own side of the street (something I need to work on). If there's something I need, define THAT and request it.

(thumbsup) I think I get it!!! YAY!!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />


~~CJ

CJ,

Glad I was of use. I am not really as distant from this as you might believe. My W tends to get on a subject and before long her volume is high, "no opinions needed", and SHE has the solutions.

My only comments to her at this time is "you don't need to yell, my hearing is good." Which somewhat diffuses things, but also ticks her off. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> . I have learned to just let it "be her problem" it surely is not mine. And yes one does back off a bit. But, I must say she has never wounded ME with her "opinions" because they are always about something in the newspaper or going on at school or...whatever. But, they are not about me, so I let her opine. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

As for me I don't have strong opinions. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/eek.gif" alt="" /> So I don't have the problem your H has or my W has. I have strong facts and I am right. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/pfft.gif" alt="" /> Further, I am secure in my knowledge so why bother to tell anyone else? Right? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Oh and she hates it when I am right. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Some of this is just normal with people that really do think about things and care about the topic. My suggestion...realize you have the answer and let him rattle on. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> Or you just go over and kiss him right in the middle of his MOST IMPORTANT thought. Bet, that will cause a pause. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

God Bless,

JL

Do you think he would have used the same tone to get his point across at your Bible Study Group? There may well be others in the group who don't see things his way. Will he give them a chance to speak up and listen respectfully to them?

Sounds like it is your first really big argument to me and I think also his POV being so different has troubled you a little. I hope you kiss and make up soon.

I grew up in the sixty's, and have never abandoned my surfboard, thus, it has served me well.

All blessings,
Jerry

Hey CJ!

Don't know right off if we have posted to each other before, but I just had to reply!

My hubby and I had an eerily similar incident just last night!

I was in sharing mode and he was fine with that, until I said something he strongly disagreed with. We were actually discussing Communion. He believes that if grape juice is used instead of wine, the leadership of such a church is causing their people to sin. I fall on the side of grace on this issue. I actually think Twinkies and Diet Coke would be fine if that's all there is available (like maybe on a sinking ship or similar dire circumstance). That a person's heart is what God reads, and that the instruments used are less important.

He's an adult Sunday School teacher in Evangelical Theology. Anyways....he went into theologian mode...teacher mode...wife needs to be corrected mode, and loudly at that....that's how I saw it at the time. Needless to say, the night ended badly and we both went to sleep angry and disconnected.

This morning we discussed. I said that when I'm just sharing, that's all I want to do! Simply share! I used the analogy of little boy and little girl, "I'll show you mine if you'll show me yours!" If either party would have pointed and laughed at, or worse, belittled the other's different parts....safety to share is quickly destroyed. Sharing should not be adversarial! If he felt compelled to correct me, it should have been at another time, so as not to ruin the connectedness we had going already!

It was NOT the time to get on the soapbox, which has a place of honor here! LOL!! There were at least a bazillion other ways he could have handled it and I wouldn't have been upset in the least!

I'm actually a Thinker, but compared to him, I'm a raging feeler! I'm INTJ and he's a prototypical ISTJ to the core! I can hang with him way better on the logic end than he can hang with me in the feeler end of the spectrum! He's learning tho!

Although I agree that we should use knowledge and study and recognize it as primary, the peace that passes all understanding is definitely a FEELING!!

For the Enquiring minds that want to know, DH and I did work it out last night. I knew we would somehow, but I was just so STUCK yesterday! Anyway, after my lightbulb moment from JL (thanks JL--one of the few who have been on MB longer than me!) I understood a lot more clearly what had happened.

So here's what we agreed to:

1) He agreed that he should have let me finish my statement before he jumped in.

2) He agreed that he was completely in full-on Thinker mode and not aware of what feelings might result.

3) I agreed that I turned "passion for a topic" into something personal against me.

4) I agreed that although I understand and agree with his views on the topic, I'm probably not the best person to have those kinds of "heated debates" with due to my abusive past.

In conclusion, we decided to either a) notify the other party that a debate is about to take place -or- b) for him to engage in heated debates moreso with his brothers and buddies who ENJOY that kind of thing (since I don't enjoy them that much). FYI, he and his brothers LOVE to sit around a table and talk theology and logic. They will present arguments all day long and then shake hands and go home happy (shrug of "huh"?).

Thanks for all your help again. Yesterday, I just could not see a way out of it, and all your comments really helped me to see a pathway to resolution.



~~CJ

CJ,

One last bit from a huge THINKER.

You can make your THINKER become a FEELER for a very short period of time.

shortly before, during, and shortly after SF I become a FEELER.

So jump his bones and make your point before he becomes a thinker again. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

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

CJ - have you read "The Four Agreements" by don Miguel Ruiz?