"Manipulation" - Marriage Builders® Forums

[ August 30, 2004, 07:45 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

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

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

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

Hugs, Thoughts, & Prayers

<blockquote>quote:<hr />(A little different question than the "trying" thread.) <hr /></blockquote>So lets tie the 2 together a little.

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

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

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

WIWH

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[ August 30, 2004, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[ August 30, 2004, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

[ August 30, 2004, 07:47 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[ August 30, 2004, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

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

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

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

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

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

[ August 30, 2004, 07:50 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Here are some older threads of intrest

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

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

[ August 30, 2004, 07:51 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

WARNING!
Long boring repsonse ahead...

If one is going to discuss the “180” in relation to marriage, then everyone is going ot think it is Divorce Busting.

If I invent a car and call it a Ford, people will simply think it’s a Ford, not something new.

I'm not interested in the DB book, really. Not if it is telling people to do "this or that"... just whatever is the opposite of what they have been doing. Like, if you have being kind... be unkind. That's erratic... and the behavior could be unkind.
No, that is not what the book says to do. As I wrote previously, the list is what some people think they have to do in order to do a 180. The list is merely suggestions to consider if what you have been doing is not working.
Just as some new people here come on and other new people not really familiar with this stuff tell them, “Do plan A. Be nice and be a doormat”. That’s not Plan A.

The author of the book doesn't have a "corner" on 180 moves.
Agreed. But the 180 is Divorce Busting. If you talk about a 180 in relation to saving a marriage, then everyone assumes it is divorce busting. Just as if you talk about marriage builder principles, it is about this web site.

(Harley is inconsistent) For example, he says not to be too self-sacrificing. Then, he tells BS's to continue to be loving... (overgiving)... when they are getting betrayal in return. (Plan A).
In Plan A, the BS is too self-sacrificing... and is getting hurt.
That's why Dr. Harley says to do it only for a short period of time... and go to Plan B. It's not consistent... but for a reason, I understand.... so I'll "let him off the hook".
In a normal, working relationship, people should not be too self-sacrificing.
An affair changes the dynamics in that relationship and people must adjust (at least temporarily).

Too many people here go to Plan B without even having read “Surviving An Affair”, just because that is one of the steps and people here suggest it. Plan B should never be attempted without professional help (see my signature)
And yes Plan B is not simply “no-contact”.

It's smarter to do an emotional, relational, behavioral 180... and would be, I believe, more successful in preparing people for restoration of relationships... or, in the absence of same, moving on and healing.
I guess the difficulty I’m have with your “180” is that in order to do it, then people have to be doing things “wrong”.
If they are following MB principles (or Divorce Busting) then they are not doing it that way.
They cannot & should not do a “Laura Lee 180”.

In fact, a person doing a Plan A... in my opinion, should be doing an emotional, relational, and behavioral 180... out of the "pit" of hurt and pain and into assertiveness, confidence, and positive energy!!
Okay, that is Plan A. Why should we call it a 180?

A person doing a Plan B... could do a Plan A... if they were STRONG ENOUGH to be assertive and positive instead of being continually harmed by "trying too hard"... "overgiving"... etc.
Plan B is not simply because you are hurting and not “strong enough”. In fact, Dr Harley seems to be now changing his direction a bit and recommends people go to Plan B as soon as the ws will not end the affair. Don’t wait.

He could continue to "try" to "Plan A". But, what he has been doing has not produced reciprocity or the healing of the relationship.
That is not what Plan A I supposed to do.

He needs to do a 180, be assertive, "change the rules"... and to put a stop to his own behavior that is playing into the negativity, and the imbalance, of the situation.
Hey, that sounds just like Plan A (better yet, Divorce Busting).

Wow! Guess I'm blending Love Must Be Tough, 180ing, and MB stuff - and, thanks, I have no particular loyalty to any particular author. I just like what truly works.
You like it but how do you know it ”truly” works?

A 180 is restoring harmony and balance... restoring positivity... instead of letting a negative person, or a person behaving negatively towards you, control your behavior by inspiring your reactions.
So your program is only good IF you are negative or being controlled negatively. If one is following just about any other program, then one can’t really do this “180” can you?

A sound program will do exactly what WIWH has said... it will either attract the other person back to you
There are no programs which suggest you can (or should try) to attract the other person back. In fact, most say it doesn’t matter what you do, this will not work and if you try to do it, you will lose (to the op).

or bring personal healing and make you a better person through the process.
This is the main goal of most programs.

If nobody gets hurt... and the person working the program becomes a better person... and the irresponsible party begins to take on every consequence of their own behavior (instead of the "responsible" party suffering in their place)... it's a sound program... even if it melds many ideas by many different authors.
The problem is that the people who developed these have tried different ways. Some worked, some didn’t. They kept the stuff that works (that’s why they have books and successful practices).
Just picking and choosing because it “seems” pretty good doesn’t mean anything.

Most everything you have described is straight out of Divorce Busting. I don't see much different at all. I haven’t read “Divorce Remedy” yet, but I’d bet it’s pretty much along the same lines.

[ August 30, 2004, 07:52 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

[ August 30, 2004, 07:53 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]

LL: Hang in there. Some of us get it and agree without getting anal about it.

Nah, I'm not trying to "pick apart" your thoughts.
Just quoting to make sure you understand where my response is coming from.
I guess I do it maybe a bit too much???

jeff,
Why are you getting anal about it?
It's only a discussion, sheesh. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Roll Eyes]" src="images/icons/rolleyes.gif" />

[ August 30, 2004, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: laura_lee ]