doingf

"truthfully, I wouldn't know if I was flirting or not, I wouldn't know if someone was flirting back. If my H asked me to stop talking to men or "flirting" I seriously wouldn't know what I could or couldn't do"


Truthfully, if your WH pointed out what you were saying was causing him to trigger, is there no way that you then could try to not say those things?

Truthfully, if your WH pointed out that you chating and being very friendly with other men was making him uncomfortable, is there no way that you can still chat up the women and not the men?

It may very well be that you do not need or will never need stronger boundries. If a WH does and is now working to maintain them. Why can't his BW do the same as him, for him, when this would make him feel secure?

The Road, Oh I totally understand, and trust me when I say that your preaching to the choir.
What your saying would take some serious thinking on the H's part for sure when speaking to women, he would have to alter his "friendly" way of saying things somehow.
I am just saying that I don't know how I would alter my social being to make my H comfortable if the tables were turned, how would I talk to men?
I just don't know where THAT paticular boundry is.
Would I only speak when spoken to?
Would I just take the chance that they think I was stuck up by not being friendliar?
First off and foremost I would certainly not care what anyone else other then what my H thought of me, but I just don't know how I would handle that with the men that knew me when I was "friendliar"
This H either doesnt' have a clue where the boundry is on his social ways, is it because he really dosen't know?
Just with his respone of "I am just being friendly" when it was clearly pointed out that this bothers his W makes me wonder if H isn't still on the WW side.

DF i am not even talking about women or men that we know. I do not have a problem with him joking around with the women of the couples that we hang around with. I feel this is a little different, we both know the people and we both joke around with the spouses, not anything of a sexual nature, just silly things.

However while in public places, although i speak to people (sometimes i start the conversation sometimes they start the conversation), i do not make a "cute joke" to a complete stranger. My H while in public places will also talk to people, however he almost seems to go out of his way to make a "cute joke" with mostly females.

I do not really think he is still wayward mainly because i still snoop alot and things really are going pretty good. He has ALWAYS been this way and this is something that we have never been able to POJA. He thinks it is just "friendliness" i think it is "flirtiness", pre-A i guess i just dealt with it because every time we would talk about it, i got the same thing.

Since the A, i can not deal with it because to me what are "weak boundaries" with other women helped lead to the A.

df

"how would I talk to men...I just don't know where THAT particular boundary is...Would I only speak when spoken to?
Would I just take the chance that they think I was stuck up by not being friendlier?"

Supposedly today women hit on men just as much as the men hit on them. I don't know first hand. I'm not single, and I'll admit to being at least thirty years past eighteen. Though in my day mostly it was the guy's that did the asking.

We knew that women/girls practiced selectivity in who would get to enjoy there presence. Even though on the surface we only thought in terms of she liked me or liked some one else more.

And, we ignored that in the back of our minds and maybe also back in the girls minds that as in the rest of the animal kingdom as from when we watched nature shows on TV. The female always mated with the one they wanted to for what they perceived as superior genes.

Any way, us guy's would not want to get shot down when we approached a girl. Though to say we did not take it personally, is maybe a poor choice of words, but I can't find any better.

We, us guy's, realized that not ever girl was going to be willing to go out with us. So if a girl acted with distance we did not take it as her automatically as them being unfriendly or stuck up, she just wanted a better deal then we were offering.

Women have to be the gate keepers for their eggs.

Wayward dosen't mean that he is having an A, it means that he could still think like a WH.
I just don't see where a line in the sand can be drawn on this one, or how a spouse would even begin to know how to not be so friendly. The only boundry I see that you have explained is that he needs to refrain from any "out of the way" comments, and where can that line be drawn? I see your side I do, I just don't see how it could work.

The Road, I am not a teen either, I am talking also in generalizations, I am trying to point out where to draw the line in the sand.
No one has really answered that, and I don't think a line can be drawn, my friendliness may be someone else's flirtations and vice versa, I just don't see how it can be done.

Of course it was not like him, but he has weak boundaries or he would not have had an A. So he knew before that he would do it once? I mean if he was not able to stop himself once, there is no way he can stop himself the second time. Tell him that his "friendly" reminds you of his A. When he does it, let your emotions surface and let him suffer the wrath. Surely he will start to figure it out after you have TOLD him and your ACTIONS back up what you have told him.

DF

I'd rather have to nail jell o to a wall. Circles, here we go.

The start of this thread a spouse saw behavior that made her feel uncomfortable and wanted her spouse to stop.

He claim he was not aware. Just as you, DF claim to be clueless.
I'll let your claim to be clueless stand. That you couldn't tell if your behavior could be considered to be flirtatious.

The million dollar question for you DF, is if these flirtatious behaviors were pointed out to you by your spouse, then would you not know what behaviors to avoid, and then not do them?



To me when one claims no knowledge then you give them the benefit of the doubt.

When you point out the behaviors that need to changed to some one, and they do not change they can no longer claim to be clueless. Can they?

Those not willing to change once shown how, are selfish, and have a road named after them "ONE WAY". Are they not?

EXACTLY!! I hate to say that about my own H but this sums my thoughts up pretty well. Thanks Road!

SC:

Pep stated the most important part:

"Get back to the principles."

Early in your Marriage, your *wonderful* husband told you:

Your a *Plain Jane* and if he "hadn't married you, he would have a bombshell"

How disrespectful is that? Put you in your place didn't he?

Then he goes out and flirts and puts smiles on other womens faces. And in the process demeans you in front of them!

And BTW, he then goes and has an A.

So, really, you asking him about his flirting and how it hurts you was all in your head.

It's the principle.

HE told you you weren't good enough. (Plain Jane)
He flirts with other attractive woman even though you tall him it hurts you.

The principle is to not intentionally "hurt your spouse"

HE can be charming. He can talk to folks. Men women and children. But HE CAN'T FLIRT. HE CAN'T Demean YOU.

He has been doing it for YEARS.
He has been asked to stop.

So, go back to the principle. Do not intentionally hurt me.

LG

Well my goodness. I did not know i was as "thick headed" as i feel right now. I guess Road said it best earlier when he said something about spelling it out for me .

I think i FINALLY get what you all have been trying to say to me.

Don't talk about "friendly versus flirty", talk about "not hurting each other"?

SC - this is "typical" Wayward Spouse talk.

"Just TRUST me, I know that I won't do that again."


The "problem" is NOT the THEY "know" they won't ever do that again, the problem is that YOU DON'T know that because none of us can read minds and you DO KNOW that he already DID choose such actions and IS CAPABLE of doing so even if the "back then" never thought he would engage in adultery.

The "problem" is that TRUST is destroyed and trust takes a VERY long time to rebuild, and then it's only possible to rebuild EARNED TRUST, not the sort of "blind trust" that your husband is referring to here in his "just trust me" attitude.

And you are RIGHT ON TARGET that THE issues is NOT doing things that will hurt our spouse, no matter what we think. Again, it is NOT "our thoughts," but the thoughts of our spouse (who we don't want to hurt) that is important.

DO you "overreact?" Maybe, but more likely you don't. More likely it's a NORMAL reaction to his "Insensitivity" to the conditions HE has 'set up' in your mind and emotions as a CONSEQEUNCE of his previous choices that he may have even thought at the time "wouldn't hurt you."

It is TIME for him to "get real" with the consequences of his previous action on his life WITH you today.

Period.

And feel free to tell him I said so if you want to bring the topic up as a subject of discussion about what "someone on MB said".

DF

care to tackle my last two questions?

if my H told me that he felt I was being flirtatious in such a manner as this, personally, I would not know what I could or couldn't do. Like I said before, I am social, I will talk to anyone in my way, I don't care who it is, men women or children and I talk to them all the same. To me this IS nailing Jello to the wall, she said he spoke to an "attractive" women without warrant.
This is not cut and dry. Of course if you want to save your M and your asked to not do something, then by all means you don't do it. My question is and has been, what is H being asked to stop doing? Does H know exactly what it is he needs to stop?

I'll try and tackle this.

The "friendly towards opposite sex" spouse is filling a need. This is filling an EMOTIONAL NEED , unless the friendliness is for business purposes ,like a sales position where it literally PAYS to be friendly or a person who is trying to get better tips.

So, the original poster has a husband who is getting at least some of his emotional needs met by flirting with women who are not his wife.

The underlying principle needing to be addressed is that spouses both become aware that their most important emotional needs are NOT TO BE MET by opposite sex persons. Friendly conversation with an attractive woman most likely meets her H's EN for ADMIRATION. His meeting that need outside the marriage puts him AT RISK for going back to that well for another sip, then another sip after that .... a risky behavior is one that meets emotional needs outside the marriage.

Do you understand?

from Basic Concepts

It is incumbent on all of us to know when we are allowing another person (a non spouse) to fill one of our important ENs.

And, if we notice that our spouse is getting ENs met elsewhere, we make an effort to meet those needs.

This protects our marriage.

The "friendly towards opposite sex" spouse is filling a need. This is filling an EMOTIONAL NEED , unless the friendliness is for business purposes ,like a sales position where it literally PAYS to be friendly or a person who is trying to get better tips.

So let me get this straight if I may, in order to get some friendliness from someone I would have to tip them with money?

I can't be friendly with someone because I am nice? What need does it serve me to be friendly?

noooooooooooooooooooooo

You missed the point - but in a very funny way