|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25 |
SnL, these quotes are from several of your recent posts.<p>SnL wrote: “Mostly this is just a moot exercise of academic interest, and no practical interest, and only arises out of my wife endless harangues about my physical condition as tainted....so I said it is only biology for crying out loud, get a grip, and I am done listening to the biyatching, you wore out your welcome, find something else to harangue me about, I am not your personal punching bag. Now I KNOW it probably is not the physical that is troubling her, but that is how she chooses to complain, so that is what I respond to (when I respond, mostly I keep my mouth shut, but lately she has been doing this in earshot of the kids and I am about to toss her through a wall, which I do not want to do), so instead I am moving to another house for the time being, maybe that will help reduce the hostilities.” <p>SnL, you are trying to talk and reason your way out of something you have behaved your way into. Do you understand that YOU cannot mitigate the damage you have done – and that you are continuing to do – by using your peculiar brand of logic? Your pragmatic observations are part of the problem, not part of the solution. If you use logic to try to mitigate the damage you have set into motion, EVERY syllogism and counter-argument you come up with and use on your wife is a guaranteed “love buster.” It will do nothing to improve things. It’s only purpose will be to soothe your own pain, frustration, guilt, inferiority, inadequacy. More over, you are treating the symptoms – her complaints – as what need to be addressed. They do not need to be addressed at face value. And they most certainly do not need to be addressed by your logic and “pragmatic observations.” The fact that you even open your mouth and try to correct her reasoning shows how little understanding you have psychologically, emotionally of your wife, perhaps yourself, and certainly human beings in general. The best thing you could do for the sake of the marriage is to shut your mouth, to be silent and show some genuine and extended regret and remorse for what you've done, to really listen to your wife’s pain and hurt – no matter how badly it makes you feel or pisses it off or fails to measure up to your standards of “logic.” If she says you're damaged goods, then, buddy, for the time being, you are. If she says you’re tainted physically, then buddy, that’s exactly what you are. After all, you’ve earned this. You’ve brought this about. It’s out of your hands now. Do you understand this? For all practical purposes, you are like an abuser or a rapist trying to tell his victim how to heal. You’ve lost your privilege as healer and teacher and logic policeman to your wife for the time being. Let her counselor or her friends here or in real life help her with the logic of it all and correct her reasoning if they see a need to do so. Because if you try to tell her differently and try to correct her thinking, then you are just “love busting,” which your wife in response will do also and end up making more withdrawals from you. Do you understand? You are part of the problem, not part of the solution. What you are doing – your reactivity, your “pragmatic observations,” your “logic,” your timetables and expectations, your values and priorities – are all part of the problem. They are all liabilities now, not assets, not strengths. You are not making things any better by what you are doing, not one bit better. Do you ever ask yourself that before you speak and try to correct your wife’s reasoning? – do you ever ask yourself, “Is what I’m about to say coming from what’s best in me or what’s weakest in me? Is it going to make things better, healthy, nobler or worse? Will it make things better long term or worse in the long term?” Or are you merely content to live your “radical honesty.” (In your hands, radical honest is a bludgeon. You’d likely be better off learning a bit of tact, and picking up on some of the other virtues, as well as learning to pick and choose your battles, instead of this ridiculous default you have of 'radical honesty.') As you are now and as you are now behaving, you are a contaminator in the relationship, your actions are only making things worse. All in a petty and reactive attempt to ease your own pain, soothe your ego, and be radically honest. <p>And do you understand that every time you lay out your fusion-based and wholly unchristian view of “love,” you are “love busting”? Far from having what love is and is not all sewn up, you are epitomizing the practice of unloving action. You've probably repented a little, but you wanted this done with and over according to your timetable. But the moment you strayed from the marriage, things stopped proceeding according to your time lines. The pain and disillusionment you have set into motion in you wife are not yours to schedule and make timelines for. Do you understand that? This is her pain to deal with, don’t make it worse by contributing more pain to her by offering her your “pragmatic observations” or by treating everything she says as needing to be addressed by your logic. You application of logic to what she’s saying is counterproductive and, more to the point, is a defense mechanism. What she’s expressing cannot be dealt with like a syllogism, you have to deal with it like poetry, like a cover story, and understand that she is speaking to you figuratively, using analogies, hyperbole, etc. It’s not to be taken literally – which is what you are doing every time you interject some of your logic and pragmatic observations.<p>You telling your wife that you're not damaged goods or tainted and uncharitably characterizing her pain and venting as "haranguing" and you misguidedly sticking up for yourself ('I'm not your personal punching bag') and your counter-venting does not help things. In fact it’s likely only making matters worse. From her point of view, it only shows her how little contrition and remorse (genuine sorrow) there is in you regarding your affair and your deception and the pain and havoc you have brought about. Have you ever thought of really applying a little Plan A of your own (and doing so genuinely) when she is speaking to you and refraining from critically and narrowly assessing what she’s saying? Have you ever considered giving her this gift as a way of expressing your sorrow and regret for the havoc you have caused? Do you understand that she is in a completely new place emotionally courtesy of your betrayal and thoughtlessness? Are you able and willing to have a little compassion for her because of this? Are you able and willing to step up and be a real man, a real human being, and show her a little understanding? So what if she doesn't describe everything perfectly or logically to you? In the interest of setting things right, you overlook it. You suck it up and let her fumble to make sense of what she's feeling and experiencing (courtesy of you and your OW/MW). You allow her space and a lot of leeway and latitude in her self-expression. That’s what remorse and redress are all about. Righting what you’ve wronged. After all, you (did A LOT to) put her in this place. Take some responsibility for it. Show some compassion for her position. Show some genuine remorse and understanding. If she wants to complain, let her. What’s the big deal? Do you compulsively have to defend yourself and keep your self-image in tact? Let her counselor or her friends here and in real life try to talk reason and logic with her if they deem that to be necessary and appropriate. You see, your doing so is not your privilege anymore. You forfeited that right when you had your affair and betrayed your wife. You don't get to betray someone's trust and then still get to play logic policeman to her; you gave up that position when you slept with someone else. For you to tell her all of the errors of her thinking is just a little bit too ripe and megalomaniacal and control freakish. It's as if the woman accused of adultery in the Gospel of John were to be the one who says “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.” From her lips, the words are a rationalization, a way of weaseling out of what she behaved herself into, they lose all of their impact. Do you understand, SnL!? Honestly, I’m not sure that you do. Instead, I think you've already begun forming your reply to all of this and defensively breaking it down “logically.” Are you able to relax for a bit and really listen without defending yourself? If not, it only shows that you are not listening to this, that you are not able and or willing to listen. Which is a bad habit. Are you able to read and listen without reacting, but instead read and listen with your heart, your soul, the highest and best in you? Are you able to do this? Are my words and thoughts just wasted here?<p>Right now you wife is complaining, bitter, pissed off, and so forth – all of which, granted does nothing to improve things as far as YOU are concerned, and does little to ease the pain of your own loss (and, yes, you do have pain. No one here is denying that. You have to go through the stages of grief, of death and dying too). Granted, what she is doing is doing little to add love deposits to your emotional bank/love tank – all of her complaining and *****ing and unhappiness and not talking as logically as you would like her to are “love busters” from your perspective. But do you know why she is bitter, angry, pissed off, complaining all of the time, love busting? Because from her point of view, she is convinced that you still do not have her best interests at heart, that you have no one’s interests at heart outside of your own. Would she be wrong in this conclusion? Honestly, and take a lot of time to think about it before you answer: Do you have your wife’s, your kids’ (I thought I read in one of your posts that you have children at home. Is this correct?) best and deepest interests truly at heart?? If you were to genuinely have her best interests at heart, how would she know -- I mean really KNOW that? Do you know what love language she would need to have that reassurance spoken to her in? Maybe in all of your own self-protective and reactive grasping for your own sense of safety and security, you’ve never really been able to get outside of yourself and your own pain and hurt and confusion and give it any real thought. So I'll give you a hint -- listening to her. Listening without impulsively and reactively and compulsively defending yourself. Listening without playing little tin god, little logic policeman to her thinking (trust me, in regards to the emotional netherworld she is in right now, you haven't a clue to its terrain. You don’t know what she’s going through). Just let her talk. Just let her express herself to you; allow the space to express all of it – the good, the bad and the ugly. Just let her spill out her pain and quit trying to defend yourself or trying to correct her thinking or feeling. Do you think you can just hurt someone deeply emotionally and expect her to get over it according to your timetable? You can’t violate someone and then say, Here, let me show you how to heal and get over this. It won’t work. 100% of the time.<p>Do you want another hint on what you can do? Spend some quality time with her. Just make yourself available to her. Don’t try to fix our problems here. Don’t worry about Selket. First things first. Deal with your marriage, deal with righting things between you and your wife. Not with trying to address the “needs” you see here. That goes on the back burner.<p>I know that this site is supposed to provide you with a position of power – that your wife was supposed to practice Plan A on you for a while so that you could break your addiction and end the insanity and let the affair die its natural death. And that this plan A was supposed to make a home and hearth for you that you would want to come back to. I have no idea if your wife ever did this or even tried to. Either way, she’s obviously not doing it now. In fact she may well be doing just the opposite – that seems to be what she’s doing according to your words here. The question is, can you genuinely understand why she’s acting the way she’s acting, doing what she’s doing, feeling what she’s feeling, or is such understanding hopelessly outside of your ken? Is such empathy possible or impossible from you? Are you able to moccasin-walk and go a mile in her shoes (or two if she presses you further into service) and really feel her pain and try on what she’s feeling and deeply sense what she’s going through? Oh, I know that you deeply want this to be done for you, that you want to have your pain acknowledged and understood, but that’s not the question. The question is whether or not you are willing and or able to bracket your own wants and needs and pain and put yourself in your wife’s field of experience and take a good, hard and even unflattering look at yourself and give her a no strings attached gift of understanding? Are you able to see yourself as she sees you, experience yourself and your actions and words and presence as she experiences it? Are you willing and or able to give her this gift? Are you able to humble yourself in this way and take the pain to your own ego and pride and self-image, perhaps even the disillusionment that this will bring with it? Are you able to pause and look legitimately at yourself from the point of view of: what if what I’m doing and what I’ve been doing has been all wrong? What if I don’t know it all? What if I’m lost here? What if what I’m doing is (a big) part of the problem? What if it’s all been counterproductive? – SnL, are you even able to tolerate my saying and suggesting these things to you? Are you able to really hear what I’m saying without formulating your responses and counter-arguments and refutations and counterexamples and avoiding really hearing what I’m saying? Are you able to let down your defenses, soothe your own hurt, bracket your own anger and upset and really hear what another is trying to communicate to you? Are you able to sit for a while with what I’ve written to you here and not simply react to it, but really give it a fair and impartial hearing?<p>A question for you, SnL. What chance is there that you might be willing to step back from your logic a bit in the sense of learning to delay gratification, not reactively and expulsively express every counter-argument that comes to mind, and instead think about your own thinking a bit more deeply and try to get at what's really driving it? Why do you think the way you do? Are you able to face yourself regarding this? Is it because of a brotherly concern for all mankind? A reverence for life? A genuine interest in the virtues? Objectivity? Self-interest? Veiled self-interest? Inferiority? Genuine compassion? Empathy? Seeking first to understand, rather than to be understood? Caritas? Christian love? Fear? A fear of death? A fear of feeling inadequacy, inferiority, shame, guilt? A fear that you're wasting your life? A fear that you’re lost? Forgiveness? Magnanimity? Remorse, regret and redress? What is the motivating force behind your thinking?<p>SnL: “I have apologized to her, many times, and I am sorry, she knows it cause I never say anything I don't mean, she is angry cause I am not remorseful or guilty in the abject sense a ws sometimes is...I never will be, those behaviours do not compute, they are nonsensical...and if I (and I have tried just to do it for her sake) tell her I am remorseful etc, she blows it off and says you don't really mean it...and she is right.” <p>How can you be sorry without being remorseful, without genuinely regretting what you’ve done for the pain it’s caused another? What are you doing to make amends?<p>SnL: “God has no objection to divorce per se...but He provides a lot of guidance on what male/female bonding is, and how it looks like...and that if it is not like that, you are not married, you are cohabitating...we cannot impose our will on God by simply going down to the courthouse and getting a marriage license or taking a vow...that does not make you oneflesh. If in our freewill we violate God's plan for us (and most do re marriage because of ignorance and youthful lust) there are consequences, and one is marital disharmony, and lack of bonding.” <p>These are serious and unsubstantiated claims. Can you substantiate them?<p>SnL: “second when well-meaning people give spiritual advice to do God's will, they are not usually being honest, they usually mean restoring the particular relationship you are in, they are pre-selecting the outcome and trying to manipulate with religion....God's will may be for the marriage to end, He may have other plans for both parties, and being receptive to God's will includes that outcome too, otherwise we are just "using" God.” <p>And elsewhere you wrote: <p>“I personally have concluded that any life strategy that is biased to only one outcome is simply coercion.” <p>Sort of like you were pre-selecting the outcome in your advice to Selket and trying to manipulate and coerce her with your repetitive pressuring of her to be “radically honest” above all other possible considerations and applicable principles? (By the way, SnL, no one had you pegged as a cult follower.)<p>You’re not some little helpless child that needs protecting. If someone or some book is trying to convert you via guilt, negative feelings, etc., to a point of view or outcome different from what you want, then dismissing it as “manipulation” is childish and self-protective. By all means, go ahead and detest the means that the author employs, but also address the specific points that the author makes and refute those. Or else your stance about it being “manipulative” is simply a way of blanketly dismissing what you don’t want to here; it’s a defense mechanism, a childish form of self-protection.<p> “I personally have concluded that any life strategy that is biased to only one outcome is simply coercion.” <p> If anyone says, “I love God,” but hates his brother, he is a liar; for whoever does not love a brother whom he has seen cannot love God whom he has not seen. – 1 John 4: 20<p>Coercion? (It seems based on only one outcome.)<p> This is my commandment: Love one another. – John 15:12<p>Manipulation? (It seems as if the outcome has been pre-selected.)<p> “so we are back to the bias that ya gotta make it work with a one particular person, whether the "couple" makes any sense or not” <p>I think Dr. Phil has said it better: “You have to earn your way out of a relationship.” The mess that is a particular marriage is the result of two people and their actions and dysfunction and resentment, pettiness, close-mindedness, particular unwillingnesses, immaturities and dependencies, and so forth. So, no, you don’t HAVE to make it work with someone, but you do have exhaust all reasonable means and possibilities. You have to try from what’s best in you, not try from the part of you that is weak, childish, complains, love busts, etc. That’s what’s meant by: “You have to earn your way out of a relationship.”<p>And, that, SnL, you are not doing. You’ve got your excuses, you’ve got your complaints, you’ve got your “feelings,” you’ve got your justifications and fine philosophy (which seems to do a poor job of balancing personal freedom with social responsibility and familial obligations), you’ve got your fine definitions of “love” and “radical honesty.” But what you do not have are any real actions designed to improve yourself or your marriage or legitimately earn your way out of it. That you do not have. That type of effort or heart or productive thinking and direction you have yet to demonstrate. <p>SnL: “I made the same vows everyone else did, but no one wants anyone to stay in a marriage just out of duty, so the vows don't really apply to anyone....and none of us can promise feelings...so what do you do? Radical honesty requires me to be forthright re my feelings about this intimate relationship, and no spouse wants to "make" a spouse remain married to them....” <p>Your vows provide you with an opportunity. That’s why you take them – for the opportunity they afford, for the sake of who you become by honoring them and living up to them, for the sake of what you must become if you are to truly honor them and really live up to them. That’s the crux of it. The highest reward you will ever get by your struggle to honor your vows and your commitment to care for and honor another as yourself is not what you get by it, but what you become by it.<p>But for many people, they do not like what they become by it; they do not like what marriage does to them. Which really means, they do not like the powerlessness, inferiority, lack of industry, lack of competence they see reflected about themselves by way of the condition of their marriage or relationship. They do not like the version of themselves that being married brings out in them. And I think that’s really the crux of the issue that you’re dealing with, SnL: You don’t like what being married has done to you, you don’t like the person you are when you are married to Thinker. That’s why you write about “fit” instead. If you fit well with another, then you’d like yourself once again, you’d be happy with yourself, you’d be more self-accepting instead of self-rejecting. Your rejection of Thinker right now and your longing for your OW/MW are secondary right now to your own rejection of the person you are (or become) when you are with Thinker and the your acceptance of the person you are (or become) with your OW/MW. Until you come to terms with your self-rejection, and see whether or not you are able to come to some semblance of self-acceptance apart from who you are with and the person you become because of that (the person that that interaction brings out in you) you’ll always be shifting scenery in your life, looking for a better fit elsewhere or mistreating the person you’re with (contaminating the relationship) because you don’t like who you are when you are with that person.<p>SnL: “marriages end when one partner can no longer hold up their end, that means does not want to be in it too (among many other reasons that could apply, such as all the flavors of abuse, neglect, personality disorders etc.). The problem seems to be many people just cannot accept the notion of a marriage ending without their being someone/something to blame...they refuse to accept the notion people often just do not fit well enough to be each others safe, healthy, nurturing place...it is that simple.” <p>First, it’s not that simple. <p>People divorce (at least the vast majority of people when they do divorce do so) because they do not like the person they have become because of their marriage (divorce is a form of self-rejection and clearing the slate so that they can start over and not so much be with someone else as simply be someone else), or they like better the person they are when they are with someone else (i.e. an affair). That’s why the people divorce or focus so much on changing the other person – because those are the two ways that people think will lead to an improved self-acceptance, a version of themselves that they can better like and accept. And they focus on changing or shifting the scenery because they do not know how to grow and mature themselves. They do not understand the processes of differentiation and emotional and spiritual maturation.<p>Also, SnL, I think I recall you being asked elsewhere before about elaborating a bit more on what you mean by “safe” and “nurturing” and “healthy,” and to discuss these more, and you didn’t answer – perhaps you didn’t see the post. (And if you weren’t asked about this elsewhere, if I am mistaken in my remembrance, then please feel free to consider this an opportunity and invitation to elaborate on these concepts and your understanding of them.) What does Thinker do that makes your marriage an unsafe, unhealthy, un-nurturing place? What do you do to contribute to the unhealthiness, insecurity and non-nurturance of the marriage? <p>SnL: “how many here would want snl meeting their needs, even if he did a great job? Likewise many people who post here I would not let meet my needs, I know they cannot do it the way I want, no matter how hard they try, or motivated they are. . . .” <p>Why didn’t you use the same or parallel grammatical construction in the first part of this? Why didn’t you write: <p> how many here would want snl meeting their needs, even if he did a great job, no matter how hard he tried, or how motivated he was? Likewise many people who post here I would not let meet my needs, I know they cannot do it the way I want, no matter how hard they try, or motivated they are. . . .<p>To me this seems to be a poignant omission. Because as I read you, motivation is one of your biggest challenges. You seem to lack willpower and be dependent on fusion for your motivation. And that seems to be the part of you that you are most reluctant to change or correct or grow out of.<p>See, the point is this; when you write this ~ “That IMO is part of the MB problem, it holds out the promise that if you just do it, your marriage will be terrific, yet we know we don't want just anyone meeting our needs...so how can that be? If it is true all you who chastise me should make a great couple with me, long as we meet the laundry list of needs, but I suspect many of you would say no way Jose...and if we were already married (before you really got to know me)...what then?” ~ many people would say “no way, Jose” to you as you are now – wounded, flailing, seemingly stubborn, thickheaded, self-righteous, close-minded, self-absorbed, lacking empathy and compassion, etc. But many people, and one specifically – Thinker – would likely be very smitten by the charming and more magnanimous, more socially conscientious, more self-confronting, less egocentric and less cocksure person you would have to be if you were to genuinely care about another (and others in general) as you do yourself. (Which, by the way, seems to be the heart of Christianity – caritas, growing to be a genuinely loving and caring person. The extreme individualism and the radically individualistic ethics that you seem to promote seems to be incompatible with the social altruism and overcoming of our inherent narcissism that Christianity points us toward.)<p>[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: Paruil ]</p>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,069
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 8,069 |
I can almost HEAR SnL feverishly typing his very lengthy reply. LMAO ......<p>[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: Resilient ]</p>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162 |
no jo, I think I have met my match in verbosity...but I would love to hash this out in person...anyways, thankyou very much paruil for your interest, and I get it that this is not about any support for me. I did read it, disagree with most of it, and have a few comments to make, if there is something you specifically would like more of a reply too, ask and I will try.<p>First I am silent through most of my wifes harrangues, second I do not owe her or anyone the use of myself as a punching bag, my offense does not grant open season on me. Second you cannot be any more remorseful than you are, I have communicated my feelings to her re my state of remorse, there is nothing more I can do, I cannot choose some other level, no one can. Third I am comfortable with my religious analysis re marriage, it is not an absolute, but if you think I was using religion to somehow condone an affair, I was not...I should have divorced with thinker a couple years ago, I regret we did not do that.....I think you forget that usually there is plenty of contribution to the demise of a marriage by both parties, thinker has much to answer for....not sure why you lay it at my feet. I had an affair, thinker is understandably hurt, it is over, she can have some leeway to express her pain, and extract her pound of flesh (is that what you were saying a bs gets to do? sure sounded like it), and then she has to deal with it in a healthy fashion. So do I, and if my way of dealing with life is hurtful to her (and vice versa) there is a solution for that, and that is what most of this has been about. I don't know why you take such issue with it. I don't say a lot of things to thinker that I do here, or with the same tone, intensity, etc. I owe her nothing on this board, it is where I search out myself, if she chooses to read and get upset, I can do nothing about it....this has been very important to me, and why you trash my efforts to understand myself, and what I need to do, seems rather unwarranted.<p>paruil...“I personally have concluded that any life strategy that is biased to only one outcome is simply coercion.” <p>Sort of like you were pre-selecting the outcome in your advice to Selket and trying to manipulate and coerce her with your repetitive pressuring of her to be “radically honest” above all other possible considerations and applicable principles? (By the way, SnL, no one had you pegged as a cult follower.)<p>snl...Doesn't fly paruil, the honesty issue is a principle, not a choice, it is not open to discussion, any more than gravity and it's consequences are. Marriage is a choice, so is divorce, both quite valid choices, hence the complaint about any process that pre-selects one outcome over the other. Some try to make marital absolutism a priniciple, they are wrong, and easily refuted.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,170
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,170 |
This was my feverish response to SnL's comments. I emailed him with a significantly shorter version (like two lines) and I really don't expect him to read this and respond to me. It just took me a while to compose and I'd hate for it to go waste. Maybe it will help someone else. I do not mean it to attack, just to challenge.<p>snl... This recurring comment thinker makes arises out of a conversation over why the sexual aspects of a pa are considered so terrible and unforgiveable etc. etc. H4F…Not Unforgivable, just difficult to forgive because it really is an enormous sin. If our spouse cheats, Jesus has given us the right to seek a divorce in that circumstance. Why not others? I don’t know; ask Him. SNL…my pragmatic observation is that it is just biology, and that part is irrelevant.... H4F…not irrelevant. Not just biology. It is spiritual biology. Jesus died in the flesh, not just in the psyche. Why, because we sin in the flesh, and in the psyche. SNL…it is the whys that are important whether a pa occurs or not (aside from std, or pregnancy issues). That someone chose to be sexually physical with another is significant NOT because of the sex itself (the notion of damaged goods), H4F…Everyone is “damaged goods.” Romans 3:23 But Jesus can make us whole again. It’s just that sex is so very personal, and the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit. H4F… 1 Cor. 6:12-19 "Flee form sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you...You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body." That says a lot about the value of the body, don't you agree? SNL…Guys often get hung up on the fact there wife was sexual with another man, and don't even much care about the reasons it happened, just that it did....this is essentially a property mentality, my spouse is MINE and so forth, but they don't much care about how much she was touched before marriage, so what is the problem.... it is just biological acts, which in themself do not change the person at all, and are irrelevant to any future reality about the person… and before anyone asks, let me say, if my wife had an affair and was sexual, the sexual part wouldn't bother me at all.....what would bother me is why, and that is what I would assess....I figured out long ago I do not own her body, and that in fact it is just a body... H4F…”The wife’s body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband’s body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife.” 1 Cor. 7:4 Sometimes men take it as an assault against themselves. That is justifiable, by this verse. Perhaps the wife reminds him too much of it, that he couldn’t save her from it. It is the logic of the emotions that the victim wants to remove the hurt part from the main part of the body. Did you know the body does this naturally when it’s forming in the womb? That is how we get identical twins. SNL…No different than the person getting in a car wreck, with the op, and having stitches, or broken bone...they are still the same person, and I doubt that injury would bother the bs much....sex is highly overated IMO....and before anyone asks, let me say, if my wife had an affair and was sexual, the sexual part wouldn't bother me at all.....what would bother me is why, and that is what I would assess....I figured out long ago I do not own her body, and that in fact it is just a body...this came about in contemplation over how difficult it is for many men to get over their wife being raped...I couldn't understand why that makes any difference to them (the sexual part, not that they were traumatized, that is a whole different issue), H4F…again 1 Cor 7:4, Plus, there was a choice to get in bed, not a choice to get in an accident. And, what if the ws gets brain damage? Imprinting happens when with another person. SNL… Those who only love someones body, I feel kinda sorry for actually. H4f…”only” being the operative word in the last sentence, and you’re right! Our bodies will one day be useless to us, but until then, it’s how we experience the world, and how we learn about ourselves. Why did God even create the physical aspect of man, if it was so unimportant? Humans are the only creatures He made with His hands. snl...I know it hurts HI, would hurt me too, and does hurt my wife for the same reason as you...those are emotional issues... what I wonder is why (and not saying you do) attach significance to this gift (and I felt the same way, so I think I understand, my w was the first)...as I matured in my thinking about life (and decades before my affair) I questioned everything, releigion, morality, ethics, all the whys....and one thing I contemplated was the issue of virginity....I came to realize it really is two things, one important one not. It is possible being a virgin is a very bad thing, something not immediately obvious due to our conditioning. 1. Is the condition of virginity, that in itself is unimportant, it is not a gift, it is nothing, there is no inherent value in the conditon, and does nothing for a marriage in itself. 2. Is why a virgin. If the reason is cause one values the psychological importance of sex and abstains unless one is properly connected to another, that validates the person doing so has their head screwed on right (psychologically speaking) cause promiscuous people are acting out dysfunction, or poor character. But if the person is obsessively a virgin and does so for the purpose of "selling" themself, or out of fearfullness for relationships, or as a way to "bind" someone with this gift...that would be bad. My point being again, it is not a gift, can never be a gift, cause has no value in inself, it's "value" is as an indicator of who you are. H4F…then virginity isn’t bad at all, is it? It’s the motivation, correct? Then, how can you say “Virginity may actually be a bad thing.” h4f, re your last post, I don't think anything I wrote here is in opposition to that, sex is two things, emotions and physical biology, I am only talking about the last part, and that getting hung up over the physical part is nonsensical, whether your spouse has or has not had sex with someone other than you is irrelevant in a physical sense, they are still the same person, nothing has changed....the issue is only why did they, that is where the emotional issues come from, and what that means to you.<p>.snl...Why? And what changes when the exclusivity is broken? I mean only physically changed, not trust issues, desireability issues etc. Why would we say to a spouse I no longer want you cause you had sex with another... what has changed in only physical terms that one can say that is the reason they don't want you any more? H4F…It’s no more nonsensical than getting hung up over the psychological, because they are intertwined. And again, you cannot separate the two. Plus, what you do to yourself, you do to your wife, and God’s holy temple. Would you be upset over someone desecrating a church? What if they touched the Ark of the Covenant, against God’s command? I hope so, cause if you did something like that, it could cost you your life. It’s not unforgiveable, but difficult to overlook. Difficult to forget. It’s called “imprinting”. It happens when people are abused. Your wife may have difficulties refraining from imagining you with OW. I have some difficulties with my abuse haunting me during sex. SNL…If in fact the issue is I don't trust you, or I want to punish you, or whatever, why not say that (and be honest, as well as accurate) instead? H4F…Forgiveness is giving up the right to punish someone. I don’t know your wife’s feelings. But I honestly would have a difficult time, especially if my H passed it off as mere biology. Your philosophy doesn’t work, because she doesn’t believe it. She only believes what she has been taught (and I think it’s God who conditions us this way.) You must say that you are sorry for ALL of it. Even if you don’t believe the way she does, you can be truly sorry you hurt her this way. SNL…My point is a focus on the physical act is ignorant, it is meaningless, has no consequence....the real issues are all psychological and emotional....some of which are possessive and territorial, for well understood genetic reasons, but questionable re marital bonding in themselves. It is funny (strange) how people routinely (here) say we should not go with feelings, we should "decide" to love, and when I present a perfectly logical argument for why sex is irrelevant re restoration (in itself) I am refuted emotionally. H4F… When you were with OW, your body was sinning against God. When a thief steals, God says, if his arm would keep him out of Heaven, it would be better that he cut it off. Now, I think that this is an analogy. But, I think it also holds water to show that the physical in and of itself, is just as (or almost) important as the spiritual. "Flee form sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against his own body. Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you...You are not your own; you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body." That says a lot about the value of the body, don't you agree? How can you say it is ignorant when the Omnipotent God has stated that the physical is important? H4F…SNL, my husband's near EA affected me, but it would have been worse if it had progressed into an EA, and then into a PA. One: because of the emotional, Two: because who knows where she's been. My virginity was a gift to my H because he knows I won't be thinking of anyone else and comparing him, and I am pure in my body. He doesn't have to worry about the other guy I was with and the others he was with and the others they were with and the others...If you sleep with a promiscuous person, you could easily end up in bed with half the U.S. <p>Your wife said that you do compare her to OW. If you don’t do it openly, then why don’t you have S with her? Try to understand that she feels that way, and true or not, she will believe it until you prove to her otherwise.<p>H4f, the argument everyone is making is that physical is emotional/psychological too...I understand that, applies some to me too (but not much),<p>H4F…are you saying you are above God’s commands and His Word? Are you saying that you didn’t need Jesus to die in the flesh for you, because His act of dying was just biology? If so, you are too haughty for your own good.<p>SNL…my point (which drifted from my original intent re this thread) was that it is only so cause WE make it so, it is a decision, we do not have to attach significance to it...and should not, cause there is none (in a physical sense)...<p>H4F…have you not even considered deeply what God has said about our bodies?<p>SNL…If you had two identical marital prospects, one was a virgin, the other was promiscuous (but is no more).... somehow you were give the knowledge that the virgin would be comfortable, a good companion, but you would never be passionate about them, never connect that deep.... the other you would always know (if you needed to dwell on it) had been with others before you, many others, but was now your safe place, where you could be you, and the passion there....who would you marry, what would you value? Virginity is nice, but of minor importance, infidelity is awful, but the sexual part of minor importance....it is all about what is in the head and the heart. H4F…the one that has “been around” may be the better choice because of their relationship with the Lord. If they have no diseases or emotional baggage, then I would consider them, if I loved them more than the other. However, the virgin may be a virgin due to his commitment to the Lord. That shows strength of character and devotion to the Lord that is desireable and meets one of my highest EN’s. SNL…justawife, I was waiting for someone to make the point you did, not an easy answer. We obviously are integrated human beings, and emotions do affect our responses to many things, including sex. So yes, you may have pseudo physical changes...they are not real though, they are still psychological, and reflect emotional truths re yourself. And usually go away, often quite dramatically with a new mate who you fit with...and trust. In the larger sense, I do not consider SF an emotional need, it is more, it is the primary emotional barometer of where we are in bonding. H4F…Okay, so you don’t need to know where you are in bonding, to have a fulfilling relationship? How is that logical, Spock? SNL…We can play head games all we want, and "decide" to love etc... but if we are not truly connected it will be reflected in our sex life (assuming one does not have other actual sexual dysfunctions, organic or psychological). IMO an unsatisfactory sex life is simply the physical manifestation of emotional divorce, you are not bonded, your are not connected, you are not oneflesh. H4F…You are always one flesh. If you are not, then it has been “torn asunder.” And then what are you? You are divided, and “a house divided against itself cannot stand.” SNL…Mostly this is just a moot exercise of academic interest, and no practical interest, and only arises out of my wife endless harrangues about my physical conditon as tainted....so I said it is only biology for crying out loud, get a grip, and I am done listening to the *****ing, you wore out your welcome, <p>H4F…Therein lies the rub. What a terrible thing to say. Although, I have said my share of ugly things to my H. But if you want respect, you must show respect. Get over yourself. <p>SNL…Now I KNOW it probably is not the physical that is troubling her, but that is how she chooses to complain, so that is what I respond to (when I respond, mostly I keep my mouth shut, but lately she has been doing this in earshot of the kids and I am about to toss her through a wall, which I do not want to do), so instead I am moving to another house for the time being, maybe that will help reduce the hostilities. <p>H4F… God says, “Husbands, love your wives.” I don’t think you’ve been applying God’s Word at all, just by your posts. Though it is hard sometimes. We must train ourselves to live God’s Word. Ark…What is obvious is that you two continue on and on in this place of pain...the lines are drawn in the sand..and no one moves... (more in between) Peace to your home SNL...peace to you and thinker...<p>H4F…Take it to heart, SnL. I think Ark is right!!! You have wounded her. I don’t think you know how much. She is wounding back in defense. And then you bring up this psychoanalytical bs, and provoke her even more. She is upset because you broke God’s law and the promise you made to her before God and everybody. She thinks you are sidestepping, and indeed that is what it looks like. If you don’t think so, it doesn’t matter. If she was the one to have the A, I would say the same to her. She doesn’t need to bow to you. If you want the marriage, you are the one to apologize first. Isn’t that how it goes? She has given you ample opportunity to repent. If not, that is her issue. You must pray for her. You must love her, and give yourself to her. I told her to leave you, frankly, if she’s tired of this. Her feelings are justified. You have justifiable feelings too. You want to be forgiven. Yeah. Don’t we all. Truth is, some don’t forgive, and others it just takes a lot of time. It has taken me a year to get over a near EA. Not even an EA, FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!!! I blew up. I accused. He’s still here, but he never fed me a line of crap like you’re feeding her. You have no defense for your actions. So don’t defend. Now, you must find your worth in the Lord. Have you read the book, “Wild At Heart” by John Eldredge? I’ve been recommending it all over the place. You may not be her hero right now. That’s okay. You can be again, in time. I have a family that I am neglecting. Take care. I hope that you and thinker can get beyond this. She really deserves better than this garbage. Like no excuses. You belong to her, and she to you. God said it. That’s the end.<p>Take care,<p>Hoping
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,170
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,170 |
SnL, you posted at the same time I did. Some of the things are similar to paruil's and I had not read your response yet. Like I said, though, this is not intended as an attack, just a challenge. I didn't want to post my own thread for fear it would draw too much attention as an affront. If you are done with me, I understand, and I see no reason you should have to defend yourself to me. I just posted it because I did put effort into it and didn't want it to take up space on my hard drive, but didn't want to throw it away either. Maybe in cyberspace it will do some good.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11 |
This has absolutely nothing to do with this subject...I just wanted to say hello to Paruil...I know you from another message board from a couple of years ago. lol! I was cleopatra on the women.com/redbook affair board. [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] I left quite a long time ago because I thought I had feelings/self under control. I still do pretty much really....still get tempted though, so here I am. You were/are very wise, so nice to see you here!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162 |
part 2<p>snl said...“so we are back to the bias that ya gotta make it work with a one particular person, whether the "couple" makes any sense or not” <p>paruil...I think Dr. Phil has said it better: “You have to earn your way out of a relationship.” The mess that is a particular marriage is the result of two people and their actions and dysfunction and resentment, pettiness, close-mindedness, particular unwillingnesses, immaturities and dependencies, and so forth. So, no, you don’t HAVE to make it work with someone, but you do have exhaust all reasonable means and possibilities. You have to try from what’s best in you, not try from the part of you that is weak, childish, complains, love busts, etc. That’s what’s meant by: “You have to earn your way out of a relationship.”<p>snl...So who passes judgement on when someone (or me) has tried hard enough? Do I need to get permission from someone that I have done all the work, and am now free to actually decide how I want to live my life...(we will overlook this is a free country, and we all have the right to self-determination, including who we are intimate with).<p>paruil...But what you do not have are any real actions designed to improve yourself or your marriage or legitimately earn your way out of it. That you do not have. That type of effort or heart or productive thinking and direction you have yet to demonstrate.<p>snl...How do you know that? In my view (the only one that counts, since it is my life, unless someone else plans on living it for me) I have done what is necessary to determine how I want to proceed. <p>SnL: “I made the same vows everyone else did, but no one wants anyone to stay in a marriage just out of duty, so the vows don't really apply to anyone....and none of us can promise feelings...so what do you do? Radical honesty requires me to be forthright re my feelings about this intimate relationship, and no spouse wants to "make" a spouse remain married to them....” <p>paruil...Your vows provide you with an opportunity. That’s why you take them – for the opportunity they afford, for the sake of who you become by honoring them and living up to them, for the sake of what you must become if you are to truly honor them and really live up to them. That’s the crux of it. The highest reward you will ever get by your struggle to honor your vows and your commitment to care for and honor another as yourself is not what you get by it, but what you become by it.<p>snl....Uh, maybe I am defective, but my life's purpose is not to die and have my gravestone say he honored his vows, there is a WHOLE lot more to being a healthy human being than that...btw do you say this to everyone in every marriage? No matter how toxic it is?<p>paruil...But for many people, they do not like what they become by it; they do not like what marriage does to them. Which really means, they do not like the powerlessness, inferiority, lack of industry, lack of competence they see reflected about themselves by way of the condition of their marriage or relationship. They do not like the version of themselves that being married brings out in them. And I think that’s really the crux of the issue that you’re dealing with, SnL: You don’t like what being married has done to you, you don’t like the person you are when you are married to Thinker. That’s why you write about “fit” instead. If you fit well with another, then you’d like yourself once again, you’d be happy with yourself, you’d be more self-accepting instead of self-rejecting. Your rejection of Thinker right now and your longing for your OW/MW are secondary right now to your own rejection of the person you are (or become) when you are with Thinker and the your acceptance of the person you are (or become) with your OW/MW. Until you come to terms with your self-rejection, and see whether or not you are able to come to some semblance of self-acceptance apart from who you are with and the person you become because of that (the person that that interaction brings out in you) you’ll always be shifting scenery in your life, looking for a better fit elsewhere or mistreating the person you’re with (contaminating the relationship) because you don’t like who you are when you are with that person.<p>snl...I don't know what to tell you.... I completely disagree with your understanding of marital psychology, and I like myself, and I do think I was a good H.... My issues are how we interract, and what that does for our emotional health. Your notion mindlessly worshiping vows leads to good mental health is frankly, bizarre.<p>SnL: “marriages end when one partner can no longer hold up their end, that means does not want to be in it too (among many other reasons that could apply, such as all the flavors of abuse, neglect, personality disorders etc.). The problem seems to be many people just cannot accept the notion of a marriage ending without their being someone/something to blame...they refuse to accept the notion people often just do not fit well enough to be each others safe, healthy, nurturing place...it is that simple.” <p>First, it’s not that simple. <p>snl..I know, but cannot write a book her in this venue.<p>paruil...People divorce (at least the vast majority of people when they do divorce do so) because they do not like the person they have become because of their marriage (divorce is a form of self-rejection and clearing the slate so that they can start over and not so much be with someone else as simply be someone else), or they like better the person they are when they are with someone else (i.e. an affair). That’s why the people divorce or focus so much on changing the other person – because those are the two ways that people think will lead to an improved self-acceptance, a version of themselves that they can better like and accept. And they focus on changing or shifting the scenery because they do not know how to grow and mature themselves. They do not understand the processes of differentiation and emotional and spiritual maturation.<p>snl...Ok, something to this, but it does not cover all circumstances at all. The problem with all this paruil is you have (or least don't mention) any underlying assumptions about psychological health, what it is, how to recognize it, how to obtain it....you seem to worship marriage...and pay no attention to how a marriage came to be.....there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that had thinker and I married different people we would have different marriages, maybe worse, maybe better but different. You seem to have no understanding of what marriage is supposed to be like, or what it is for, it seems like you just say if it exists, it should continue...that makes no sense to me...why be married paruil?<p>paruil...Also, SnL, I think I recall you being asked elsewhere before about elaborating a bit more on what you mean by “safe” and “nurturing” and “healthy,” and to discuss these more, and you didn’t answer – perhaps you didn’t see the post. (And if you weren’t asked about this elsewhere, if I am mistaken in my remembrance, then please feel free to consider this an opportunity and invitation to elaborate on these concepts and your understanding of them.) <p>snl...This is something I have tried to figure out, what should marriage be, these are some of the terms I have used to try and show that. ok, here goes, remember is sort of a work in progress.<p>safe means you feel free to be whoever you are inside, all the time, you never worry about your spouse reacting negatively and rejecting you, the whole walking on eggshells thing, the gaurding your emotions thing etc. <p>nurturing is sorta MB en's, your needs are being met, in a way you need them too....people are diverse, and meeting those needs diverse....to use a trivial example if I "need" to be married to a 5' 10" blonde someone could wear platform shoes and die their hair, and that might work, or it might not. For example I have a strong need for understanding stuff, and that involves a lot of effort in looking, and vigorous debate, not just anyone can do that no matter how hard they try, and most likely even the trying will stress the heck out of em....cannot go the distance. Could go on and on...MB suggests you compromise essentially, find some other way to simulate that need that can be met.....ok, maybe, but what if that is not satisfactory, and you are allready married before you understand all your needs and someone elses and whether they can be effectively met each way....Makes a lot more sense for people to mate up with people more in sync with needs...it is much easier to meet a need similar to yours, and vice versa...so that is about fit, and ability to nurture.<p>snl...Healthy has to do with the fact none of us are perfect, so there is gonna be "stuff" some of that stuff can be dealt with by your partner so is healthy for both of you...some cannot, so is unhealthy for both of you....and none of this can be changed, or the changeing requires a lifetime of effort and tremendous focus and resources....makes much more sense to separtate and partner with someone where this is not a friction.<p>I was brief on this stuff, but hope you get the drift...this is what I mean about decideing what the potential is before one just continues on in a marriage.....many marriages are not the best choice for the people in them (not healthy).<p>paruil....What does Thinker do that makes your marriage an unsafe, unhealthy, un-nurturing place? What do you do to contribute to the unhealthiness, insecurity and non-nurturance of the marriage? <p>snl.... This is not the place to discuss that, you are talking about playing with a loaded gun. Suffice to say we stress each other severely....because of who we are, in ways that cannot be changed.<p>SnL: “how many here would want snl meeting their needs, even if he did a great job? Likewise many people who post here I would not let meet my needs, I know they cannot do it the way I want, no matter how hard they try, or motivated they are. . . .” <p>Why didn’t you use the same or parallel grammatical construction in the first part of this? Why didn’t you write: <p>how many here would want snl meeting their needs, even if he did a great job, no matter how hard he tried, or how motivated he was? Likewise many people who post here I would not let meet my needs, I know they cannot do it the way I want, no matter how hard they try, or motivated they are. . . .<p>snl...Those are the same to me, but I never was good at grammar, so whatever point you are making has gone right over my head.<p>paruil....To me this seems to be a poignant omission. Because as I read you, motivation is one of your biggest challenges. You seem to lack willpower and be dependent on fusion for your motivation. And that seems to be the part of you that you are most reluctant to change or correct or grow out of.<p>snl...I have no idea what fusion is, and I have plenty of willpower, but I get stuck too. It is taking a whole bunch of willpower to even get to the point I will allow myself the option of leaveing the marriage, rather than just caving in to thinker needs...and my aversion to hurting her.<p>paruil...See, the point is this; when you write this ~ “That IMO is part of the MB problem, it holds out the promise that if you just do it, your marriage will be terrific, yet we know we don't want just anyone meeting our needs...so how can that be? If it is true all you who chastise me should make a great couple with me, long as we meet the laundry list of needs, but I suspect many of you would say no way Jose...and if we were already married (before you really got to know me)...what then?” ~ many people would say “no way, Jose” to you as you are now – wounded, flailing, seemingly stubborn, thickheaded, self-righteous, close-minded, self-absorbed, lacking empathy and compassion, etc. <p>snl...I wonder if everyone sees me that way, or if some are attracted to me by virtue of the traits I exhibit in dealing with this? But it is interesting you see me that way, is not how I see myself, I am pretty comfortable with who I am, and how I have proceeded, and where I am at...some self-doubt for sure, but I think I have a good mind, use it well, and arrive usually at good outcomes in a rational manner, and I get feedback from others validating that...go figure. I have even recieved emails from members of this board expressing such sentiments.<p>paruil...But many people, and one specifically – Thinker – would likely be very smitten by the charming and more magnanimous, more socially conscientious, more self-confronting, less egocentric and less cocksure person you would have to be if you were to genuinely care about another (and others in general) as you do yourself. <p>snl...You have listed generic traits we should all shoot for, nothing about what makes me uniquely me.<p>paruil...(Which, by the way, seems to be the heart of Christianity – caritas, growing to be a genuinely loving and caring person. <p>snl..That is not the heart of Christianity, but not the place for a religious argument. Caring is a good thing of course, but it is not the goal of life, nor the only yardstick we should be measured by...and most people "care" anyways to one degree or another. I see no point here.<p>paruil...The extreme individualism and the radically individualistic ethics that you seem to promote seems to be incompatible with the social altruism and overcoming of our inherent narcissism that Christianity points us toward.)<p>snl..You are right, I do not think we are ants or bees, we are an individualistic species, that is how God made us, and to deny our basic nature in pursuit of some utopian notion of how we should be is a philosophy doomed to fail. The trick is how to take a fiercely indvicualistic, selfish species, and craft a paradigm that allows 2 to become one....it is difficult, but you do it with a firm understanding of, and application of, psychology...fit.... if you ignore who people are, you gaurantee strife, unhappiness, and insecurity in their relationships.<p>Thanks for your comments.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25 |
SnL, <p>Your answers read as if too little real thought and or reflection was put into them. Sorry, but that's the way they read. Any chance that you might be willing to slow down, relax, sit with it for a while, be a bit more self-reflective and self-confronting, and think a bit more deeply on what was written and what's been asked of you? Any chance of your not reading and answering so quickly and seemingly unreflectively? (Because you've missed a lot of what I've tried to communicate and express - and I don't think it was for my lack of effort in trying. Please, if you would, give what I have written a more careful and legitimate reading.) Really think about what you want to say before you write it, and take some time before you do it. There's no hurry.<p>And ~ (if you wouldn't mind) answer the harder questions that were asked of you – here and on the other post where you said you were going to respond to me.<p>Or not, that's your choice. But I prefer not to engage in a superficial, reactive, off-the-cuff, exchange of views. It's a waste of time and energy ......... water down the drain.<p>There's some deep stuff here (at least in my opinion!) to cover -- if you're up to it and not afraid to be really intimate (simultaneously self-confronting & self-expressive, not just reactively expressive and defensive). (Hint - "I don't know" can be a quite legitimate answer.)<p>[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: Paruil ]</p>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25 |
Wswoman/Cleo [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] <p>Yes, I remember you and I hope you are doing well! What changes and learning and growth has occurred and is occurring in your life!! Do tell, do share [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] <p>Take Care, <p>Paruil
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162 |
well I am pretty tired actually...but also much of this is stuff I have been dealing with quite awile and am pretty comfortable with, sorry if it seemed superficial, jeez it is almost refreshing to be called superficial [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] <p>I have a suggestion, I have no problem with introspection (duh), or being analyzed (hide like a rhinocerous, and Honesty my greatest en)...so maybe you could ask the stuff you would like an answer on the most....and just post one at a time...or if you really want, we can work out a phone conversation (have done so with a few others) maybe a conference call with several...that takes this off MB which depending on the subject matter can be distressing to some, and allows a much more coherent interchange...this venue is murder on trying to make points without writing a book all day long...either way, let me know... I will have to ask thinker though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 61
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 61 |
Hey Paruil Wouldn't K just love this thread [img]images/icons/shocked.gif" border="0[/img] Sorry, had to but in [img]images/icons/grin.gif" border="0[/img] <p>Respectfully,
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 168
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 168 |
SNL~<p>Sorry, I didn't even get past the first few sentences in your first reply to Paruil. I am completely and UTTERLY floored and ASTOUNDED...... TOTALLY FLABBERGASTED.....and completely KNOCKED for a loop.<p>I absolutely CANNOT BELIEVE that this is what you took out of Paruils post....<p> <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr>thankyou very much paruil for your interest, and I get it that this is not about any support for me. <hr></blockquote><p>If what Paruil wrote wasn't the most earnest and sincere reaching out effort, I don't know what the eff is!!! SHEESH! I had you pegged as someone who is able to halfway see reason. Granted I know it's difficult when one reads something that isn't altogether gratifying and soothing to the ego.....but, really, SNL, I gave you WAAAAAAAY more credit than this. I mean, WaaaaAAAAAAaaaaAAAAAAY more credit.<p>You have completely shocked me....now I have to go pick myself up off of the floor so that I can read the rest of your response.<p>This may not be the support you WANT, but, Buddy, let me tell you.....there is a TEXAS-size load of support in this post. Did you read it???????? I mean, REALLY read it???????<p>selket<p>P.S. Did I say I cannot believe, I mean I can't even fathom how you can think this?????????????<p>[ March 15, 2002: Message edited by: selket ]</p>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 35,996 |
Hey there guys!<p>Actually, this thread reminds ME of Jake's earliest efforts on Women.com .... "But what about the passion?" ... Jake and I have kept in touch. He and Grace are doing quite well. Jake is expressing his "passion" via poetry now..... [img]images/icons/grin.gif" border="0[/img] <p>~~~ carry on ~~~~<p>Pepper
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162 |
sel your post confused me, I am digesting it. Per some committments (believe it or not) I am trying to cut down on board activity, so will not be here much over the weekend, but I will finish the things I started, or am involved in eventually. <p>Pepper, you are a flash from the past, everytime I see your name I am about 6 years old. My mom and dad split up back then, and my moms best friend was pepper, I think she was even a roomate at one point in some small apt we lived in, you are not like 70 years old per chance? (ok, just kindding), I know where your name came from...anyways just another wrinkle in the MB experience.<p>[ March 16, 2002: Message edited by: sad_n_lonely ]</p>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 11 |
Paruil, MUCH personal growth has occured with me in the last 2 years, however, this has caused not-so-great growth in my marriage. Made me realize that I don't really want to be married to this man and never really did, just did so because there was a baby involved. When my mother died 2 yrs. ago, a spiraling effect occurred and I dealt with old hurts that should have been dealt with long ago, etc. Anyway, for awhile there, I was doing really, really well. I became even more spiritual than I ever had been before and had gotten to the point where I felt total peace and didn't even need the television or radio or anything at all and could live daily, even in a not-so-happy marriage. But, old feelings have returned, the same OM is still in my life and quite recently sent me a card letting me know he loves me (actually it was from a secret admirer, but, I know it was him). This was the first time he said the "L" word. (To refresh your memory, he and I have been friends for several years, no physical contact, but, strong attraction. Agreed to not see each other in person anymore due to strong attraction a few years ago. Since then, I continue to struggle with no contact and break my promise to myself not to contact him. Although, to be fair, recently, He was the one that sent the card. He is married too) <p>Anyway, I have realized that I don't want to be married, but, I know that my husband would make it incredibly hard and guilt-ridden if I tried to leave. I plan to get individual counseling for myself in the near future so that I will be able to take that big step.<p>There is alot more to it than that, but, that is the nutshell of it. [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25 |
SnL, <p>Thank you for the offer of a phone conversation, but, honestly, I would prefer to keep this on the boards – writing a response allows for more thoughtfulness instead of the reactivity and immediateness that tends to crop up in phone conversations.<p>Which is my point ~ I am more interested in thoughtful responses from you (as well as from myself), not quick and or superficial ones, or responses that simply pick out the easy things to answer and skip and or ignore the harder questions.<p>I've asked you lots and lots of questions, including these from another post ~ <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> SnL . . . you took vows, you made a promise, you committed yourself to another and did so irrespective of conditions, correct? If not, what did you sign your name to all those years ago? What did you say your “I do’s” to? What were your vows? What were you committing yourself to? . . .<p>The gist of what is being asked of you is what basis is there for making any promises to another when you are or think you are in love? <p>According to your version of love, what does your commitment to another involve? <p>What would your vows read like, SnL, were you to write and recite them now? <p>How aconditional (meaning valid across conditions and irrespective of circumstance) would your promise/commitment be?<p>Where you to tell another that you love her or him, what exactly would that mean to another? <p>Are you guaranteeing the other person anything (sickness, old age, poverty, or until your fine feelings shift or wane)? <p>What precisely are you committing yourself to? <hr></blockquote><p>There were also plenty of questions and points for you to delve into in the (long) post at top of this thread, and the answers you left were unconvincing or superficial (at least to my mind they were; from your point of view, my questions and points may have been superficial. But I don't think they were, and one of the reasons why is because you have ignored the difficult points and questions). <p>What I'm asking is that if you are would like to discuss ideas and philosophies and exchange points of view regarding marriage, divorce, intimacy, safety, etc. (which I would like to do with you, the way you think interests me, I'd like to learn more about you and your point of view), then I'd like to try to delve more deeply into things and take more time examining the issues and examining our own assumptions and our own motivations for holding certain assumptions. (By the way, I'd like to hear more about your thoughts on what constitutes safe and nurturing intimacy and interaction; you wrote a bit about it in your first reply to me on this thread, and that was for me the most interesting part of your response - the cusp of breaking new ground, going into things a bit more deeply.)<p>Take Care, <p>Paruil [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] <p>ps. How many children do you and Thinker have, and how old are they?<p>[ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: Paruil ]</p>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162 |
Ok, paruil, I will participate. I must say I have no problem expressing myself in detail and with thoughtfullness verbally, and it is much more effective in a time sense. But that is ok, this is probably the last time I will do this, so if anyone else has an interest in my actual views on "stuff" ask now. Also paruil, I know it is hard to search threads, but I have written a great deal on just about every angle imaginable re marital issues, in my effort to understand myself...I will repeat stuff here, but obviously cannot possibly duplicate the hours and hours of posts. Also I will not necessarily try to offer my "proofs" for every thing I might say here, but I do have extensive reasons for everything I say.<p>paruil... you took vows, you made a promise, you committed yourself to another and did so irrespective of conditions, correct? <p>snl...yes.<p>paruil...The gist of what is being asked of you is what basis is there for making any promises to another when you are or think you are in love? <p>snl...freewill.<p>paruil...According to your version of love, what does your commitment to another involve? <p>snl...That is a little complicated, and what I have been trying to figure out. It involves various things, an agreement of exclusivity, good faith, practical concerns (such as the physical well-being of your spouse), protection, radical honesty....it does not mean you gaurantee the conditions needed for marital intimacy (oneflesh), no one can vow that...it either exists or it doesn't.<p>paruil...What would your vows read like, SnL, were you to write and recite them now? <p>snl...To always be honest (radical honesty) with you, and to protect you from harm.<p>paruil...How aconditional (meaning valid across conditions and irrespective of circumstance) would your promise/commitment be?<p>snl...There would be no conditions.<p>paruil...Where you to tell another that you love her or him, what exactly would that mean to another? <p>snl...That I have told you everything there is to know about me, that I choose to make myself completely vulnerable to them in an attempt to bond, and have no expectations of anything in return.<p>paruil...Are you guaranteeing the other person anything (sickness, old age, poverty, or until your fine feelings shift or wane)?<p>snl...I am gauranteeing nothing but honesty. <p>paruil...What precisely are you committing yourself to?<p>snl...A good faith effort at an intimate bond.<p>paruil...There were also plenty of questions and points for you to delve into in the (long) post at top of this thread, and the answers you left were unconvincing or superficial (at least to my mind they were; from your point of view, my questions and points may have been superficial. But I don't think they were, and one of the reasons why is because you have ignored the difficult points and questions). <p>snl...I didn't deliberately ignore anything, I do not run from difficult questions...but I have a request...I function better if a question is specific, not general, and clearly identifiable. I found your post a somewhat rambling soliloquy (sp) like rhetoric...with questions, assumptions, and your positions all kinda mixed up together...no offense or anything, but if you could just list em 1. 2. 3. with a brief explanation if necessary, I might respond better.<p>paruil...What I'm asking is that if you are would like to discuss ideas and philosophies and exchange points of view regarding marriage, divorce, intimacy, safety, etc. (which I would like to do with you, the way you think interests me, I'd like to learn more about you and your point of view), then I'd like to try to delve more deeply into things and take more time examining the issues and examining our own assumptions and our own motivations for holding certain assumptions. <p>snl..I am game.<p>paruil...(By the way, I'd like to hear more about your thoughts on what constitutes safe and nurturing intimacy and interaction; you wrote a bit about it in your first reply to me on this thread, and that was for me the most interesting part of your response - the cusp of breaking new ground, going into things a bit more deeply.)<p>snl...safe means your spouse will never get angry at you for being you....will never ridicule you, embarass you, or profit (emotionally) at your expense. Nurturing means your spouse has the ability to discern who you are (see you) and provide the necessary support to be a better you NOT make you be a better you, but provide the synergistic component needed for any human being to reach their full potential. I do not believe the fundamental unit of our speices is the individual, it is a properly matched heterosexual pairbond. Conversely, a mismatch actually is harmful to the well-being of the two individuals, moreso than if they acted independently (single) from each other....and that is I believe, the basis for the emotional condition of marital withdrawal..... it is survival.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 25 |
SnL, <p>Thanks for your reply [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] <p> <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> paruil...What would your vows read like, SnL, were you to write and recite them now? <p>snl...To always be honest (radical honesty) with you, and to protect you from harm. <hr></blockquote><p>1.a.) Is that all that there would be to your vows? 1.b.) Nothing about growth, best interest of another being on par with your own, etc.? <p>2.a.) And what basis would there be for your promising this and being able to deliver on this promise in the crucial junctures of your life given your track record, given your past? 2.b.) What’s to prevent you from changing your mind in the future as you did in the past? (What follows is a general remark, feel free to dispute it or offer an alternative heuristic) The whole idea of relevant past behavior being the best predictor of future behavior. (What follows is another general remark, feel free also to express your thoughts on the following) Because this is where qualities such as “character,” “commitment,” “integrity,” “being devoted or committed to something bigger than yourself,” even “metanioa” are typically mentioned and interjected into the proceedings. <p> <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> paruil...How aconditional (meaning valid across conditions and irrespective of circumstance) would your promise/commitment be?<p>snl...There would be no conditions. <hr></blockquote><p>3.a.) No conditions, meaning whether or not the other validated you, made you feel safe, was nurturing or rejecting would not matter? 3.b.) No conditions, meaning should the two of your grow or drift apart in the future, should your present “fit” change or deteriorate, you would still remain married and be radically honest and protect your beloved from harm?<p> <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> paruil...Where you to tell another that you love her or him, what exactly would that mean to another? <p>snl...That I have told you everything there is to know about me, that I choose to make myself completely vulnerable to them in an attempt to bond, and have no expectations of anything in return. <hr></blockquote><p>4.a.) No expectations of anything in return, meaning whether the other person was to ridicule you, be angry at you for being you, embarrass you would not matter? 4.b.) No expectations of anything in return, meaning should the attempt at bonding fail, then what? – free will and move one to search out a better and new “fit”? 5.) Has Thinker been emotionally or psychologically abusive to you?<p> <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> paruil...Are you guaranteeing the other person anything (sickness, old age, poverty, or until your fine feelings shift or wane)?<p>snl...I am gauranteeing nothing but honesty. <hr></blockquote><p>6.a.) What basis would there be for having children? 6.b.) How would your spouse know that you’ll be there for your offspring and be a participant in their upbringing? 6.c.) How can your spouse know that you will back out on them? 6.d.) Are you guaranteeing anything about your role as a future parent? 6.e.) And what basis would there be for getting a mortgage, etc.? (What follows is a general remark, feel free to correct this provisional conclusion) It sounds like your bond would not be too durable. It sounds very unstable.<p> <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> paruil...(By the way, I'd like to hear more about your thoughts on what constitutes safe and nurturing intimacy and interaction; you wrote a bit about it in your first reply to me on this thread, and that was for me the most interesting part of your response - the cusp of breaking new ground, going into things a bit more deeply.)<p>snl...safe means your spouse will never get angry at you for being you....will never ridicule you, embarass you, or profit (emotionally) at your expense. Nurturing means your spouse has the ability to discern who you are (see you) and provide the necessary support to be a better you NOT make you be a better you, but provide the synergistic component needed for any human being to reach their full potential. I do not believe the fundamental unit of our speices is the individual, it is a properly matched heterosexual pairbond. Conversely, a mismatch actually is harmful to the well-being of the two individuals, moreso than if they acted independently (single) from each other....and that is I believe, the basis for the emotional condition of marital withdrawal..... it is survival. <hr></blockquote><p>An alternate perspective to much of this is covered in Schnarch’s book “Passionate Marriage,” in the sections where he talks about such concepts as:<p> Fusion
Differentiation
Emotional Gridlock
Self-Validated Intimacy
Borrowed Functioning
Self-Soothing
Critical Mass
Crucible<p>7.a.) Is Schnarch’s Passionate Marriage a book that is high on your reading list? 7.b.) Is it something that you anticipate purchasing and delving into in the next couple of days or by this weekend?<p>In the meantime, while I await your response to questions 7.a. & 7.b., I will make a few comments:<p>“safe means your spouse will never get angry at you for being you” – 8.a.) why never? 8.b.) What is the big deal if your spouse gets mad at you once, or twice, for you being you? 8.c.) Why is the specter of another person even rejecting you once so haunting? 8.d.) Would it be proof of a mismatch, a mis-“fit”?<p>“will never ridicule you” – 9.) why the use of the word never, again?<p>(What follows is a general remark that I would like you to respond to and or address) I am genuinely interested in your answers, but I am also interested in your repeated explicit or implicit use of “all or nothing” categoricals such as “never,” “is” (in the sense of “is always” where the always seems to be implied) , “completely,” “no expectations of anything in return,” etc.<p> <blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr> paruil...There were also plenty of questions and points for you to delve into in the (long) post at top of this thread, and the answers you left were unconvincing or superficial (at least to my mind they were; from your point of view, my questions and points may have been superficial. But I don't think they were, and one of the reasons why is because you have ignored the difficult points and questions). <p>snl...I didn't deliberately ignore anything, I do not run from difficult questions...but I have a request...I function better if a question is specific, not general, and clearly identifiable. I found your post a somewhat rambling soliloquy (sp) like rhetoric...with questions, assumptions, and your positions all kinda mixed up together...no offense or anything, but if you could just list em 1. 2. 3. with a brief explanation if necessary, I might respond better. <hr></blockquote><p>No. It stays as it is for the time being. Making life easier for you is not a high priority item for me right now–and I’m simply being honest by saying that. Your functioning is your own responsibility, not mine. And if that means you have to do a little more work and go line by line over what was written in that post, then so be it, then that’s what you have to do, after all, that’s the gist of what legitimately reading and trying to comprehend something requires. <p>And in another sense, it only seems fair. I haven’t asked you to adopt what might be considered a more conventional and more reader friendly manner of posting and expressing yourself – using capitalization, appropriate quotes and punctuation, etc. Nor will I. (And, honestly, I've meant no offense by this.) I’ve learned how to adapt to your manner of self-expression. And now I would simply request that you extend yourself and try to do the same for me. (But if you do choose to respond, I would request that you consider using the two-response method. Your first response contains all of your initial reactions and embodies and articulates your feelings, impressions, and immediate thoughts. And then later–a day or two or three, etc.–you reread the post, and respond anew. And you then compare your new responses with your original responses, and see which one speaks better for you.)<p>Having said that, in this post I am willing to try to number my questions and point out things that I think are worthy of your attention and a response from you.<p>SnL, you also wrote: “ . . . .marital intimacy (oneflesh) . . . either exists or it doesn't.” 10.a.) Is it something that is changeable, as in it can exist at one point, but then not exist at another point due to various reasons (i.e., people changing, stressful time, fusion, etc.)? 10.b.) Is it something that can be restored or renewed? 10.c.) Is it something that can be nonexistent, but then come into being and be established by various reasons (i.e., productive human effort, work, God’s will, a miracle, etc.)?<p>11.a.) ps. How many children do you and Thinker have, and (11.b.) how old are they?<p>Take Care, <p>Paruil<p>[ March 20, 2002: Message edited by: Paruil ]</p>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 2,162 |
pauil said...What would your vows read like, SnL, were you to write and recite them now? snl...To always be honest (radical honesty) with you, and to protect you from harm. <p>paruil...1.a.) Is that all that there would be to your vows? 1.b.) Nothing about growth, best interest of another being on par with your own, etc.?<p>snl...Correct, nothing more. Why? Cause there is nothing more a human can legitimately offer in a vow sense. I wrote a paper once on vows (not just marital, leige vows also, they are all meaningless, cause humans do not have the capacity to make vows, they can say them, just like I can say I will fly off that building, but I don't have the capacity to do so...you see?). The reason they are meaningless is cause humans have no ability to gaurantee future behaviour, and all behaviour is driven by survival, under the right conditions every human being will violate any vow you care to propose (even the little one I just mentioned above), because a vow in the sense you ask is an absolute...so why make em? Now if you wanna talk about intent, a whole nother ballgame. Keep in minde paruil as we walk through this, you are dealing with a rationalist personality, I only deal in facts, and what actually works, what I want is irrelevant, what you want is irrelevant...I can be wrong, make errors, and do, but it is truth/reality that drives me.<p>paruil...2.a.) And what basis would there be for your promising this and being able to deliver on this promise in the crucial junctures of your life given your track record, given your past?<p>snl...I don't quite understand what you are going for here. You mean why should I be trusted? Not my concern....would be yours (if you were the recipient of my vows). <p>paruil...2.b.) What’s to prevent you from changing your mind in the future as you did in the past? (<p>snl...Nothing.<p>paruil...What follows is a general remark, feel free to dispute it or offer an alternative heuristic) The whole idea of relevant past behavior being the best predictor of future behavior. <p>snl...I agree.<p>paruil...(What follows is another general remark, feel free also to express your thoughts on the following) Because this is where qualities such as “character,” “commitment,” “integrity,” “being devoted or committed to something bigger than yourself,” even “metanioa” are typically mentioned and interjected into the proceedings. <p>paruil said...How aconditional (meaning valid across conditions and irrespective of circumstance) would your promise/commitment be?<p>snl...There would be no conditions. <p>paruil...3.a.) No conditions, meaning whether or not the other validated you, made you feel safe, was nurturing or rejecting would not matter?<p>snl...correct.<p>paruil... 3.b.) No conditions, meaning should the two of your grow or drift apart in the future, should your present “fit” change or deteriorate, you would still remain married and be radically honest and protect your beloved from harm?<p>snl...No, the marriage would end cause the conditions needed to be married ceased to exist. One may stay married in a contractural sense, I am opposed to such marriage (for me), but that could change I suppose.<p>paruil said...Where you to tell another that you love her or him, what exactly would that mean to another? <p>snl...That I have told you everything there is to know about me, that I choose to make myself completely vulnerable to them in an attempt to bond, and have no expectations of anything in return. <p>paruil...4.a.) No expectations of anything in return, meaning whether the other person was to ridicule you, be angry at you for being you, embarrass you would not matter? <p>snl...Those are not expectations, you asked what safe meant, so I tried to illustrate. I don't think marriage is a thing you do, it is a condition of bonding, it either exists or it does not...if those conditions are not present, the marriage does not exist, you are simply cohabitating in a contractural sense, and indeed such marriages have many expectations. Most marriages are contracturally based, so is harleys methods, but not all marriages are, some are true synergistic pairbonds (psychological sense), oneflesh (in the spiritual sense).<p>paruil...4.b.) No expectations of anything in return, meaning should the attempt at bonding fail, then what? – free will and move one to search out a better and new “fit”? <p>snl....You can accomodate and settle (contractural marriage) or you can seperate and be alone...it is simply a matter of facing the reality of the precise nature of your connection...you cannot change it, you can only recognize it, if it isn't there, it isn't there.<p>paruil...5.) Has Thinker been emotionally or psychologically abusive to you?<p>snl.... This is going to distress thinker, and I will pay for answering it, so please refrain from asking too many specific questions re thinker. In the past I would smooth something like this over, or not face it, etc. etc. but in the last year I have come to realize I am important too, that I am not here to make everyone elses life better at my expense...and can now answer such questions about my feelings/perceptions without feeling guilty, or disloyal...yes she has. But she will respond I have done the same to her, do with that as you will paruil. I have repeatedly asked her, begged her not to read my stuff here, or if she does, to not make it a part of her stuff, she has refused all such requests, I pay dearly for anything I write on MB about myself, or my feelings.<p>paruil said...Are you guaranteeing the other person anything (sickness, old age, poverty, or until your fine feelings shift or wane)?<p>snl...I am gauranteeing nothing but honesty. <p>paruil...6.a.) What basis would there be for having children? <p>snl...one needs no basis. Our drive to procreate superceedes anything our rational mind might want.<p>paruil...6.b.) How would your spouse know that you’ll be there for your offspring and be a participant in their upbringing? <p>snl...They don't, as many here have come to find out despite "promises".<p>paruil...6.c.) How can your spouse know that you will back out on them? <p>snl...They don't.<p>paruil...6.d.) Are you guaranteeing anything about your role as a future parent? <p>snl...No. No one can gaurantee the future, all I can do is state intent. But to base your life on what someone tells you is foolish anyways. Marriage is an assessment, you assess who your spouse is NOW and PREDICT your spouses future behaviour, the better you do that (and they to you) the more likely marital success....most of us do a poor job. In my case I unfortuneately was correct, I accurately assessed my wifes psycological profile, the likelihood it would change (her "promise" it would), my psychological profile, and the likelihood we would "make it", I was right on all counts....I married cause I had promised her I would, and I stayed married, and faithful cause of vows...but in the end, as I surmised 25 years ago, that would not be enough...I didn't know why then, it was all instinct, now I know. <p>paruil...6.e.) And what basis would there be for getting a mortgage, etc.? (What follows is a general remark, feel free to correct this provisional conclusion) It sounds like your bond would not be too durable. It sounds very unstable.<p>snl...The basis is the same for all such decisions, on one hand it is a crap shoot, on the other hand you weigh the risk vs reward, that is how all such decisions are made. Life is unstable paruil...so? If you are suggesting the realities of life can be avoided by codification, you are mistaken, no piece of paper, no vow, no promise is worth more than the capacity of the one making it do deliver on it...right? Words mean almost nothing to me paruil, I listen and look for what is between the words. However we do live in a society which can exert some pressure so there is value in contracts and such, but not much....contracts mostly work cause the people who make them do so in good faith, and the outcomes are beneficial to both...there is no contract that would not be violated if enough pressure brought to bear on one party. The only appropriate mechanism for gauranteeing human behaviour is enlightened self-interest, and that is what I deal in when arguing my positions for people...I will rarely tell anyone what they should do for ethical/moral/etc reasons, I tell em what to do in terms of why it is in their best interest to do so. If you can demonstrate that convincingly you have no need for external coercion...contracts, vows, threats, etc. The problem is people get confused, and think something is in their best interest when it is not....greed, vanity, pride, etc driving such things. Few people have more than a passing knowledge of human psychology, and why they do/feel what they do, and therein lies the source of most of human misery (and the poor choices we make)....<p>paruil said...(By the way, I'd like to hear more about your thoughts on what constitutes safe and nurturing intimacy and interaction; you wrote a bit about it in your first reply to me on this thread, and that was for me the most interesting part of your response - the cusp of breaking new ground, going into things a bit more deeply.)<p>snl...safe means your spouse will never get angry at you for being you....will never ridicule you, embarass you, or profit (emotionally) at your expense. Nurturing means your spouse has the ability to discern who you are (see you) and provide the necessary support to be a better you NOT make you be a better you, but provide the synergistic component needed for any human being to reach their full potential. I do not believe the fundamental unit of our speices is the individual, it is a properly matched heterosexual pairbond. Conversely, a mismatch actually is harmful to the well-being of the two individuals, moreso than if they acted independently (single) from each other....and that is I believe, the basis for the emotional condition of marital withdrawal..... it is survival. <p>paruil...An alternate perspective to much of this is covered in Schnarch’s book “Passionate Marriage,” in the sections where he talks about such concepts as:<p>Fusion Differentiation Emotional Gridlock Self-Validated Intimacy Borrowed Functioning Self-Soothing Critical Mass Crucible<p>7.a.) Is Schnarch’s Passionate Marriage a book that is high on your reading list? <p>snl..yes.<p>7.b.) Is it something that you anticipate purchasing and delving into in the next couple of days or by this weekend?<p>snl...Yes mother. (I hope you can take convoluted psychological humor, there will be no more future warnings [img]images/icons/smile.gif" border="0[/img] , tell me if you would prefer I do not)<p>paruil...In the meantime, while I await your response to questions 7.a. & 7.b., I will make a few comments:<p>“safe means your spouse will never get angry at you for being you” – <p>8.a.) why never? <p>snl...Let me clarify. You asked for a definition, so I gave it. I assume you find me intelligent enough to know I do not live in a perfect world. The ideal is never, but the reality will be there may be some, it is a matter of degree and frequency, and I cannot give you a formula per se...but it would be rare, and their would be extensive making up mechanisms associated with it.<p>8.b.) What is the big deal if your spouse gets mad at you once, or twice, for you being you?<p>snl...see above.<p>paruil...8.c.) Why is the specter of another person even rejecting you once so haunting? <p>snl...That is a complex question. Part having to do with how people in general are, and it isn't really rejecting, it is um..... a sorta psychological validating. If someone finds you affect them such that they are regularly distressed in some way, they are gonna push you away, often using anger as the tool (but neglect is another commone method)...this is not nurturing, and starves one, remember I think the basic human unit is the synergistic pairbond. The other part is me personally, none of us are "perfect" psychological specimens (whatever perfect means)...but whether defective, or just part of a "normal" range...I am a very high maintainence mate psychologically/emotionally.... not common for males, but there it is.<p> paruil...8.d.) Would it be proof of a mismatch, a mis-“fit”?<p>snl...Yes, is one of the symptons. A lot of anger is a mismatch in fitting, and/or a personality disorder (which is in itself a fitting issue, and a more serious one).<p>paruil..“will never ridicule you” – 9.) why the use of the word never, again?<p>snl..again, just stating the ideal.<p>paruil...(What follows is a general remark that I would like you to respond to and or address) I am genuinely interested in your answers, but I am also interested in your repeated explicit or implicit use of “all or nothing” categoricals such as “never,” “is” (in the sense of “is always” where the always seems to be implied) , “completely,” “no expectations of anything in return,” etc.<p>snl...stating ideals, has that cleared this up?<p>Just to help you out how I think. I first find the boundaries, the exteremes of anything I consider, and I work my way in from there defining trip points for various behavioural choices...does that help? I need to know the whole picture, not be trying to deal with a subset of information, I need to know the contect and relative value of everything I deal with. This is harder to do when dealing with human psychology than more specific things, like what are my choices for the foundation of the house I built (I ended up using a wood foundation).<p>paruil said...There were also plenty of questions and points for you to delve into in the (long) post at top of this thread, and the answers you left were unconvincing or superficial (at least to my mind they were; from your point of view, my questions and points may have been superficial. But I don't think they were, and one of the reasons why is because you have ignored the difficult points and questions). <p>snl...I didn't deliberately ignore anything, I do not run from difficult questions...but I have a request...I function better if a question is specific, not general, and clearly identifiable. I found your post a somewhat rambling soliloquy (sp) like rhetoric...with questions, assumptions, and your positions all kinda mixed up together...no offense or anything, but if you could just list em 1. 2. 3. with a brief explanation if necessary, I might respond better. <p>paruil...No. It stays as it is for the time being. Making life easier for you is not a high priority item for me right now–and I’m simply being honest by saying that.<p>snl...ok.<p>paruil...Your functioning is your own responsibility, not mine. And if that means you have to do a little more work and go line by line over what was written in that post, then so be it, then that’s what you have to do, after all, that’s the gist of what legitimately reading and trying to comprehend something requires.<p>snl...Ok, I understand your point, I am done with that post, and have nothing left to add to what responses I allready made. But I will continue to respond to your new questions if you want. If perchance curiosity (and time constraints allow) prompts me to see what I may have missed, and comment on it, I will do so, but no gaurantees...fair enough? <p>paruil...And in another sense, it only seems fair. I haven’t asked you to adopt what might be considered a more conventional and more reader friendly manner of posting and expressing yourself – using capitalization, appropriate quotes and punctuation, etc. Nor will I. <p>snl...I agree one needs some flexibility. I am comfortable my techniques are clear enough to convey information...but if you have a structural problem please let me know.... I do admire those of you who use bold stuff, and proper quotes etc. I have not learned how to do so, somehow it confuses me, and distracts me to do so myself.<p>paruil...(And, honestly, I've meant no offense by this.) I’ve learned how to adapt to your manner of self-expression. And now I would simply request that you extend yourself and try to do the same for me. <p>snl...Am I doing well enough?<p>paruil...(But if you do choose to respond, I would request that you consider using the two-response method. Your first response contains all of your initial reactions and embodies and articulates your feelings, impressions, and immediate thoughts. And then later–a day or two or three, etc.–you reread the post, and respond anew. And you then compare your new responses with your original responses, and see which one speaks better for you.)<p>snl...This confused me.<p>paruil...Having said that, in this post I am willing to try to number my questions and point out things that I think are worthy of your attention and a response from you.<p>snl...Worked ok for me. This is one of the reasons though I mentioned verbal discssion, be it phone, or voice IM, or round table. Because this is not real time, one forgets what is said, and points are often much briefer cause of extensive typing required for even small points. Then the cut and paste so as to keep continuity going gets burdensome in itself, and eventually it seems (from observation) the whole thing collapses under its own weight, and real life time conflicts etc... but I do value the echange of information with others, and hope the on-line tools to do so get more sophisticated. Wish I could just voicetype this for example....and have an easily called up synopsis of what is said etc.<p>SnL, you also wrote: “ . . . .marital intimacy (oneflesh) . . . either exists or it doesn't.” <p>paruil...10.a.) Is it something that is changeable, as in it can exist at one point, but then not exist at another point due to various reasons (i.e., people changing, stressful time, fusion, etc.)? <p>snl...No, it is immutable IMO. It may not be rationally recognized, it may even be run away from, but it cannot change, nor can it be prevented from occuring....it operates outside the realm of rational choice.<p>paruil...10.b.) Is it something that can be restored or renewed? <p>snl...No. It cannot be lost, so no need to restore or renew. But it can be run away from, denied, and in that sense restored/renewed...IF it actually exists...freeill makes that so.<p>paruil...10.c.) Is it something that can be nonexistent, but then come into being and be established by various reasons (i.e., productive human effort, work, God’s will, a miracle, etc.)?<p>snl...No good works will not do it. It is similar in nature to believeing in God. You cannot negotiate, work, or buy yourself into beleif, it operates in anothe realm, it is a leap of faith....oneflesh I suspect is similar. You have to give up everything you have to enable it, unlike God (there is only one) there are many potential mates, but you cannot bond with just anyone (something we all inherently know), this leap requires complete vulnerability, with no gaurantees, something humans find very difficult to do, it is really hard to make yourself psychologically vulnerable to someone, especially since in so trying we are often abused, taken advantage of, etc... as we make inappropriate choices.<p>I realize my conjectures re the nature of human bonding are probably controversial, I also realize one does not have to be oneflesh to be successfully "married". I think true deep human marital bonding is not common, and is because there is a continuum of fit for each of us with all others, and that as the fit gets better, the pool goes down, I think the close connections I talk about can only happen with a very small % of potential mates...given the logisitics, ignorance, and mating/dating habits of our culture, people are far more likely to marry in the accomodation part of the spectrum...I think most of the social dialog over love, in-love, soulmates etc is a reflection of confusion over how much "fit" each of us needs/wants in order to feel maritally safe/happy etc. MB strives (through behaviour modification) to emulate the conditions observed in marriages that are deeply bonded, the hope being that even if not fitted all that good, one can at least craft a comfortable marriage based on history, kids, and good attitude, and if one falls passionately in love all the better....the alternative of assessing who you are, who your mate is, how you fit, the potential you have, and what to do about it is fraught with difficulty, and frankly (as sh more or less pointed out to me) few are gonna benefit by it, and indeed be traumatized by that process (psuchological honesty is not something humans embrace with much enthusiasm), so much better to (in my words) get em to play nice, and hopefully that will be enought to keep em going...I agree.<p>11.a.) ps. How many children do you and Thinker have, and (11.b.) how old are they?<p>snl...d23 d20 s18 s16 all ours, thinker and I never married to anyone else or have any other kids.
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
313
guests, and
55
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums67
Topics133,622
Posts2,323,491
Members71,965
| |
Most Online3,185
Jan 27th, 2020
|
|
|
|
