Here's what she said in this thread: "Further, any work on our relationship will not even be considered without you finding a counselor trained in Domestic Violence to help men with their abusive behaviors, far, far away from your current counselor. That is my boundary."

Now, that's totally different to what you suggested she said. It sounds like you're talking about an entirely different individual. Certainly not the one that made the comment above. Me - not knowing the individual in question, I can only respond to the comments that she's made in this thread. And to me, they appear controlling.



S=Spouse



Then your definition of what constitutes a "personal boundary" appears to be different to mine. For me, a personal boundary deals specifically with behaviour that's expressed towards and adversely affects the person in question. I don't see how someone telling you which forums you should and should not visit can be construed as a personal boundary. Maybe the other MB experts can chime in here and offer more clarity on this matter.

? I'm confused -- I'm me, mineownself, longtime MB poster. ZP is a longtime MB poster. It's amazing some of the stuff some of us know each other. I know more about many a poster's underwear preferences than I care to think about. And some discussions do take place off the board.

You lost me on the difference. Nowhere does she say he has to see a certain type of counselor. She says that if he wants certain things from her, there will be conditions that must be met first. There's nothing controlling about that.



Ah, yes, your definition of a personal boundary sounds in and of itself controlling to me.

A relationship only takes place with the free consent of both parties. Each party can set whatever conditions they want on giving their consent, no matter what they are. That's just how it is. Saying they don't get to do that is controlling, and that's where you seem to be.

If one of my sisters (I can't think why you think I have a wife -- I've always been straight) were to declare that she will no longer have a relationship with me unless I dye myself purple, she is free to do so. It's a little wierd, but that's the nature of relationships -- she doesn't have to have any relationships with non-purple people (now that's a fun phrase to say out loud) if she doesn't want to. I don't have to have relationships with nutjobs who think I should dye myself if I don't want to.

ZP and BH can each declare whatever they want under, "this is required before I will have a relationship with you". And each of them is free to say they prefer no relationship to the other's conditions.

Funny, I thought that her specifying that he find "a counselor trained in Domestic Violence" would have been enough to qualify as her specifying that he see "certain type of counselor". Apparently you and I are reading things quite differently.

I thought personal boundaries usually start with "I", e.g.

"I will not tolerate abusive behaviour from anyone".


When the statement starts with "You", then it starts to be controlling, IMO.

Erm, no, you're confusing semantics with content.

You're confused because you keep hanging yourself up on the semantics of a piece you don't like and ignoring the crucial piece of content that defines the whole.

"Further, any work on our relationship will not even be considered without" is the defining piece. She's telling him what she will and won't do. The rest is merely details about what she will and won't do. There is no command in there, which is the fact you seem confused about.

This is the first time I've chimed in on this thread, but...

MOS - I disagree with your assessment here. Or maybe I misunderstand you. I don't think that what MiM quoted above was purely semantic. ZP specifically said at the end of that quote "...far, far away from your current counselor."

It appears to me that ZP is putting a specific condition on the type of counselor BH needs to see.

I honestly don't know if that's a boundary on herself or on him - I can see it both ways quite honestly.

I'm curious as to why she doesn't like his current counselor.

Seabird, I'm not following where you disagree. Yes, she did say that. It's part of the details about what she'll consider. It doesn't change the fact that she issued no command, but only gave information about what she would and wouldn't consider about future marital relationship possiblities.

I see you're a new member, so maybe you've haven't seen some of the long and involved discussions we've had over the years about the severe damage ICs can do in marital situations. There's also a fair bit in the various MB materials on this subject.

ICs are for making the individual feel "happy" or "content". That is how their success is defined. Marriage-building or coaching is ignored. So is ending abusive behavior, since a lot of abusers are quite happy about being such.

I certainly do not agree with your analysis. You can't just refer to the rest as "merely details". They are also an important part of the content. They indicate whether or not it is in fact a personal boundary that's being defined, or if the utterer is trying to force the recipient into doing something they would not otherwise want or feel the need to do.

Let's put it this way - If she'd said something along the lines of "I will not accept abusive behaviour in a relationship and will end it if it occurs again", now THAT IMO is a personal boundary. Notice, no reference to the H having to see specific councellors or jump through any other hoops that she could think of. Personal boundaries are supposed to be about one self, not about someone else. I think her H knows about the abuse problem and is trying to deal with it. IMO, in her comment, she's trying to dictate *how* he should deal with it.

If you still don't see where I'm coming from, or don't agree with my POV, then I believe we will have to agree to disagree on this point and leave it at that :-).

You're still just plain wrong. The relationship is already over. She gave him some information about what it would take to get a new one. There is nothing controlling about that.

You talk about force, but there is no force in what she said, just information about options.

The reason I said you were confused by the semantics is that you seem to be letting the fact that her manner of expression was abrasive distract you from the actual content.

According to your usages and distinctions, I'm forced, controlled, and abused every time I go to the doctor. That's just plain silly.

...which has absolutely nothing to do with how one defines a personal boundary.



I agree - that IS a plain silly strawman argument <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

This will be fairly quick. I have to go back to work and cover a sick call and I don't feel comfortable posting here on company time.

I do see how it's controling to tell me to see a particular type of counselor. The one I'm going to does mostly MC. As ZP does not wish to participate in it, he has started doing IC until she is ready to try MC. About me seeing a counselor for DV, I have asked two weeks ago to have at least one session with her counselor.

As it has been mentioned, there are three sides to our marriage. Hers, mine, and the whole truth. The best way to find the truth is one counselor helping both of us. I am willing to have a phone session or even drive to her office to do this. So far I have heard nothing about my request.

So is what you and in essence she is saying is that He shouldn't continue to see his individual counselor because it will some how harm the marriage?

I'm sorry but I'm not following, and I've been here for years. She has said she has no intentions of going back to the marriage at this point, so why shouldn't he continue to see HIS individual counselor for abuse issues HE suffered as a child?

If she is really serious that she wants him to get help, then that is where he needs to be focused, on getting help with his own past of childhood abuse.

And personally, I don't believe a domestic violence counselor will address those issues, because they would only be focused on the "just because you were abused doesn't give you a right to abuse" which he already understands at this point.

And I disagree with your assertation of IC's especially Christian Counselors, however, I would agree that most secular counselors (I have personally encountered many)do use the "I want to make you feel good method" of counseling.

Real good Christian Counselors use the Bible to teach where the abuse is a sin, and IF the person is a Christian, and truly believes what the Bible says, they will make changes, and if the person is Not a true follower of Christ, no matter what their words say...who refuse to accept those truths no matter how difficult those truths might be to swallow would turn and run away, and would cause the counselor to question the person's salvation and whether they are a true follower of Christ or not.

And in that he is willing to go to a Counselor who is willing to call him on his sinful behaviors is a huge step, IMO. And in that BH recogonizes it's not going to be a short or easy process is also a huge step.

he has said that there has been no hitting in 3 years, and has even acknowledged that it changed because she apparently stopped trying to prevent him from leaving so that he could calm down.

Granted He should have been able to calm down without leaving and without hitting, but some times that is difficult to do if a person is up in your face continuing
an argument. (not saying she did that, only they could give an honest answer to if that is what happened or not).

And *if* that is the case, then that will also be something he will need to learn to handle, how to act/react when someone is up in his face wanting to continue to argue when he's trying to calm down, be it her or someone else in the future.

And trying to prevent someone from leaving a situation so that they can calm down can also be seen as abusive, and if that is the case here, if it were reversed that he was trying to prevent her from leaving so that she could calm down...nobody would even think to say it wasn't abusive, by virture of the fact he's a man.

Now, please don't miscontrue what I'm saying here, He was wrong to hit her at all...but *if* she was in anyway trying to prevent him from leaving, in order to get a solution right then, instead of allowing him to leave so that he could calm down..She was JUST as much in the wrong (wouldn't you agree?) And again, do not miscontrue what I am saying, even IF that is what she did, it did not give him a right to hit her.

And *if* that is what happened and how she responded, that is an area she could address in her own Individual counseling (which she is apparently going to) to figure out why she felt the need to prevent him from leaving a heated argument. Maybe something she learned as a child growing up that needs to be addressed in her own counseling sessions.

but in either case, if she was trying to prevent him from leaving, and his hitting her as a result..both of them need to learn how to handle those type of situations in a relationship be it this one or a future one.

Erm, no, where did I say that? Someone asked why she would have a problem with his IC. I gave some info on that. I didn't say anything about what he should do.

Edited to add:

ZP is very responsibly following precautions appropriate to her extremely dangerous situation. That involves being wary of the misuse of counselors, which is common problem in her situation.

TR,
You asked me some questions earlier.

The yelling at each other did continue but I have stopped pushing or hitting over 3 years ago. The yelling pushing and hitting has been done by both of us.

Do I ever see myself hitting my wife again? No I don’t. I know that it is wrong and have taken steps and continue to take them to ensure that I never hit again.

You asked about the agreement to let me go for a while. Instead of her blocking me from leaving she allowed me to leave with the understanding that I would be back in a reasonable time and that we would continue when I returned. As I stated earlier I did not always continue the “discussion” when I returned. But I did return.

As for the chasing after me question. There were times that she would walk after me and try and continue the argument after I left the house. She would follow me with the kids into the woods demanding that I come back and talk or she and the kids would not be there when I returned.

The time I jumped the fence she had followed me down the street in the car and again demanded that I get in. I told her that the best way to finish it was to leave me alone for a little while. When she continued after me, I jumped a fence and ran onto a school property do that she could not follow me with the car. Again I returned home after I had calmed down.

Hopefully this answered your questions.

ROFL. I see you've given up on your point or lack thereof and are just saying whatever sounds like it makes a point whether it has any logic or not. Please do continue.

You keep saying you'd like marriage counseling, how has it gone in the past when the two of you have attempted marriage counseling or even marriage coaching?

Did it help at all in addressing any of the issues?

We have never been to a MC or done coaching. And I don't ever remember her bringing it up. I know that I never did.

She posted her for years and has continued talking with people off the site since she left. I have emailed breifly with one person from here as a mentor. Oher than that I have only made breif comments in her emails to people from MB.

I never had a screen name until she asked for the D. She suggested I come her for help.

Speaking as a person who survived a physically, mentally, emotionally, and sexually abusive marriage I will just add this one statement to this thread. One of the MOST DIFFICULT things for a survivor of abuse to realize and admit is that they were a participant in "The Dance of Violence."

When you are involved in the Abuse, often due to childhood abuse of your own, you don't realize that what is happening to you is in fact abusive. You were treated abusively as a child...it seems normal to be treated abusively as an adult...and it is what you know, so it's familiar. At some point in the journey you either begin to realize or someone shows you or something happens, and for the first time it occurs to you that being treated like that is ABUSE. You learn and learn and try to practice some healthy ways, but of course the Abuser has no idea you are changing "The Dance" so they try harder to get you back into the old, familiar cycle. As a victim, it's much easier to say, "Well SHE or HE abused ME!!! I was the victim! It's HER or HIS fault, not mine! I was the one who was HURT and ABUSED!!"

Many, MANY, MANY victims of domestic violence get stuck here...in victimhood. Many, MANY, MANY victims never leave this place, and never move beyond it to being a survivor because it is so much easier to blame the Abuser than it is to take personal responsibility and work on how you, as a victim, participated in the Abuse.

From this point forward, I will speak only of my specific situation, but I bet those who have been abused will be able to identify.

In my situation, my exH physically abused me by pushing, shoving, grabbing, yanking, standing in the way, etc. He never balled up his fist and hit me, but he did slap a couple times. Our physical abuse was more like push me into a wall, shove me backwards down the stairs, grab my arms so hard I got bruises shaped like his hands, and yanking me out of the way if I stood in his way. He also did physical/emotional things such as punching walls, kicking pets, breaking things, burning my possessions, and tearing up my journals or books. And this is just the physical abuse. Most of the abuse was moreso along the lines of emotional and verbal abuse. But I think you get the picture, right? In addition, my exH had 13 A's that I can confirm and probably several more that I just do not have evidence to convict him in a court of law (know what I mean?). Soooo...yeah. It was SEVERELY abusive.

What happened for me, as the victim (at the time) was that for the longest time I believed him that our private stuff was between him and I and not to be discussed with others or else it was 'airing dirty laundry.' As the victim, I could feel the cycle of violence getting more and more violent, and yet it never occurred to me to call the cops because it was between us and because at the time I didn't realize it was abusive! But our fights definitely did get worse and worse. He would scream at me, BUT I DID SCREAM BACK AT HIM. He would grab me, BUT I WOULD PUSH HIM. He call me mean, evil, hurtful names, BUT I WOULD DISH IT RIGHT BACK TO HIM. And more and more, I felt sick to my stomach and awful, because that is not the person I really am! I am a peaceful, easy-going, relaxed kind of person, and to be involved in that level of fighting and arguing was tearing me apart inside!

Am I saying that I was "to blame" for his abusive behavior? NO!! He chose to respond in an abusive way and he chose to avoid dealing with it. He chose to pretend that "there was nothing wrong with him." But I KNEW there was something wrong with me, and what I discovered is that we were involved in a "Dance of Violence." He may have been dancing "in the lead" but I was dancing too and dancing backward! What I needed to do was STOP DANCING!!! What I needed to do was to not use his anger and abuse to excuse my equally abusive response! What I needed to do was to take personal responsibility and say to myself, "Just because he chooses to call me names, push me, and threaten me does not give me the right to respond by doing the same things! I am responsible to STOP DANCING and control MY anger and respond in a healthy manner even if he is completely out of control and violent!"

That is a hard pill to swallow. Yes, my exH was the Abuser, but I abused back. He chose to live the abusive "Power Over" model whereas I wanted to live the "Mutual Power" way and kept falling into abuse in response to him. Sooooo...what I had to realize was that while my exH may have been the initiator and Abuser...*I* was participating by continuing to "Dance." And I don't mean that "running away" is the way to stop dancing either. All that is, is a Dancer who has left one dance and is looking for a different dance. I mean, as a SURVIVOR of Abuse, I have to look at MYSELF and realize what *I* did to contribute to "The Dance" and how *I* stayed in the Dance when I could have chosen so many OTHER, HEALTHY responses.

I believe that is what is happening here. Are we saying that BH is blameless? No. He has his own demons to deal with. Are we saying that ZP should return to him, right now, the way things are? No. He's not ready and she's definitely not ready. But are we saying that there are TWO PEOPLE dancing in this dance of Domestic Violence...and that she may not have deserved the Abuse she got, but that she also needs to look at herself and do some counseling over why she stayed in The Dance and what is it about her that she choses to Dance and how she can respond to The Dance in a more healthy manner? YES!!! BH may very well be abusive, and he has admitted as such. But he did not do it in a vacuum and each partner should take personal responsibility for what they did and seek out professional counseling for THEIR OWN issues. It sounds like BH is finally doing that. I do not know if ZP can quite admit her part in this yet.

Your faithful friend,



CJ

AGREED, VERBATIM.

Just a question: why do you want to remain M'd to her? I've read her posts, and I don't sense any real sense of compassion or desire to continue (or more correctly, restart, as her spokesmodel here, mineownself, confirms your W believes that the relationship is over). What are your reasons for wanting to continue? What do you see in the future for you both if you remain M'd?