MO5:

I'm going to lecture you on usage, because I completely understand what you're saying, and agree with the intent---but you're using (IMO) the wrong words.

You said:

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">with all do respect to those who think compromising is a bad deal</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">The essence of compromise is (from dictionary.com):

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">A concession, often to something detrimental or pejorative</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">And then you say

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">We as a couple are not going to agree on every thing totally and completely it just isnt happening. Now if I were forced into nc or making a decision i didnt want, I can see problems and resentment down the road.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Which is entirely true for every marriage on this planet. When I think "compromise", I think of one person having to "eat" a situation that they don't agree with. That will cause resentment. Now that is exactly what you don't want to have happen.

And then you describe your "compromise process"

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial"> But my husband and my self have learned to give and take and work things out till we both agree, and are happy with what we agree on, it might be that one of us has to give or take, but we dont do any thing that neither one of us can live with. That does not cause resentment.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">What you have described is essentially, to the last detail, the process of using the policy of Joint Agreement to successfully brainstorm and safely negotiate to a win-win situation. In Marriagebuilder terms, this is not a compromise, but a successful use of the POJA.

It's one of the cornerstones of a good marriage---and I'm thrilled that you're able to use it so successfully. Around here, though, please don't call it "compromise". <img border="0" title="" alt="[Smile]" src="images/icons/smile.gif" /> It's more than that.

<small>[ April 10, 2003, 08:57 AM: Message edited by: K ]</small>

forgive me if i have offended you and thank you for the english lesson, but what we do is not completely poja because only one of us is practicing any thing on this site,

so we talk it out till we find something that suits us both and makes us both hapy not just one of us..... that better <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

Momof5,

Yeah you have it. My warning to Amy has to do with most people think and use as compromise which is much closer to the dictionary definition. It will cause much resentment.

That is the subtle part of the POJA. It is doing what you and your H do. It takes communications and that communications may take some time to arrive at where you are both happy.

My point to Amy was needs to understand that "just swallowing" it and not arriving at a point where they are both happy is not good in the long run. Yes, she does need to be very sensitive to her H right now, she is asking a lot of him, and he is very young. But, that does not mean swallowing something she really doesn't agree with.

I realize these are tough issues, but that means that they require (as you do Momof5) a lot of discussion on the many ways an answer can be reached.

I offer an example. Suppose I am feeling like dessert, and would really like some ice cream. My W on the other had says she doesn't want ice cream, but rather pie. I don't want pie, really don't even like the texture of pie.

Now a GOOD POJA would be for us to realize we don't need dessert and skip it. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="images/icons/grin.gif" /> Not in my lifetime. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" />

So what needs to happen, we need to stop and talk: "what are you really hungry for? Is it really ice cream or perhaps something that some other dessert might provide? If we talk enough, I might decide that actually donuts might just do the trick. She on the other hand still has something about a pie. Then she thinks (actually I would do this love them <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="images/icons/wink.gif" /> )how about apple fritters?" Meets the donut criterion, and the fruit aspect that she was really looking for in a pie.

So we end up somewhere different than either of us started but we are both happy, and we haven't compromised in the strictest since of the word.

I know I am preaching to the choir with you K, and Momof5, but hopefully a few others will read this.

The thought I had when I first mentioned to Amy is that the word compromise is often taken various limits. Some like the strictest definition seem to me a win-lose, often they are lose-lose (neither is really happy but take comfort that the other person isn't real happy either), and then there is the win-win compromise which I associate with the spirit of POJA.

I know this is symantics, but sometimes the devil is in the details. I think the message to some as young as Amy and her H, is that the details do matter, and swallowing something they don't like will come and get them and their marriage.

Must go, another busy day.

Hope I haven't muddied the waters.

God Bless,

JL

MO5,

You didn't offend me at all. But because this is a MarriageBuilder's board, and Dr. Harley is fairly specific on usage, I wanted to clarify your message, so that others who read will understand this in the context of the Concepts, Q&A columns, and other places where the terms compromise and POJA are being used.

(Waving to JL...)