Yes.



Is a duck's butt waterproof? (I always look for oppor2nities 2 use that question in life).

Your approach is reasonable, but I would argue that you don't grab the rock because it sank, you don't grab it because it was never floating 2 begin with. I would submit that if you DID find a floating rock (pumice is a rock that floats), you probably would give it a once over if you were thinking about building something 2 float. ...and then probably give it 2 your kids when you realized it wasn't a good building material for boats (though boats are built of things like steel and concrete that don't float).

[quoteIn other words, if I was trying to determine why some people have a good marriage, why some people are faithful, why some people are successful at life, I would look to the good marriages and the faithful people to see what they are doing to get that way.[/quote]

Also reasonable.


Yes. Good. But who entices them 2 seek help from people with good, or otherwise recovered marriages? I would agree that another wayward is more often going 2 be the blind leading the blind, but it might not always be. (Steve Harley asked me, when we were on a similar topic, "Can a hypocrite give good advice?". You know what the answer was? (below).) On this board, then, I believe it is the responsibility, if possible (it might not be) for FWSs and FBSs first, perhaps, and then maybe BSs and WSs, in this order, 2 make the effort 2 steer the active waywards in the right direction, at least for the benefit of that wayward's BS.


This worked for you. Good. For me, it was useful 2 study everybody (that would allow that), particularly since I was living with a WW who wouldn't talk 2 me much about what was going on in her haid.


Neither am I. I'm a rocket scientist! ;oD


Agreed, and you don't need 2 be talking about it if you don't want 2. I do need 2, or at least did need 2, however. It's like the studies of the Titanic sinking after the disaster. Remember, it was the 2nd of 3 of those ships built. the Brittanic was still under construction, when Titanic sank and left Jack and Rose clinging 2 that mantle (;oD). They modified it so it wouldn't sink like Titanic did (and it didn't sink like Titanic, it sank faster, but because it struck a mine, not an iceberg, and the portholes had been left open. Even more of a sidebar: Funny thing is that most people forget the Olympic, which was the first of the three built. It sank a German U-boat during WWI by ramming it (causing all kinds of damage 2 the Olympic in the process, but it didn't sink). It even kept going until well in2 the 20's, and was nicknamed "Old Reliable" as a result. End of sidebar:

-ol' 2long

Edited 2 add:

Answer, "Of course." Think about why that is.

but the thing is..it isn't YOUR job to enforce the TOS. I didn't agree to a box that gave YOU the authority to edit anything. So, report a post...if the mods see a problem...THEY will edit.

I would LOVE to see a study that shows what the impact is of a parent continually assaulting a family versus suicide.

I am okay to agree to disagree.

I'm sorry that I was confusing, meremortal. Thank you for telling me. I don't do as well with the written as I wish that I did. I'll try to explain it more clearly.


What I tried to say (in the whole paragraph, not just the first part of it) was in response to that part of the quote. I probably should have deleted the first part. Sorry about that.

What I tried to say is that in the incident that I wrote about, I behaved in a way that felt good in the moment with no regard to the children who would be in the care of that OW afterward. In that moment, disregarding the effects my actions could have on that OW's children was no different than a Wayward or OW disregarding the effects their behavior could have on the children. What else did we have in common? It felt good and felt justified.


I am very happy and relieved to hear that. A Moderator showed up within minutes of being notified and the thread seemed to be watched pretty closely after that.


I agree with you. In the past, my posting "style" has been attacked by others who don't agree with it. I believe that different people are reached through different "styles" and I believe that it's up to the Moderators to tell someone to go away, not any of us, especially if it's our "style" that isn't getting through to them. Maybe someone else's will.


Understanding them helps me to effectively confront them, just like studying OW's to understand them helped me to be effective in getting rid of the one who wanted to harm my children. I am a strong believer in being both honest and compassionate, but that does not mean that I'm supportive of their adultery or showing them sympathy. Not by a longshot. I've never had a Wayward or OW be confused in the least about that!


I agree, and I see it going both ways. I think disrespect by Betrayeds is against the TOS the same as it is by Waywards and OW's. Believe me, if I thought that engaging in disrespectful behavior was good for a Betrayed, I would start a thread for it myself and tell you some of my "classics." But I know that it doesn't help us move forward in recovery and can actually hinder our recovery.


I get upset myself when that happens. But if I can't refrain from engaging with them on their level, I don't post on the thread. If it's too upsetting for me, I don't continue to read it. I don't think that makes me a wimp or anything, it's just that I know that oftentimes the reaction is what floats their boat (IRL I use a vulgar term that I think is more fitting, but that darn TOS you know ).

I wouldn't want to play into the hands of active Waywards and OW's who are just here for sport. I wouldn't want to be the source of their glee. I wouldn't want to be a part of one particular game where OW pretends to be "her guy" and gets the BS's to drive him back to her instead of to his BW. But what else do they have to do while waiting for their phones to ring when "their guy" is taking a dump? (Ever notice how many get called from the bathroom? It's weird! LOL)


I hope that I've been more clear, meremortal. Thank you again for telling me.


ETA: Sorry for being so slow in getting back with you.

I agree with you, medc. That's why I reported the thread to the Moderator.

I also posted that I reported the thread and why I reported it. That way, if it did NOT get edited then anyone reading the thread at that time or in the future would know that it was within the TOS and not that the Moderators didn't happen to see it.

I'm sure that the Moderators get a lot of threads reported that don't get edited because they are not in violation of the TOS. When I reported that thread, I wasn't sure if it would be edited or not. It was up to the Moderator and I would have accepted the decision either way. If it wasn't edited I would have wondered why and might have emailed to ask, but that would have been to get a better understanding so that I wouldn't waste their time in the future by reporting threads that were not in violation of the TOS.

medc, if you ever get the impression that I am trying to enforce the TOS, please say something to me about it. That is not my intention at all.

Want to hear something funny? I didn't even want to be the one to report it, but it didn't look like anyone else was going to. Discussing different views about posting, sure.....being responsible for "policing" the board, no way!

This has all been wonderful stuff. So much to take in and absorb.

This thread has gone on so long I've almost forgotten the original questions.

But to answer at least one of them, yes I believe a repentant FWS has a lot to offer. I believe a healthily recovered BS has a lot to offer.

If we didn't believe in redemption, why would any of us be here? There are myriads of places to go to cry over life's injustices or hardships. But this place offers solutions, and we should be happy every time we see someone "get it", be it a FWS or a BS.

If we believe no WS can ever be 100% forgiven and reinstated into the state of grace, there would be no purpose for this place at all. We would just recommend anyone who is ever betrayed to immediately go to Plan D, no questions asked.

I'm grateful to every recovered person here, former wayward or former betrayed, who is truly trying to help save marriages in a healthy way, whether it is through prayer, Biblical counsel, or harsh 2x4s. As long as it is within reasonable bounds, and an underlying sense of truth and Christian caring is present, I don't care which styles are used, because different approaches will reach different people.

We are all big boys and girls and if we REALLY want to learn, we will be happy for the lessons and not overly concerned about the delivery.

Just my 2 cents, FWIW.

Absolutely! Good post keepitreal, and well said.

And medc...you are welcome...and appreciated!

Ok, I've admitted to a major personality flaw of mine. I don't even know if it's really a flaw, it's part of who I am and I'm aware of it and I try to work on it. There are also many good personality traits I own.

Pep and Mel and others have said what their personalities are. Should they be changed or should we accept everyone as different. Personally, I accept that we are all different. We are made up of our FOO, our life experiences, our innate personalities, our genetic makeup, our beliefs, our self awareness or having no self awareness at all.

I can't accept we're all perfect. We just aren't. We're all flawed human beings in one way or another.

I'd really be interested to see what people see as their flaws (for want of a better word) and, even more interested in the pluses in their personalities.

I've been reading this thread with some interest.

I believe that 2x4s can be civilly given, and are often very, very necessary for WS.

I DO see a lot of posts that seem to be molly-coddling a WS, and it seems to me that they serve to help keep the wayward mentality going.

Molly-coddling a WS with gentle, and even some psycho-babblish posts, can actually entrench them into an attitude of entitlement. Writing things to make them "feel good" can actually hurt them in the long run. They will like the posters who made them feel good, and get angry at the posters who deliver the 2x4.

Which words do you think the WS will think the most about? Sure, they'll remember that the "Feel-good Poster" made kind remarks to them.

However, when someone says something to you that makes you angry, what do you do? Well, if you're like me, you probably go over and over WHAT THEY SAID for quite a while, until the anger finaly dissipates...and, often, by that time, I have, in my personal experience, managed to figure out the truth of what that person was saying.

Active WS SHOULD feel badly about what they are doing. They SHOULD be told that they are destroying their children's lives. They SHOULD be told that they are willfully sinning.

Active WS DO lie like rugs, and should be called on their lies.

They SHOULD be told that the OP is NOT the wonderful person they think he/she is.

Yes, telling WS all this stuff makes them angry, but it is the TRUTH. The TRUTH is what they NEED. Might not be what they WANT, but where has doing what they want gotten them so far? In a HUGE mess, that's where!

I think this illustrates an important point.

Demonstrating to someone how their behaviour is damaging themselves and others, and how their choices will have painful consequences, is respectful.

Telling someone that they are a worthless human being is NOT respectful.

I suspect the frustration of not being able to get the WS to 'feel badly about what they are doing' is what tempts people to attack the person, rather than the behaviour.

TA

Acting like/being a worthless human being is not respectful to those around them. Pointing out the obvious is, IMHO, just fine.



or perhaps, sometimes people feel that the person...not only the behavior...needs a good whack across the head. When people do things long enough...they are defined by their behaviors...hence they are bad people(but, they can change).

So, if someone is acting disrespectfully, it's therefore OK to retaliate by acting disrespectfully in return? Sounds like playground morality to me.

Does returning disrespect with disrespect tell the person that there's anything wrong with being disrespectful? Is it supposed to annoy the person and then make them wake up to the fact that they're being disrespectful too? Or does it lower their estimation of the person who's behaving just as badly as they are themselves, and make it seem OK for them to get down to the same level?

It seems to me that shame actually arises in the good part of a person - the part that wants to love and respect others. A WS has usually closed off that part of themselves in order to do what they're doing. If that part needs to be brought back to life, it doesn't seem to me that telling the person that they're wall-to-wall scum is going to wake them up to their own conscience. All it does is to harden their defences and give them a target to attack other than their own behaviour.



TA

I do not think it is disrespectful to call evil by its true name. I think you are doing them a great disservice by not doing this.

Thankfully the liberal attitude that you have is not shared by all.

What you might decide is disrespectful to you...may not be to other people (as evidenced by some of the comments on this thread). I have used very aggressive comments and approaches with some posters...and will continue to do so...as it yields very good results with some people (and for those it doesn't...there are always posters like you and LA to pick up the slack). Different approaches reach different people.

Personally, I have found some of the more liberal posters on these boards to be hugely disrespectful to BS. The thing is, I am not looking for the seal of approval from any poster here...I post what I think and feel and if the mods decide it needs to be edited...so be it.

This is a futile argument since we all have different notions of what constitutes "disrespect." We will never agree on what constitutes disrespect because it is so subjective. One man's notion of disrespect is another man's notion of straight talk. Personally, I consider it disrespectful to tell other posters how to post. But so what? You know what they say about opinions.

In the end it doesn't matter one damn whit what I think of another posters level of "respect," all that matters is what the MODS THINK.

These discussions NEVER go anywhere because we have no control over other posters, so I just don't know why we keep doing this. No one is going to change their posting style to suit another poster, so what is the point? I have been told I am mean and disrespectful for years, but do I care? Nope.

I much prefer to focus my energy on the one thing I CAN CONTROL: MY OWN POSTS. I would much rather focus on something that is positive and produces RESULTS: helping other people around here. Griping about other posters helps no one and avails nothing.

This seems dishonest to me....

This is an INCREDIBLE statement....

AMAZING!!

Please explain? I am not getting your point.

Same here.....

It doesn't matter what YOU think but it matters what the MODS think?

That's confusing to me.

What's the truth?

Oh. Now I understand. You mean the the MB MODERATORS in the PLURAL SENSE. I get it now. Never mind.

What in the WORLD are you talking about?

Mimi,

When I read Mel's statement about what "mattered" in regards to opinions, what I got out of that was this:

In the end, the only opinion around the BOARDS regarding "respect" that matters is the mods because they have editing power. They can edit any post, any time. They can change a post - and in the end, remove the poster forever (well, except maybe in the case of BA ). So their opinion matters because they make the decisions around here.

IRL, of course, your opinion matters, mine does, everyone else's "matters".
Just not in the same way.

That's what I got out of what Mel said.

SB