I have been reading a number of threads of late that reveal that those posting have NOT read all of Harley's columns and advice on this web site. Folks you ain't gonna make it "Fat, dumb and ignorant."

One common thread has to do with what Harley calls "Just compensation." I call it "Retribution." Here is the link:

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi5042_qa.html

In other words, how the wayward makes it up to you. Read the column at the link and you will then have a better idea and of course, read all the other columns as well, please.

Larry

That is an outstanding article that I refer to often. I think he even discusses this in his video. His reasoning is breathtaking in its brilliance in this article, IMO.

Hmmm, thanks for bringing that up again Larry, I went and re-read it since it had been a while for me. I also had an issue with this a couple of weeks ago when talking about it in a thread with some posters.

My issue before was, at it's core, a matter of choice and my mistaken feelings about it (choice). I know where the mistaken beliefs came from, but, that isn't important I guess. The mistaken belief was this though: that a good action is only good when it is made completely from free will, and if it was "expected" or "required" then it wasn't actually good.

See, my argument was that the things that Dr.H talks about as compensation (or retribution for you!) are things that a good spouse should be doing anyway, and hence have no good or redeeming quality about them, and hence could not be used to compensate/counteract/pay back for a bad action.

I was taught that doing everything that is expected of you is the baseline for being . . . well, basically for being "not bad". There was no choice in the matter for me (talking as a little child here), at least that is how I learned it, so doing "what was right" was almost out of my control, and it had no intrinsic value per-se. If you did NOT do what was right then that made you a bad person, and you would then have to do something above and beyond, something extraordinary, in order to atone for that badness.

Also, having to be reminded or asked to do something "right" was wrong and bad, and doing the thing that you were reminded of was bad or at best "only because I told you to. You should have done that on your own without me having to tell you!"

So, in my world, the only choices you ever really had were to do bad things, and you only ever made those choices because you were a bad person. Doing good, doing good things, doing what others wanted you to do, whatever, those were expected things that I felt I had no choice in. I was always told that I only did those things because I was told to do them, while anything bad I ever did was because I chose to be a bad person.

But, lo and behold, I actually have a choice in everything I do! Yes, this was a revelation for me at the age of 30.

So, before, I thought that doing what Dr.H suggests as repayment didn't make sense to me. I thought "well, you are supposed to do that anyway, so it holds no value to do it, especially not enough to repay anything bad that you had done". Also, along with that was the thought that doing those things, because I had been "told" to do them in order to repay a debt, meant to me that in addition to them not holding any value at all (no choice or value in doing good remember) they actually became almost a bad thing because I would be doing them in order to "not be bad", in order to avoid punishment, so only for selfish reasons.

I felt that the idea of repayment meant that I would have to do something of my own volition, without being told to, without anyone expecting it, that was above and beyond the expectations of any good person, in order to atone for the debt.

In a way, looking at it more now, I could never really do anything good at all, nothing of value. I've always catagorized anything good as "expected" behavior, and because of other things being brought up, I took away my own . . . responsibility? . . . in anything good that I did. Doing good, doing the right thing, doing what others wanted me to do, doing what I knew I should do . . . all of these became selfish acts to avoid being punished, to avoid being labeled as a bad person, a disappointment.

You might be able to see a little bit how relationships and love could be a hard thing for me to do very effectively, since (nearly) all good things end up, to me, being at best of no value because they are something I have to do and have no choice in, and at worst they end up being a selfish act in order to prevent pain/anger/disappointment.

For the lion share of 30 years now, my only ever choice has been to be a bad person.

Finally coming to the realization that it actually is my choice to be good, to do what my wife wants me to do, whatever -- that is a profound thing for me. To finally start trying to reason out that what I do for the good of others is actually my choice, and those good things do hold value -- amazing!

This is a conept my WXH apparently (stubbornly) failed to comprehend.

Even though most of the changes he needed to make in order for our marriage to recover were the same sort of things he would need to make in order to have a happy, healthy marriage with ANYONE, even if there had never been adultery, he insisted on viewing the necessary changes as 'punishment', 'revenge', me having a 'jelaousy problem', or me 'failing to get over it', etc.

He would promise some improvements after his latest adultery ended, go through some motions for a little while, then revert back to being lazy and inconsiderate. He would flat out refuse to do what's needed to even maintain a so-so marriage, claiming WE couldn't afford to go on dates (even when he made $55 per hour and went out to lunch every day with coworkers), would say "if it's not broke - don't fix it" as an excuse to not even talk about our marriage let alone work on it... only to once again get involved with an OW "because" supposedly HE had been doing everything he possibly could to get over his adulteries but I was supposedly "never" going to get over it or give him credit!

Part of the problem is that society in general and my WXH's family specifically acts as if most of what is required to maintain an adultery-safe marriage is viewed as 'jealousy' or 'controlling'.

My WXH also would get very angry whenever he did anything for me and even for our daughters. Instead of doing something out of love or caring for us he often did things with gritted teach and growling. He would even comment frequently about how he "TRIES SO HARD TO BE NICE TO YOU GUYS". He would say this with clenched fists and looking as if he were about to punch us! It was very hurtful to us to be told that the nice things he did on rare occasions enraged him so much, that they were done with such resentment. It was especially scary to hear how he had to "TRY SO HARD" to be nice instead of hateful towards us!
What a pompous jerk!

Meanwhile he was showing the latest OW (and her little girl) this facade of him being a really nice guy - taking them out and spending lots of time and money on them...

Any and every little thing he did for me and our daughters was at some point thrown back in our face as something we "made" him do, that he didn't want to do, and that we didn't deserve or appreciate.

I think it somehow made him feel immasculated to be nice to his wife and daughters. It was demeaning to him somehow. I think he confused respect with fear, if we weren't cringing in fear and weren't pathetically lacking in self-esteem he felt we were disrespecting him. I'm sure this came from his mother marrying an emotionally, verbally, and physically abusive step-father and then acting as if she were ashamed of her own kids, as if the step-father's harsh treatment and disapproval of her kids was justified.

I can't see my WXH EVER saying or doing the things necessary for recovery because from his warped persepctive to do so would be too humiliating and demeaning for him and would just make him resent us even more. At best he could use his immense skills in con-artistry to immitate a repentant person for a while... but then we would be exposed to his hate-filled rsentment for his "having" to be nice to us... He really does feel entitled to us without havign to be loving towards us. So when he has had to behave lovingly in order to keep us in his life he views this as us being manipulative, "forcing" him to behave civil and loving in order to get what he expects he should get while being hateful and abusive.

bump

ah-ha!

See now this, combined with teh Video in Mel's link is very interesting as a primer reminder.

Just compensation :

1) NC for ever
2) Extraordinary precautions to avoid accidental contact
3) FWS Learn to meet BS ENs

I'd almost forgotten this yet it is a foundational tenet.

That article, to me, shows the breadth and depth of Dr. Harley's brilliance. It is so very tightly reasoned and BRILLIANT that it is COUNTERINTUITIVE. [at least it is to me! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />]

I smile, Mel, because Dr H is probably the smartest and most successful marriage "pop psychologist" out there, yet never uses ANY psychobabble whatsoever !

I guess the righter you are, the clearer you can speak without losing your point !

What is PSYCHOBABBLE, Bob?

I appreciate the fact that Dr Harley takes such a practical approach - one void of drama & endless navel gazing. I hate that. I did my share, and now I realize how self indulgent it was - and all my hand-wringing did nothing to forward my happiness or my family's happiness !

My H's AA group has a motto:


[color:"red"]Save the drama for your Mama. [/color]

wikipedia explains it pretty well Mimi

I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the PRACTICALITY of the approach, too..


I'm not gonna go there about the PSYCHOBABBLE...

Hi mimi


It is usually exercised by a person seeking to speak with unearned authority in a specialised field. In this case, psycyhology.

Communication comprises two prime parts :

1. Message
2. Delivery lexicon

The message really can only be offered or discussed with any authority if the required study or experience has been acquired by the communicator.

The delivery lexicon can be adopted by almost any capable social chameleons, however, and to an uninitiated audience, unsubstantiated personal opinion or "fluff" presented with the authority of the correct delivery lexicon can be highly effective NOT at educating the audience, but at engendering admiration in them for the deliverer.

In business ( I learned this as part of my commercial psychology training) we must watch out for this from clients and suppliers who are trying to APPEAR to be expert when they are not, or empowered when they are not.

"psychobabble" is the use of terms and delivery lexicon of psychology, but with a contentious or lightweight message at its core.

In any airport lounge bookshop you'll see books written in psychobabble with a very flimsy message at their centre.

Dr Harley's books contain NONE because his authority comes from education and experience, and has removed any requirement for his audience to learn a psychology lexicon in order to grant authority to his message.

A bit of a long answer I'm afraid, but ya did ask ! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Thanks, Bob!! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />