<small>[ August 30, 2004, 07:45 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]</small>

I try not to post too much Christian stuff on this site and remain neutral but your last two posts remind me of the sermon I gave this weekend. It was on Roman's 5: 1-5 - With a message of Hope and the theme was that suffering builds perserverance, perserverance builds character, and character builds hope. Here's a small portion of it:

If you have put down your hammer and nails, and the self-designed blueprints for your own life…if you have quit trying to make life work through your own engineering, and trusted Christ to forgive you for such sinfulness, and you know that Christ has paid the penalty for your sin on the cross, then you are a Christian. You share in the hope to be revealed in the future. You will never be disappointed. How do you know that your hope is real? You know because you have an understanding of God’s love for you in your heart. The Holy Spirit has made that known to you and God has accomplished it all through the atoning death of his Son.

If you're interested, I could e-mail you the sermon (write to me at bill@salinaplaningmill.com).

Hugs, Thoughts, & Prayers

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">(A little different question than the "trying" thread.) </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">So lets tie the 2 together a little.

What most people see as the "180" is based on Divorve Busting 180, which is, in my mind, maniplulation. However, it is more to maniplulate a WS out of the fog that to manipulate a desired outcome.

The way you describe 180 is more of turning your own life around and moving on with yourself. This is not manipulation unless it is intended to "trick" WS into seeing what they are missing.

Laura, this is an iteresting topic coming from someone like yourself. Without a little manipulation in life, how could anyone ever sell anything. Wether it be selling yourself or selling a product.

WIWH

I think that the 180 may be an attempt at manipulation but it also serves to help you recover if it doesn't work. If reconcilliation isn't in the cards, you are ahead of the game in the healing process.
Most of what we do is a reaction to a negative emotion. If its working we wouldn't be trying to fix it.

What most people see as the "180" is based on Divorve Busting 180, which is, in my mind, maniplulation. However, it is more to maniplulate a WS out of the fog that to manipulate a desired outcome.
No, that is incorrect.
The 180 is very, very simple. If you do something and you get no effect or a negative effect, do domething different.

The way you describe 180 is more of turning your own life around and moving on with yourself.
Correct. The 180 has nothing to do with turning your life around.

This is not manipulation unless it is intended to "trick" WS into seeing what they are missing.
Again, not the intent of the 180. The 180 is to get a good/psoitive response from the ws.

I think that the 180 may be an attempt at manipulation but it also serves to help you recover if it doesn't work.
It not to help you to heal at all. It is used simply to change the dynamics of the relationship, which in turn will change the realationship.

<small>[ June 08, 2004, 11:29 AM: Message edited by: Chris -CA123 ]</small>

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> What most people see as the "180" is based on Divorve Busting 180, which is, in my mind, maniplulation. However, it is more to maniplulate a WS out of the fog that to manipulate a desired outcome.
No, that is incorrect.
The 180 is very, very simple. If you do something and you get no effect or a negative effect, do domething different</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">This does not mean that it is incorrect to say that it can be manipulation

I believe that if you do what you believe is right and you don't get the desired outcome, that it is manipulative to do the opposite of what you believe is right so you can get the desired outcome.

I don't think that all of the 180 concept is manupulative but it can be if one uses it to try to manipulate an outcome.

Putting your dinner plate in the dishwasher instead of in the sink so S doesn't have to do it for you is not being manipulative.

Pretending that you would rather go to the balet than sit home, drink beer and watch football all sunday so you can get lucky sunday night I think is manipulative

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> This is not manipulation unless it is intended to "trick" WS into seeing what they are missing.
Again, not the intent of the 180. The 180 is to get a good/psoitive response from the ws.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I agree, this is not the intent of the 180 we are speaking of but people can do oposites of what they normally would in an attempt to be manipulative.

<small>[ August 30, 2004, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]</small>

Hmm. It seems to me that this subject is really dealing with motives. And some time back I gave up on ever having completely pure motives. I decided that I needed to be content with having the right priorities.

For example, if I am courting someone and I give her a gift, am I not being manipulative? After all, gift-giving is a "love language" that could encourage her to find me more attractive.

Consider also that I expect to derive a certain amount of joy from watching her receive and appreciate my gift. Is not this an additional selfish (albeit non-manipulative) motivation for my action?

I am aware of these motives as I give my gift, but...if my primary motivation is to bring her joy, then I am satisfied that my selfish and manipulative motivations are in appropriate balance.

(Note that this is not for me an academic distinction. I have been forbidden to give gifts to my lady friend who does not want to be courted, on the grounds that she does not want to deal with romance in her life at this time, and so she does not want those sorts of feelings to be aroused. And yet on a number of occasions I have offered and she has accepted various "gifts" and services. I made those offers fully aware that both the offer and the action could affect her feelings about me, and thus I risked manipulating her feelings against her will. And yet I made no offer without first trying to assess whether she would consider it a romantic gesture. If I thought there was significant risk of that, I declined to make the offer - not because I feared she would be upset with me, but because I did not wish to violate her boundaries. I had to satisfy myself that my motivation was pure enough.)

To apply this principle to the implementation of Plan A, I believe that you should always be careful not to violate your spouse's boundaries (it's a matter of respect) or pretend to be something you do not want to be. But as long as no boundaries are violated, and love rather than desperation is the primary motivating force, then I see nothing wrong with "manipulating" a spouse back toward a mutually beneficial commitment to the marriage.

For example, if I am courting someone and I give her a gift, am I not being manipulative?
Absolutely. You are vying for her affections/attention. If you don't get it, you may try something else (a 180?) and if that doesn't work, you give up (or go to jail for stalking <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="images/icons/shocked.gif" /> ), cause you would be getting nothing in return.

This type of question came up about a year ago.
Someone was talking about "unconditional love" and he explained that he did everything for his wife simply because he loved her. He was seeking NOTHING in return from her. If he was trying to get "something" from her, then it was "manipulation".
Tried to get him to understand that he loved her because she filled his emotional needs, not (necessarily) a one for one swap of "I'll take you out to dinner if you give me sex".
He never did get it.

To me, manipulation means sneaky and doing a 180 is not sneaky.

<small>[ June 08, 2004, 03:33 PM: Message edited by: Chris -CA123 ]</small>

<small>[ August 30, 2004, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]</small>

<small>[ August 30, 2004, 07:47 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]</small>

So... Plan A... then Plan B... and 180!!
You do a 180 based on your spouses responses to your actions.

While in Plan B, your spouse is pretty much irrelevant to anything you do.
The 180 is not (necessarily) consistent with Marriage Builders (per Dr Harley and Steve Harley).
Do the 180 or do Marriage Builders but not both.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Chris -CA123:
<strong>This type of question came up about a year ago. Someone was talking about "unconditional love" and he explained that he did everything for his wife simply because he loved her. He was seeking NOTHING in return from her. If he was trying to get "something" from her, then it was "manipulation". Tried to get him to understand that he loved her because she filled his emotional needs, not (necessarily) a one for one swap of "I'll take you out to dinner if you give me sex". He never did get it.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Hmm. Are you sure that guy wasn't me? Because this comes awfully close to what I believe.

It was only after I stopped worrying about whether I was going to get anything in return that I was able to let go and just love my wife. When I started choosing whether I would do something she asked me to do for her (or with her) based on whether I wanted to do it rather than on whether a fair exchange would ever take place, I found that as I often as not, I really did want to do it - because I loved her and I loved doing things for her and I loved spending time with her. By going the "unconditional love" route, I was able to do these things and enjoy them without resentment.

I was not seeking or expecting anything in return. But of course, I was getting something in return, and that was the joy of spending time with someone I loved and the joy of giving to someone I loved - and perhaps simply the joy of loving.

I have said before that one of the reasons I believe I never stopped loving my (now ex-)wife despite the way she came to treat me, was that she went a long way toward meeting my emotional needs just by being herself.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"><strong>To me, manipulation means sneaky and doing a 180 is not sneaky.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I pretty much agree here. When both parties understand what is going on, there is little cause for accusations. In fact, the primary reason I have felt comfortable making the decisions I have made regarding my lady friend is that I have been very up-front with her about how I feel, and she has been very up-front with me about how she feels. So we are both aware that when I ask to do something for her, it is not because I expect to win her affections, but because I want to do it anyhow, even if she never wants our relationship to go beyond friendship.

Hmm. Are you sure that guy wasn't me?
If you don't know, then it definitely wasn't you.

I was not seeking or expecting anything in return. But of course, I was getting something in return, and that was the joy of spending time with someone I loved and the joy of giving to someone I loved - and perhaps simply the joy of loving.
You were getting something in return.
The joy you got was because she was happy and returned something to you (she spent time with you, she held your hand, etc).

There is a general expectation that your spouse will love you and do things for you.
Unconditional love will last only for a short time if nothing is returned. If you get nothing in return, why would you continue to do it?
The person you are loving unconditionally never acknowledges you, never says thank you, never spends time with you, etc.

<small>[ June 08, 2004, 05:00 PM: Message edited by: Chris -CA123 ]</small>

<small>[ August 30, 2004, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]</small>

My perception of 180 seems, to me, to be consistent with MB.
Okay, but Steve Harley & Dr Harley both told me personally that the 180 (the whole plan) is not consistent with Marriage Builders. Portions of it could be used, but if you are going to use MB, then use MB. If you are going to use DB, then use DB.

To me, a 180 means building one's self up
But that is not the 180 according to Michele Weiner-Davis.
The 180 is simple.
If you are not getting the expected results, then do the opposite of what you have been doing.
(This is directly from Michele Weiner-Davis)

Example: Your husband is late coming home. You have always given him the 3rd degree after he walks in. Doing a 180 would be to smile and ask him what he wants for dinner or to not say anything to him.

Doing a 180 is changing what you do to get a positive result from your spouse, not about making yourself happy/building yourself up.

<small>[ June 08, 2004, 05:49 PM: Message edited by: Chris -CA123 ]</small>

<small>[ August 30, 2004, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]</small>

I agree I don't agree with the version of the 180 as stated. My view of what it means to me is outside that... and I do like the term 180... cause it means "turnaround". STOP going in the negative... turn completely in the other direction... the positive.
The 180 is a small part of the Divorce Busting. The 180 is not the only thing you do just as stopping LoveBusters is not the only thing you do when in Plan A – Marriage Builders.

The correct way to do the “real divorce busting” 180 is to do things which have a positive reaction/effect and stop doing things which have a negative reaction/effect.

The ”180 list” which pops up here from time to time simply says to not do certain things, even if they are positive. For instance it says, “do not say I love you and do not set date nights”.
It may be a 180 but this is not something which should (necessarily) be done.
If saying “I love you” is working and the spouse is not getting all ticked off about it, continue.
Likewise with the “date nights”. If you are both having a good time and it is not objectionable to the ws, then continue to do it. This is inline with both MB & Divorce Busting
Doing a 180 means if you are doing these things and the other spouse gets ticked off, stop doing it.

OK... that's all I have time to respond to. Bottom-line, I'd like to throw out the author's concept of a 180.
Then you‘ll have to get rid of a few million books (Divorce Remedy and Divorce Busting) as well as her web site and convince at least as many people that belive in MB principles that your concept is better. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

We're talking about something else. My concept of a 180, a complete turnaround, is different.
What you are talking about is more along the line of the entire “Divorce Busting” principles in general, of which the 180 is a small part.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> We're talking about something else. My concept of a 180, a complete turnaround, is different.
What you are talking about is more along the line of the entire “Divorce Busting” principles in general, of which the 180 is a small part.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">It's been a while since I read DIvorce Busting but I remember it as Chris says.

Turn yourself around to be a better person. Make yourself more desireable and if this has a positive affect on WS then great, if not, then you are still a better person. 180 is just one of the many ways of doing this.

DB also explains a last resort 180 wich can get pretty extreem and can become manipulative under the wrong motivations.

Here are some older threads of intrest

http://www.marriagebuilders.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=37;t=014880;p=1#000002


http://www.marriagebuilders.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=31;t=007076#000000

<small>[ August 30, 2004, 07:51 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]</small>