Again, AD can do whatever she wants. She is a big girl. This is a VOLUNTARY program. AGAIN. The question is WILL THAT WORK? Do you see the difference?

It is very likely that her "passion" for politics far overshadows her marriage. And I believe it does. She has no such passion for her husband. If it does, she will want to create a NEW passion that includes her husband and complements her marriage instead of taking away from her marriage. If she feels a PASSION for politics that she doesn't feel for her H, common sense dictates there will be a contrast effect as Dr Harley outlined.

As a former political activist myself, I know that my "passion" for politics did overwhelm my marriage, so I gave up the activism. My passion is now spending time with my husband. I do dabble a bit with politics from the sidelines, but it is very minor and very secondary to the time I spend with my H.

As long as your MARRIAGE is your greatest passion, of course. But it is not possible when you place that activity ABOVE your marriage like she has. She has "passion" for politics but not for her husband. That is a problem.

There is no politics, art, or whatever, that can bring the happiness of a great marriage. A great marriage affects one's quality of life.

p.s. writer, I am curious how you think you are helping her marriage by defending her "passion for politics" over her marriage?

Her marriage is a WRECK, on the doorstep of divorce, and you are campaigning for corner cutting?

What the hell?

Absolutely not. I don't think I'm campaigning for corner-cutting at all. She absolutely needs to find that passion for her H again. They need to be spending time together meeting the 4 intimate EN's.

I just don't agree that giving up something she is passionate about is the answer. That is only likely to breed resentment and make the problem worse. She's even stated that she would resent doing something like that. If someone suggested that I give up my writing and find some other pursuit that my H was interested in, I would resent the hell out of that. And I don't think creating more resentment in AD is the answer to helping her build a loving relationship with her H.

How would you know, though? You don't know better than Dr Harley. You can read his words, can't you? He has saved thousands of marriages, you have not saved one. So why would not want to help AD find passion in her own marriage? Why would you purposely contradict Dr Harley and interfere with her goal of creating a happy marriage?


Again, you don't know what you are talking about. Which begs the question. Why are you posting to her if you don't know how to save a marriage? So you can tell her what she wants to hear? At the expense of her marriage?

I feel like I need to go find my rant about musicians and repost it ... Why do some careers and interests get a special pass that makes the practitioners special people who should never have to give that up for anybody?

My rant revolves around this:

I see.

So if somebody had two children and had a passion for having a third, but her husband didn't want to have a third child with her, then you would never ask her to give up that passion, right? Even though Marriage Builders advice is the exact opposite? Something being a "passion" means you should never have to give it up?

You are creating an area of marital life that isn't subject to POJA, which is a recipe for marital disaster.

Suppose a husband has a passion for sex, but his wife has a sexual aversion. You wouldn't ask him to give it up, right? Because it's a passion, and it is a part of his identity.

I am not saying anything that is intended to interfere with AD's goal of creating a happy marriage. In fact, I very much support AD in creating a happy marriage. That's why I don't advocate telling her to do something that will build more feelings of resentment towards her H. She seems to have a great deal of resentment towards him already. Increasing that resentment doesn't seem likely to lead to her falling back in love with him, which is the ultimate goal, right?

Spending UA time with her H meeting the 4 intimate EN's will help AD fall back in love with her H, which is the ultimate goal. I believe she can do that without giving up everything else that is important to her. I believe in the concept of balance. That seems to be the only point we differ on here. I think it's important for AD (for everyone) to be happy in general. I think that marriage is certainly one source of happiness, but I don't think most people consider it their ONLY source of happiness.

Please show me the citation from Dr Harley where he advocates "balance." As far as I am concerned you are on here contradicting Dr Harley, which is very unfair to AutumnDay. You are substituting your own personal opinion for that of Dr Harleys.


You are not reading the Harley quotes we are posting and don't know what you are talking about.

Ideally, if your spouse knows that you have a "passion" for something, they would realize how important that something is to you and they would want to support it. Just like you would support their "passion." That's what married people do, they support each other, not to the detriment of the marriage, but actually to make the marriage stronger.

Dr. Harley's wife certainly realizes the passion that this man has for his work, and from what I can see, she supports that passion. If she didn't, these books and this site and all of these resources we utilize everyday wouldn't exist.

Passions are not bad. They do not have to be the enemy of a good marriage.

Where does Dr. Harley state that causing someone to feel resentment toward a spouse is a good way to help him/her fall in love with that person?

You tell me. I want a citation to support what you said about balance.

Just a reminder that the purpose of this board is to help others learn and apply Dr. Harley's program in their marriages. If you are able to help with that goal, then please do so.

Thank you.

That's an interesting way of looking at it. Personally, my vows included the phrase "forsaking all others," and I've come to believe that that means giving up any attachments that bother my wife, because I choose to put her first and am not willing for anything to come between us.


Yes, but she didn't have to support that passion, and in fact she put limits on it. Dr. Harley wanted to go on and get a PhD and Joyce did not want him to, so he didn't. Dr. Harley wanted to move to do brain research in another state for a year with a university project that was investigating the neurological basis for the feeling of romantic love, but Joyce did not want him to do that, so they didn't move. Marriage building is a shared passion for Dr. Harley and Joyce, not something that Joyce has to support in order to be a "good wife." It is voluntary on BOTH their parts.

Dr. Harley has given numerous other examples of passions he had that Joyce did not support, such as competitive chess.


Nobody said they were.


That's up to the two people in the marriage to decide, and the answer is going to be different for each marriage and passion.

You don't have any idea what you are talking about. Dr Harley speaks often of giving up his "passion" for hiking and camping to accommodate his marriage. Dr Harley gave up his passion for a chain of addiction treatment centers and sold them to accommodate his marriage.

So you have no idea what you are talking about. You are debating very common principles that most members know about.

Word. Still waiting to see evidence that the concept of "two types of resentment in marriage" has been read.

**EDIT**

A reminder that the purpose of this forum is to help posters with Marriage Builders concepts! If you cannot help in that regard, then kindly refrain from posting and stop disrupting this thread.

Please familiarize yourself with our board policy in the Announcements Section

This announcement is to clarify our policy about the discussion of other marriage books and programs on our forum. Such discussion is acceptable, except on the threads of those seeking help for their marriages. Offering alternative methods to those in need promises to confuse and discourage them, often leading to unnecessary debates. Posters attempting to help should not be put in the position of having to debate basic principles. That is not helpful to anyone, most especially the poster in need.