My husband of twenty years recently confessed that nearly six years ago, during a period of huge change in our lives, he made a dumb mistake.
I�ll provide a little back story so that I can ask my question.
He has a sports car that I surprised him with for his birthday one year. It was something he�s always wanted and I was thrilled to be able to get it for him. We call it the �date car� and take it out for special occasions and top down scenic drives. He also has a model of it in his office.
Long story short � he was attracted to a woman at his office. She noticed the model of the car and commented that she liked them. He told her he had one at home. Shortly thereafter he drove the car to work one day and took her for a ride. He said he immediately realized he was being stupid, risking his marriage, his job (she was a subordinate), etc. and that�s where things ended. They took a short ride and nothing else ever happened. He left that company shortly thereafter for a better opportunity and we moved to another state. He made the decision not to tell me about it because he said he knew it would hurt me.
A strange series of events led me to ask whether any other woman had ever ridden in the car. He initially told me no, but a few days later sat me down and told me the story about the long ago ride. I was really, really upset. Not just that it had happened, but that he had kept it from me for so long.
Things have been mostly great between us over the years but there have been times when I�ve sensed he was keeping something from me and it�s made me think I was crazy. I think this secret has been festering all this time. We�re working through things in counseling and he�s been wonderful.
The problem is the stupid car. It sits in the garage under a cover and hasn�t moved since this all came out. He loves that car and doesn�t want to get rid of it but says he will if I really need him to. I don�t know what to do. If I make him sell it, I worry that he�ll resent me. However, I can�t imagine ever wanting to ride in it again. I�m afraid it will always be a trigger.
I�m looking for some objective opinions.
I�m looking for some objective opinions.
I will tell you how the Marriage Builders concepts would apply here but I would strongly suggest you get the book
His Needs, Her Needs, so you can learn the skills to resolve these kinds of problems yourself.
Absolutely, he should get rid of it! You are right, you would be triggered by the car.
The greatest risk for resentment would be
with you if he kept the car. That is because any residual resentment he has will fade with time, but your resentment will be triggered every time you see the car. So, it is your resentment that is the problem, not his.
The purchase of the car also violates the policy of joint agreement. Since he did not give you the complete facts when he bought it, he violated the POJA. Would you have agreed to his purchase of the car if he had told you why? And told you he had taken this woman for a ride?
Dr Harley addresses what to do when the POJA is violated in his book Lovebusters, pg 170. Your situation is different but the principle is the same.
I explained to her that when the Policy of Joint Agreement has been violated, and a decision has been made without a joint agreement, a couple must correct the decision as soon as possible. In this case, it meant going back to her decision to invite Jack and Barbara to live with them and making that decision again, this time with the POJA in mind. Since she now knew that Bill would not agree to that arrangement, she had no choice but to ask her sister and BIL to find another place to live. As soon as Jack and Barbara moved out, Bill moved back in.
And lastly, has your husband tightened up his boundaries around women so this type of thing doesn't happen again?
SHE bought the car, Mel.
Get rid of it. Go pick out another one, together. Same model, same year if you like, but get rid of that tainted car. It is not worth keeping.
I see that! It doesn't change a word I said.
I see that! It doesn't change a word I said.
Not these? "The purchase of the car also violates the policy of joint agreement. Since he did not give you the complete facts when he bought it, he violated the POJA. Would you have agreed to his purchase of the car if he had told you why? And told you he had taken this woman for a ride?"
I see that! It doesn't change a word I said.
Not these? "The purchase of the car also violates the policy of joint agreement. Since he did not give you the complete facts when he bought it, he violated the POJA. Would you have agreed to his purchase of the car if he had told you why? And told you he had taken this woman for a ride?"
Right. It still violates the POJA because she did not have those facts.
I have read His Needs, Her Needs and that's probably the only reason I am even considering having him get rid of the car. So often I'm the one who is guilty of putting my needs aside.
My husband has tightened up his boundaries. I think this episode scared the heck out of him. Our counselor thinks we have an amazing marriage and is helping us make it even better.
CWMI, thanks for clearing up the car purchase issue. I was happy to buy it for him but certainly wouldn't have if I had thought it might contribute to something stupid like this.
We've talked about replacing it and I'm sure we'll reach some mutually satisfying conclusion. I just wanted to ask someone outside the situation if I was being unreasonable. Tainted is the exact word I used to describe it the other day.
I'm confused why you think I didn't have all the facts before I purchased the car.
We've talked about replacing it and I'm sure we'll reach some mutually satisfying conclusion. I just wanted to ask someone outside the situation if I was being unreasonable.
This is absolutely reasonable because it would hurt your marriage to keep it. Like I said earlier, the greater risk of resentment comes from YOU. Your instincts are correct that the car should go. And if you find something he likes to replace it with, there is less chance that he would have any problem with it. And really, that is a small price to pay for his part in tainting the car.
I'm confused why you think I didn't have all the facts before I purchased the car.
Sorry for the confusion, I misread and thought he had purchased the car himself because of his attraction. My eyes are tired tonight!
I don't think it changes anything if she bought the car. In fact, if anything it makes what he did worse. All this time she's thinking it was a special car/gift and he basically made it ugly. Not only that, keeping this a secret for so long says he KNEW how it would hurt her but he kept the lie by omission going. He was attracted to this woman. Why didn't he confess THAT at the time?
I suspect that car holds more secrets than he's telling.
Dump the car. He should buy her the car of her dreams (after they POJA it of course.)
What prompted him to tell you, stupidcar?
Mel, one day I washed the car as a surprise for him. While vacuuming it I came across a hair. It was mine - I've been shedding like crazy lately. For some reason, while telling him about it, I jokingly asked the question. Maybe I suspected, I'm not sure.
With all the celebrity cheating scandals we've been talking alot about honesty and secrets - think Arnold. He said once I directly asked the question he couldn't keep the secret.
I think that keeping the secret all these years has put some distance between us that wouldn't have been there. There is definitely some damage but we're both committed to working through it. He's the one that called the counselor, made the first appointment, has been willing to do whatever it takes to make this right.
The fact that I bought the car and that it has been our special "date car" does make it worse. I can't believe how icky it makes me feel to think that he was headed down that dangerous path and that I helped provide the vehicle - pun intended.
By the way - he bought me my dream car a year ago!
Thanks for the input. I needed someone to tell me I wasn't being unreasonable. I really want this to be a POJA. I don't want to force him to sell it and am praying he reaches that decision on his own. I have shared my feelings and am letting him process it without throwing out any ultimatums. I see definite signs that he is getting used to the idea of it going away.
Um...stupidcar I'm sorry to throw fuel on the fire but I have a REALLY hard believing that the distance and unease you have been feeling is because of the "festering" of THIS particular secret. It just doesn't make sense, not where a guy is concerned.
I guess what I'm saying is: keep your powder dry, and snoop like crazy.
There are some other issues that have come up in counseling and we are working through them. However, they are unrelated to the car and that was the question I needed answered.
The thing is with objects that are tainted by an affair there is no need to POJA. It is the right of the BS to have the object removed from their and their WS's lives.
Whether a sofa or the whole house. Many a WH had to sell their dream vehicle and forced to down size to an econo box because they no longer were in a place financially post affair to treat themselves to another expensive car. The consequences of having an affair. You dance, you don't complain that the band has to be played.
And this is a simple case this is not an everday car.
Get another date vehicle. Your dream vehicle, car, motorcycle. Nothing more fun the riding in a 4dr jeep wrangler with the doors off going on a picnic.
As has been done before whether to toss into the garbage, cut, tear, rip, barnfire, sell, donate to charity. The method does not matter.
Pick the method most enjoyable, fastest, or any combination that makes the BS the happiest.
This was the main topic of conversation in our counseling session last night. He hopes that with some time I will feel less strongly about it and we can keep the car. He and the counselor suggested storing it somewhere so I don't have to see it everyday. I was reminded by the counselor that the car didn't hurt me, my husband did and that he didn't have an affair, just a lapse in judgement.
I'm pretty upset. I wish that he cared enough about my feelings that he couldn't wait to get rid of the stupid thing.
He has been researching other vehicles but he has a strong attachment to this particular car. We bought it brand new, it's always been garage kept, under a cover AND they stopped making them a couple of years ago so we can't get another new one.
This was the main topic of conversation in our counseling session last night. He hopes that with some time I will feel less strongly about it and we can keep the car. He and the counselor suggested storing it somewhere so I don't have to see it everyday. I was reminded by the counselor that the car didn't hurt me, my husband did and that he didn't have an affair, just a lapse in judgement.
BUT, the car triggers your feelings, though, and that is what matters. Your feelings won't fade in time, but his will. His would fade by replacing it with another car. Yours will be triggered every time you see the car. And you will also be reminded that he placed the car above your feelings.
If I were you, I would consult Dr Harley and see what he says. Dr Harley is a licensed psychologist. You can get his advice for free on his radio show by sending him an email. He will answer your question on the radio and then could replay it for your husband.
This was the main topic of conversation in our counseling session last night. He hopes that with some time I will feel less strongly about it and we can keep the car. He and the counselor suggested storing it somewhere so I don't have to see it everyday. I was reminded by the counselor that the car didn't hurt me, my husband did and that he didn't have an affair, just a lapse in judgement.
BUT, the car triggers your feelings, though, and that is what matters. Your feelings won't fade in time, but his will. His would fade by replacing it with another car. Yours will be triggered every time you see the car. And you will also be reminded that he placed the car above your feelings.
If I were you, I would consult Dr Harley and see what he says. Dr Harley is a licensed psychologist. You can get his advice for free on his radio show by sending him an email. He will answer your question on the radio and then could replay it for your husband.
Yeah! What melody lane said.
And just storing it somewhere you can't see it deprives you of the pleasure of getting another car together with your husband to be the date car. I believe thats a ridiculous suggestion.
This was the main topic of conversation in our counseling session last night. He hopes that with some time I will feel less strongly about it and we can keep the car. He and the counselor suggested storing it somewhere so I don't have to see it everyday. I was reminded by the counselor that the car didn't hurt me, my husband did and that he didn't have an affair, just a lapse in judgement.
I'm pretty upset. I wish that he cared enough about my feelings that he couldn't wait to get rid of the stupid thing.
He has been researching other vehicles but he has a strong attachment to this particular car. We bought it brand new, it's always been garage kept, under a cover AND they stopped making them a couple of years ago so we can't get another new one.
A LAPSE IN JUDGEMENT?
Wow, you�re husband must LOVE this counselor.
I would ask this counselor how he defines �affair.�
You might want to know because evidently your husband will be allowed to go just about that far before he has committed an infraction.
SC,
A lapse in judgment is when you ask the waitress where she�s from because you think she�s cute.
Challenge this counselor. Ask him to really think about a �lapse in judgment.� Ask him to think about the number of chances your husband had to turn back from the decisionS that lead to having Another Woman in his vehicle. Ask him to think about the number of encounters with this woman it must have taken to set the whole thing up � hint: clearly he spoke with her enough times to find out she was a car enthusiast. Ask him to think about how many times your husband played out this scenario in his head before it even happened.
I was wayward once and, in one incident, wound up making out with a girl at the end of a party. Perhaps your counselor would call that a �lapse in judgement.� However, these things don�t just �happen.� They take planning and premeditation.
I�m going to be very generous now and say that most counselors are complete idiots. I don�t believe yours is the exception to the rule. I believe he is dangerous to your marriage.
I suggest counseling with Dr. Steve Harley.
~Optimism
I agree with everything all of you have said.
I figured out early on that this counselor was an idiot in regard to his characterization of the woman in the car incident, although meeting with him has been helpful in some areas. Fortunately, thanks to some earlier pastoral counseling, my husband and I are on the same page about that behavior. We have done a lot of work exploring the pattern that led up to it and how to prevent anything like it in the future. There are EPs in place, we practice radical honesty and he has an accountability partner that I respect, along with other MB principles.
I agree that storing the car is a ridiculous idea, especially when you factor in the cost involved. Parking is at a premium where we live so it's not a simple matter.
If I was vindictive, we would sell the car and I would use the money for something purely selfish - something just for me. That would be rough justice and my taker would win.
I feel that selling it and picking something new together is a very gracious offer. When I'm feeling witchy that almost feels like my husband's bad behavior is being rewarded but I can work through that.
He loved being the original owner of a very low mileage, garage kept sports car but his carelessness damaged it just as if he'd been driving recklessly and hit a tree. I'll bet he's more careful with the next one. We just need to find something we both will be happy with. Unfortunately, they no longer produce the model we have and there isn't anything else new that he really loves. We may go for something classic.
We've done so well working through this unpleasant chapter in our long history. I never thought a CAR would be such a sensitive issue!
Interesting side note - The idiot counselor used to own the same model car and got rid of it because he didn't really like it. His wife bought it for him just like I bought ours for my husband.
Bottom line - the car needs to go. I haven't had anyone tell me that was unreasonable - even the counselor.
Thanks again for the input. The people on these boards don't pull any punches.
Just curious stupidcar - does your husband agree with you that this was an affair? Is it important to you that he does?
Yes and yes.
The sticking point has been the car. His contention was that he is responsible for what he did, not the car, so why should the car go away? He has clearly stated that if that's what I want, that's what will happen although I know he's hoping he'll get to keep it. I was doubting myself and came here to get some opinions as to whether I was being unreasonable. I feel completely affirmed in my belief that we need to get rid of the stupid car.
The reason the car should go; human memory is not recorded like tape or video, it is reconstructed on the spot with information we currently have access to. The car allows you to construct a visual of your husband in the car with another woman.
This will remain true of other cars of the same model, year, or body type. So long as you have accessible information to construct the memory with, both the memory and the associated feelings will remain strong.
Not only should you sell the car, it should be replaced with a totally different type in brand, shape, and color.
He chose to taint it. The car, and the marriage.
Perfectly said, HoldHerHand. Thank you for that. I had the same thoughts about getting the same make and model.
The reason the car should go; human memory is not recorded like tape or video, it is reconstructed on the spot with information we currently have access to. The car allows you to construct a visual of your husband in the car with another woman.
This will remain true of other cars of the same model, year, or body type. So long as you have accessible information to construct the memory with, both the memory and the associated feelings will remain strong.
Not only should you sell the car, it should be replaced with a totally different type in brand, shape, and color.
He chose to taint it. The car, and the marriage.
I have a different view on the reason the car should be eliminated.
The car is a hunk of metal. But it is a hunk of metal that was purchased to evoke certain feelings. One could spend the same money on a rare painting (acrylic on canvas), or a sculpture (marble), or a piece of land (dirt and trees); again with the same feelings of contentment if the owner had love for those objects.
At this point the car evokes feeling which are negative to one spouse. If there is true love and respect and admiration and sharing, then the car can no longer give the same sense of satisfaction, to either party. There's no more POJA in that car. It's anti-POJA.
SC, you seem to have studied these concepts and it appears your husband has a good approach to your marriage. You are very important to him.
You seem to be becoming steadfast and convinced in your stance on this car thing. Perhaps he is digging in his heels as well (bolstered by the opinion of the counselor). I am concerned that the thing that once pulled you together and evoked such positive feelings is now creating distance between you two.
To think a hunk of metal could have such an impact on a very real thing like a human bond....
opt
I sent my question into the Harleys and they answered on the radio show today. Dr. Harley agrees the car should be sold and replaced with something we both agree on. He was concerned about the lying behavior and classified my husband as the type that lies "to stay out of trouble." I completely agree and we have been addressing this behavior in counseling.
Looks like we'll be getting a new car! I'm actually kind of excited to begin the process and move forward. I'll keep you posted on how it turns out. Anybody want to buy a gently used two seat convertible sports car?
You'd probably have to hop on a plane to come see it because we don't live on the mainland.
Nice! I heard part of the call today and heard where he suggested you sell the car and get something you both agree. We sold our little sports car last year and it went really fast! I was surprised at how fast it sold.
Are you going to play the clip for your husband? I just checked and todays show has not been added to the archives but it is there under the rebroadcast.
New guy here, so disclaimers of probably annoying people with a post that doesn't comport with local culture...
Husbands have many temptations over the years. I suspect wives do, too. Presuming nothing more happened than what has been reported, this was a test that your husband passed with flying colors. He started messing up by walking out to the car with this woman. He admits to being attracted to her. Surely he was trying to impress her with his car.
And then his inner voice told him not to continue down this path. He realized that this woman was not worth losing you over. He realized that he was making a mistake. He has felt guilt over the years for getting oh so close to destroying everything of value to him. And he probably feels lower than slime for tainting something so special to you.
He realized that YOU are what is important to him. I bet he scared himself so badly that he self-inoculated against ever tempting fate like that again.
So I don't think you should beat up your husband any further if you find that he honestly regrets what he did. He had the strength to turn back when it would have been far easier to give in to temptation.
But yeah get rid of the frickin' car! It is tainted for both of you. In the end, stuff is just stuff. You'll both feel better to be rid of it.
The counselor suggested we not talk about the car with each other until our next appointment which is tomorrow. I've called his office to ask specifically if I should share that information and the very similar advice I got from our pastor. I'm waiting for a return call.
I'm not trying to punish him and I do commend him for not going any further than he did. It definitely scared the heck out of him. If I wanted to punish him I would have keyed the stupid thing or sold it and used the proceeds for something entirely selfish. I think replacing it with something that is not tainted is the best solution for all concerned.
I just heard the radio show. I hope you get to pick out a nice replacement car that you both enjoy.
AM
Here is her radio clip:
here
Keep the damn car!
Stop projecting your ongoing anger (justified or not!) at your husband at an inanimate object, as a form of passive-aggressive revenge against him.
Look, if he were walking your dog when he had had an inappropriate converstaion with some floozie, we wouldn't be discussing putting YOUR DOG to sleep. My FWW conducted her EA from the family room, on the family computer. Crushing the computer and bull-dozing the family room would NOT have changed her actions, nor erased the hurt they caused. Deal with the person (WH), not the ancillary props.
Getting rid of the car will leave the same unaddressed resentment, with the added irritant of his resenting your high-handed demands, and your own reminder (from the empty garage space) that you can't get past his betrayal, in spite of taking away his toys.
Dr Harley: "He blew it...the lie is why he should get rid of the car."
NG, you can't say whether or not getting rid of a dog is appropriate, nor a car. It's up to the offended person what is 'just compensation'.
High-handed demands was very inappropriate to say.
Wow, NG, that was harsh! If you read my earlier post, you would know that I am NOT trying to punish him. It's not only about the car ride, it's primarily about the lie and the fact that the car has been something we enjoyed together, which is forever tainted. I think getting something new is a reasonable solution. He screwed up and he still gets a new toy!
With that said, I have decided not to force him to sell it, although that's what I hope the conclusion is. I don't believe I'll ever want to ride in it again but if he wants to keep it sitting in the garage under a cover hoping someday we'll be able to enjoy it again, that's his choice. No high handed demands here!
We'll be discussing it with our counselor this evening.
NG, you don't get to pick your triggers. You don't get to just decide not to be triggered.
And I think the suggestion was to sell the car, not bulldoze it.
And for the record, I would've smashed the blasted computer.
And its about him caring about her feelings more than the car. If he can't demonstrate that going forwards then how is she supposed to heal?
I have decided not to force him to sell it....
Good! "Harsh" or not, my opinion remains that the real issue is your attitude toward your FWH. Addressing THAT without the misdirected attention to automobile ownership will be the more efficient route to recovery.
Glad to have been of assistance!
Not to force is not the same as being enthusiastic about him keeping it though.
Can you be enthusiastic about him keeping it somewhere? If the answer is no then you need to keep being honest about it until you can work out a mutually agreeable solution.
NG seems to be forgetting the little matter of POJA here.
He said he immediately realized he was being stupid, risking his marriage, his job (she was a subordinate), etc. and that�s where things ended. They took a short ride and nothing else ever happened.
So the furor is all over this? There's got to be more to the story than this. I don't quite understand where everyone is getting that the husband cheated? Risking his marriage or job by giving someone a ride in the car? Sounds to me like someone that recognized that this could be a risky behavior that couild be viewed as inappropriate or that violated his boundaries, and so caught himself. What happened beyond giving someone a ride in a car?
After reading this I'm intensely curious if this was the reason you sought counseling?
He hid it from her, that's the problem. He snuck his car into work to give little miss hotpants a ride, and hid it from his wife. It's not like her car broke down and he gave her a ride home, he PLANNED this little escapade and then kept it from his wife.
Where does it say that he "snuck" the car to work?
Why is the woman now little miss hotpants?
From what I read the woman saw a model of the car and so the guy brought it into work and gave her a ride. Nothing else happened.
What exactly did this guy have to hide?
The point is that he did hide it. Had it been a mutual friend of theirs and he had POJA'd giving this woman a ride then there would have been no problem. But this was IB, weak boundaries and then dishonesty.
Now his wife feels hurt by the secret and is showing him clearly what he can do to make her feel better (sell the car and POJA their new purchase).
Exactly. If it wasn't a big deal, why not mention it at the time it happened? If her husband didn't think it was worth mentioning it, then there's a bigger issue at play.
No matter how small of a deal any of us think ths is, it is a big deal to his wife, s he needs to do whatever it takes to help her resolve this. If she wants to car gone, he should sell the car. If he wants another one, he can POJA with his wife. Maybe she will be OK a long as it is a different color. Who knows. But he needs to work this out with her. She feels how she feels. Not our place to argue she shouldn't feel that way.
NG seems to be forgetting the little matter of POJA here.
No, NG is applying it. DECIDING TO SELL the car is the action that must be POJA'd.
No agreement -> no sale.
Why should she have to POJA selling the car? Isn't it like some people in SAA sell houses and such?
NG seems to be forgetting the little matter of POJA here.
No, NG is applying it. DECIDING TO SELL the car is the action that must be POJA'd.
No agreement -> no sale.
That is not how the POJA works. If it makes her unhappy it has to go because it is bad for the marriage. No sale is not the default position when it concerns something that makes one of the spouses unhappy. Doing nothing is the default position when proposing something NEW to do. Anything that makes one spouse unhappy should be replaced with something that makes BOTH happy.
The bottom line is that couples need to eliminate behavior that is good for one and bad for the other, even if it makes the one eliminating it feel bad. Truth is, it should never have been there in the first place, and all you're doing is eliminating a bad habit. It's like telling a child molester to stop molesting children. It may make him feel bad to stop, but he should never have gotten started in the first place.
Now I'll get to your question, how should people deal with the disappointments of giving up thoughtless behavior?
<snip>
As a couple identifies and eliminates thoughtless behavior, the withdrawal they experience will cause some unhappiness at first. But it doesn't leave a void -- couples are not left with nothing to do. They replace their thoughtless behavior with new thoughtful activities that give them a solid marriage, love for each other and much greater happiness than they ever could have had with all their thoughtless activities combined.
If it makes her unhappy it has to go
Okay, now we're getting to the crux of the issue. Her "unhappiness" is the point of this entire issue. Her attitude toward the car IS a fitting subject for discussion and resolution, and he should approach the problem with her.....if she is fittingly able and willing to look at all alternatives available. Does that strike anyone reading this thread as the situation as originally presented here?
Approaching the issue from a position of "I'm unhappy; we have to sell your car!" is NOT, IMVHO, conducive to a mature, joint resolution of the problem, and should not be mandated as the optimal solution here, just because she is the one who initiated the thread.
And, BTW: This issue is more or less moot. Having been able to express her hurt and discomfort to her husband, and evidently getting a response suitable to both of them (not revealed to us here) she DID take the MB-friendly position that the car can remain, and certain other EP's and JC's will adequately assuage her hurt. Whether or not the ability to "vent" her initial pain here as well, to us "uninvolved third partries", contributed to her ultimate decision, we may never know.
[
Approaching the issue from a position of "I'm unhappy; we have to sell your car!" is NOT, IMVHO, conducive to a mature, joint resolution of the problem, and should not be mandated as the optimal solution here, just because she is the one who initiated the thread.
Not only is it "mature," but it is the solution to the problem. Anything that makes one spouse unhappy in marriage is to be eliminated, not tolerated. It is to be eliminated in a way that makes them BOTH happy. For example, the solution given by Dr Harley here was for them to find a replacement car that made them BOTH happy. But this car has to go. If something in marriage makes one person unhappy, it has to go.
This is how POJA works. I did not suggest what words to use when expressing her complaint, and that is another issue entirely, but the principle of POJA mandates that the car GOES.
Her attitude toward the car IS a fitting subject for discussion and resolution, and he should approach the problem with her.....
Keep in mind WHY the solution is to remove the CAR and not focus on changing her attitude. Do you know why?
If it makes her unhappy it has to go
Okay, now we're getting to the crux of the issue. Her "unhappiness" is the point of this entire issue. Her attitude toward the car IS a fitting subject for discussion and resolution, and he should approach the problem with her.....if she is fittingly able and willing to look at all alternatives available. Does that strike anyone reading this thread as the situation as originally presented here?
Approaching the issue from a position of "I'm unhappy; we have to sell your car!" is NOT, IMVHO, conducive to a mature, joint resolution of the problem, and should not be mandated as the optimal solution here, just because she is the one who initiated the thread.
And, BTW: This issue is more or less moot. Having been able to express her hurt and discomfort to her husband, and evidently getting a response suitable to both of them (not revealed to us here) she DID take the MB-friendly position that the car can remain, and certain other EP's and JC's will adequately assuage her hurt. Whether or not the ability to "vent" her initial pain here as well, to us "uninvolved third partries", contributed to her ultimate decision, we may never know.
I don't remember your story.
But your position would support a WS that banged their OP in the family home, in the marital bed, see's no point for the WS to be forced to sell the house, bed, or even the sheets that were on the bed that day. There should be no sale because the WS has no desire to move or removal of furniture because the WS finds it comfortable and can't buy new because they don't make it any more.
That car must be sold.
And I would not be bothered if the BW takes a match to the car and burns it to the ground because if the BW felt that the money recieved from that car would be blood money/30 pieces of silver.
But being in this case that the car is kept in the garage it should be pulled out side and a safe distance from any buildings or other vehicles first. Then strike the match.
Logged on to give an update and was surprised to see so much activity on this thread.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I decided I was not willing to force my husband to sell the car.
We met with our counselor on Thursday evening. My husband shared first and said that he still did not want to get rid of the car, but reiterated that he would if that's what I needed. I shared some of the input I had received during the week, including Dr. Harley's advice, told him about posting on this forum and read the email from our pastor. I then told him that I was unwilling to force him to sell the car and he could keep it if he wanted.
Then, our counselor looks at us both and says you HAVE to sell the car! He said we should replace it with something new that my husband will love.
We did some car shopping over the weekend and I thought maybe he was getting a little excited about something new, although he wasn't terribly enthusiastic about any particular model and was shocked at the prices. His car is almost 7 years old. On our walk last night he informed me he wants to sell his car and NOT replace it! He doesn't want to incur any debt to get something new and he's not willing to raid our savings. He wants to put the proceeds from the sale into savings. We will also free up over $100/month that it costs to insure and maintain the current car.
I'm not sure what to think. I kind of like the idea but I don't want him to resent me down the road. I guess if he changes his mind we can always get another car. I went by his office this morning and the model is gone. I sort of thought getting what I believed I wanted would feel better, but I'm a little sad.
I understand on some intellectual level that folks feel the need to get rid of things if they have the taint of an affair. But then they keep the WS.
I guess I don't understand that. Why is it that some find the WS good enough to keep, but something that had no part of the decision to cheat is discarded?
To me, and I know not all see it this way, it makes no sense to get rid of something like the car if you are keeping the WS.
I can see something like pictures or gifts given to the WS, as they have little value.
But if someone is unable to use their mind to control the emotional response an object evokes, how do they ever get to an emotional state where they feel romantic love for the WS?
To me, actions mean far more than some object. Cars and houses are just stuff. It's people and their actions that matter. Cars and houses cannot make the decision to cheat or the decision to end the affair. So why is so much emotion spent on such objects after an affair?
I'm not sure what to think. I kind of like the idea but I don't want him to resent me down the road. I guess if he changes his mind we can always get another car. I went by his office this morning and the model is gone. I sort of thought getting what I believed I wanted would feel better, but I'm a little sad.
Which is exactly what I tried to convey in my "Don't sell the car; deal with the anger" note a few days ago.
Look, you related in your earlier notes that YOU enjoyed the car as well - that your "date-nights" in it were something special, drawing both of you together. That does not have to change.
Your XWH made a huge series of errors in his defense of your marriage, letting OW into the "affection zone" that should be reserved for the two of you. You either accept the fact that he was imperfect, work together to repair the faults, and move forward, or you don't. It DOES require work on the part of both parties, and there are definite steps that have to be taken.
It seems you tried to take a "short-cut" to the next stages of recovery by demonizing (totemizing?) the car, symbolically purging your marriage of the pains afflicting it, assigning them to the car, and jettisoning them by disposing of the vehicle. As I said, it's not likely to work, and quite possible WILL engender the resentment on his part that I suggested earlier and you've suspected now.
Courage has been defined as grace under pressure. Try to find the courage to address your lingering issues with XBH directly.
soooooooo, did we sell the car yet?
for my friends here at MB - I used the "how many marriages have YOU saved?" line over the weekend....on my own Mother, lol.
I was explaining a Harley concept to her and she contradicted it. I couldn't help myself.
It was all in fun but the point was made.
Anyway - SC, hope all is well and you and your husband are finding common, loving ground about your recent experiences.
opt
The car is up for sale. We've done some shopping but he hasn't found anything he loves yet. Things between us are much better and last night he surprised me with the news that he's taking me to Maui in a couple of weeks! We've been talking about going but I didn't think we could fit it into the schedule.
The last few months have been tough but our commitment to get through it with God's help (and some input from Marriage Builders) will be blessed. I truly love him and I know he loves me.
This thread is starting to worry me because FWH pulled into the garage last night in a shiny new sporty convertible to test drive over night.
SC I am going to re-read the good advice that you were given.
I am glad that your stupid car is up for sale. That says a lot that he is willing to give it up.
The car was sold in early September. My husband has been wonderful.
So why am I still struggling with this 7 months after the revelation? I feel like a fool that he was able to keep his indiscretion from me for so long. I look back at that time in our lives and now it's clouded by the fact that things weren't as they seemed. In hindsight, it has helped me understand some experiences from back then, but I never suspected! Because I missed it then I analyze every little thing now.
My husband has been remarkably patient and completely transparent, even going to a lot of trouble to make sure I have access to his job site on a secure military facility without me asking and telling a prospective new employer that he is only willing to travel as long as I can go with him. He's doing everything he can to help me feel safe and secure but I'm still insecure sometimes.
Is this a normal part of the process?
Yes. You are going through an anger phase following a betrayal. Ride it out, and get that UA time in!
When you have a particularly sharp downturn, do something extra fun or exciting with your husband. Or something relaxing and intimate, like a nice hot bath with bubbles and salts!
Are you absolutely sure that nothing other than a ride occurred? With any other woman?
Maybe you should schedule a polygraph.
Something just doesn't seem right here.
So why am I still struggling with this 7 months after the revelation?
Recovery is quite a haul, SC. You're still in the earlier stages. Keep going - it gets better.
Your H sounds like he's on board with recovery. Are you snooping? How much UA time are the two of you getting each week?
I think you're okay, but make sure you're still doing some verifying to confirm that you're safe.
SC, just out of curiosity, did your marriage begin as an affair? Were you and/or your husband married when your relationship started? How did you meet?
ML, thanks for chiming in. I was hoping you would although after reading around here over the last several months I'm actually terrified of you!
I've never thought our marriage started as an affair, but maybe I'm wrong.
We met at work almost 30 years ago and became friends. I was married. He was not. At that time, I had no idea what an EA was. I remember hearing a song that said, "you came along one promise too late" and thinking it applied to us but didn't dwell on it.
My XH and I had a baby and I left that job. H got married and had a child. We babysat for each other sometimes but didn't spend much time together.
His marriage broke up after three years. I didn't even know they were having problems. A year later my marriage failed. We started spending time together, as friends, with our boys, and eventually started dating. We got married in 1991.
We've talked about the beginning of our friendship and realize that there was an attraction, although we never acknowledged it, or acted on it, until we were both single. Does our history make this an affairage? Is it somehow related to our current issues?
We've talked about the beginning of our friendship and realize that there was an attraction, although we never acknowledged it, or acted on it, until we were both single. Does our history make this an affairage? Is it somehow related to our current issues?
Thanks for your answer! No, what you describe is not an affair. Marriages that start as affairs are plagued with trust issues, for obvious reasons. It doesn't appear that is the case here.
How exactly are you "struggling?" Is it because you analyze every little thing now? I think that is probably a good idea. You will do this less often in the future, but
MORE SO than you did before you found out about the car incident. Harley puts it like this:
"Lack of trust does not make spouses paranoid and miserable, it makes their marriages safe. "
and here is another good one:
One topic is loss of trust. How can a spouse ever trust an unfaithful partner again? My answer is that the spouse should never have been trusted in the first place. I shouldn't be trusted by my wife, and I shouldn't trust her. The fact is that we are all wired for infidelity, and under certain conditions, we'll all do it. The way to protect your marriage from something that has been common to man (and women) for thousands of years is to recognize the threat, and do something to prevent it from happening. Basing a marriage on the Policy of Radical Honesty and the Policy of Joint Agreement goes a long way toward preventing an affair. Being each other's favorite leisure-time companions, and not being away from each other overnight are also important safety measures. Meeting each other's most important emotional needs, avoiding Love Busters and building an integrated lifestyle, free of secret second lives, are all ways to affair-proof your marriage. With these measures in place, we end up trusting our spouses because an affair becomes almost impossible to achieve.
In other words, you are safer now because you "recognize the threat."
Phew! My heart started pounding when I saw you had responded. You're always what I would refer to as "brutally honest" with people and I was afraid you would tell me we were doomed.
I do struggle with analyzing everything and look forward to it becoming less urgent as he continues to rebuild my trust, although I'll NEVER not pay close attention.
As I said above, he's been wonderful and very patient with my vigilance. I'm pretty sure he would wear a webcam on his head if I asked. We're working hard to meet each other's EN and spend lots of UA time together.
A difficult part is that this incident is relatively new information for me, but a long ago memory for him.
Thanks for the input.
Phew! My heart started pounding when I saw you had responded. You're always what I would refer to as "brutally honest" with people and I was afraid you would tell me we were doomed.
I usually save that for folks who are sitting on the railroad tracks with a train headed towards them or fogged out waywards! You are neither!
although I'll NEVER not pay close attention.
You have exactly the right idea!
Celebrated our 21st anniversary this weekend. Hoping the coming year has a little less drama.
We continue to work together on extraordinary precautions and firm boundaries and I have a question. We all have to deal with members of the opposite sex and are bound to come across someone we find attractive. When does it cross the line from attraction to an inappropriate relationship?
Personally, I tend to run the other direction when I sense any kind of attraction but sometimes that's not possible and you might have to interact.
Any advice? Want to be prepared with the proper tools so neither one of us gets too close to that awful slippery slope.
sc, Harley recommends telling your spouse when you find yourself attracted to a member of the opposite sex. This is done for a couple of reasons. The first is so your spouse can help hold you accountable and so you can brainstorm ways to avoid this person. You would want to do everything you can to avoid this person and certainly never have personal discussions with him/her.
Attractions usually evolve when someone allows a member of the opposite sex to meet his needs, so as long as he does not allow that to happen, an attraction is unlikely to occur. I would go read the newsletter on opposite sex friendships in the newsletter section. That is pretty comprehensive.
Here's the situation that made me uncomfortable:
There is a young woman at our church.� She�s been in college on the mainland most of the time we�ve been attending so up until she graduated this summer she�s only been around during school breaks.� She�s an attractive girl, has performed hula (which can be quite seductive) several times at church and wears very little in the way of clothing most of the time � strapless tops and short, short shorts.� We do not know her or her family and I�ve never had a conversation with her, except maybe hello or thank you for your dance in passing.� I could tell DH finds her attractive and he acknowledges it.� He has engaged her in casual conversation a couple of times without me present and told me about it.� I tried to not be bothered by it.
�
We were out to eat a couple of weeks ago and saw this girl's picture on a poster about a local Cultural Event.� Sunday before last, when I was already inside and DH was outside talking to a friend he saw the girl as she arrived and told her we�d seen her picture and asked about it.� They talked about it and he told me later.� It bugged me but I didn�t say anything until later when I said I thought he needed to be careful around her.
�
We talked more about it after dinner the other night. While he admits he finds her attractive, he didn�t think he was doing anything wrong by being friendly to a 21-22 year old girl at church that he has no intention of communicating with outside that setting.
�
Whatever his motivation, I am uncomfortable and feel dishonored.� I feel that at the first HINT of an attraction DH should RUN THE OTHER DIRECTION!!! He listened very calmly to what I said, was sorry he had upset me and said it helps him understand that he needs to step up his boundaries even more.
Am I just a jealous, insecure crazy woman?
�
Whatever his motivation, I am uncomfortable and feel dishonored.� I feel that at the first HINT of an attraction DH should RUN THE OTHER DIRECTION!!! He listened very calmly to what I said, was sorry he had upset me and said it helps him understand that he needs to step up his boundaries even more.
Great!! That is excellent that he listened to your concerns and changed his behavior.
Am I just a jealous, insecure crazy woman?
You MUST listen to the radio show that ran today. They cover this very subject! People are "insecure" and "jealous" for a good reason. Jealousy is a reaction to a threat in marriage and people are "insecure" when they are being threatened. For example, I feel very insecure when riding in the car with a drunk driver. It doesn't mean I need counseling, it means I should avoid that risk. It doesn't mean you need counseling either, just that your H needs to stop engaging in risky behavior.
I listened to it while I ate my lunch. Perfect timing!
DH was very respectful of my feelings and I need to acknowledge that. I simply wish his boundaries were a little stronger so that the second he sensed an attraction he would have avoided contact with this person. I also wish the women around here wore more clothes!!!
I simply wish his boundaries were a little stronger so that the second he sensed an attraction he would have avoided contact with this person.
'
You nailed it! That is where I would focus all of your attention. He needs to have better boundaries around women period. He shouldn't be having personal conversations with them when you are not there.
Here's the situation that made me uncomfortable:
�
Whatever his motivation, I am uncomfortable and feel dishonored.� I feel that at the first HINT of an attraction DH should RUN THE OTHER DIRECTION!!! He listened very calmly to what I said, was sorry he had upset me and said it helps him understand that he needs to step up his boundaries even more.
Am I just a jealous, insecure crazy woman?
I agree with you...when you are married, the more you are attracted to someone outside of the marriage the more you should avoid them! Over and over we have seen here that talking to someone you are attracted to leads to "let's work on a project together for the church" (It's okay! It's Church!!) which leads to "could you help me with something with my car/house" which leads to "give me a guy's perspective about my problem with my boyfriend" which leads to "you are such a good listener" which leads to "you are so smart/good at fixing things up/fun to be with/mature" which leads to "Hey, my wife never tells me those things anymore" which leads to....
Here is an article Dr. Harley wrote about the dangers of opposite sex friendships:
http://www.marriagebuilders.com/graphic/mbi8119_friends.html
I've read the article. Lots of good points.
The problem here is DH thought his interactions with this girl were harmless and I see them as risky, especially since I wasn't standing there with him. He said he considers it "a lesson learned" about needing to reinforce his boundaries.
Any suggestions on how we can better handle a similar situation in the future? He's feeling ashamed and a little depressed. Neither one of us want me to continually be put in the position of being his accountability coach. I tend to sense danger before he does and am definitely the more cautious person in this relationship.
I suggested a sort of code phrase we could use such as "The Terrorist Threat Level has been elevated" to encourage him to be careful around someone that I perceive as a threat. I want to throw up the caution flag before lines are crossed.
I don't want to beat him up. He's really trying.
Neither one of us want me to continually be put in the position of being his accountability coach.
But you ARE his ultimate accountability coach. It's you and him in this marriage. You should both depend on each other to stay on top of protecting your marriage. That's not unhealthy.
If your method works to protect your marriage, good for you!
I don't want to beat him up. He's really trying.
There was a discussion not too long ago along these lines. Instead of accountability the discussion was about the "contrast effect." It applied Dr. Harley's philosophy on the dangers of using porn to gawking at real live women (perhaps younger, more voluptuous, whathaveyou).
The idea was that one astute poster was noticing that he found himself more attracted to his spouse when he ignored other "eye candy" women.
So, if you encourage your husband that he will be MORE In Love with you when he treats these temptation girls as if they simply don't exist; he will feel the benefits directly also. Not just as a protection for you specifically or your marriage but also for himself and his personal feelings of contentment/"in love" feelings in your relationship.
I have applied the approach with success. Although I'm not married, I have a committed relationship with a wonderful woman my age. She's beautiful. We both have our over-40 physical flaws which we've earned and I wouldn't trade for anything. But, being essentially "single" the radar was up for a while; until I read that post a while ago and realized I was only causing myself anguish by "checking out" or "second looking" a pretty girl on the street. My GF is truly the only woman in my world and it's very satisfying. I don't get any pleasure speaking with another attractive woman or even looking, because I now know the backlash effect is not a nice feeling.
hope that makes some sense. I'm rushing,
opt
I simply wish his boundaries were a little stronger so that the second he sensed an attraction he would have avoided contact with this person.
And if he didn't "sense an attraction", which is apparently what his response to your accusation was, what would you demand he do? (I skipped "asked", because you're obviously well past that.)
You have carefully presented this young lady in unflattering terms that suggest you disapprove of her beauty and talent ("strapless tops and short, short shorts" while Hula-dancing at church? Wow! Some church!) and would condemn/forbid his speaking to her on that basis alone - outside of the church, before service, with an attentive witness.
Well, if MB teaches us nothing else, that fact that not all affairs begin based on physical attractiveness is well documented here. Therefore, would you forbid his communicating with women who are accomplished, personable, conversationalists? Would such bans be imposed against any women who are extraordinary cooks, or highly efficient income providers, or the organ player/choir soloist of great gift? Those are equally strong attractors to men having ENs of different relative strengths. Why is your concentration on physical attractiveness?
Such high-handed restrictions would quickly become LBs, my friend. It may be that the dynamic of your marriage is such that hubby can accept your overcontrol. If so, he's a remarkably devoted husband, and probably worthy of more belief by you in his fidelity. If he is NOT as willing to be treated as a child, then your actions will be disadvantageous to your union, whether or not he voices his resentment. ("The tighter you squeeze something, the more it slips between your fingers...")
Of course, this advice, coming from a male who can appreciate the varied qualities of women WITHOUT having any interest in conducting affairs (so why should it have any legitimacy?) will be unwanted, and predictably assaulted by the assembled "sisterhood". But, just before firmly covering my ears, I'll hit "Submit" anyway.
Of course, this advice, coming from a male who can appreciate the varied qualities of women WITHOUT having any interest in conducting affairs (so why should it have any legitimacy?) will be unwanted, and predictably assaulted by the assembled "sisterhood". But, just before firmly covering my ears, I'll hit "Submit" anyway.
NG, my testosterone-steeped comrade, your points are good ones. SC would be most assured of having a husband who wasn't tempted by women if her husband was locked in a closet in the basement of their house 24/7.
There's really no sure-fire way for SC to keep him on the narrow path. He's responsible for the care and feeding of his fidelity. But she identified what she perceived as a threat to them in this case and wants to know how to address it.
Her H needs to tighten up his boundaries. SC's first return post indicates that:
We do not know her or her family and I�ve never had a conversation with her, except maybe hello or thank you for your dance in passing. I could tell DH finds her attractive and he acknowledges it. He has engaged her in casual conversation a couple of times without me present and told me about it. he saw the girl as she arrived and told her we�d seen her picture and asked about it. They talked about it and he told me later. While he admits he finds her attractive, he didn�t think he was doing anything wrong by being friendly to a 21-22 year old girl at church that he has no intention of communicating with outside that setting.
Whatever his motivation, I am uncomfortable and feel dishonored. The last sentence is the most important one to me. I believe SC's intuition is giving her a little tug, and I think it's wrong to dismiss that little tug as just being insecure or jealous. Many are the betrayeds on this site who felt that little tug and dismissed it.
She's right to act on her concerns and address those with her H. I think it shows honesty and care for her marriage to do so.
MB, thanx for your response.
You highlighted the exact area that confounds me about SC's concern in this area:
I could tell DH finds her attractive and he acknowledges it.
I (and I'll bet you) find many people "attractive". In my case, I couldn't imagine my bride asking me about the attactiveness of another woman, but I would not lie, because PA is one EN, surely, but ONLY one. And being more or less adherence to a set of standards, PA is a close as any EN to a "fact".
Using some of the alternative EN sources above, would this be an issue if SC noted:
I could tell DH finds her organ-virtuosity exemplary and he acknowledges it. or I could tell DH finds her culinary skills remarkable and he acknowledges it.
SC's spouse has evidently disagreed with the SC's assessment that this 21-year-old-church-going-hula-dancer is a threat to his commitment to SC. As a matter of fact "He has engaged her in casual conversation a couple of times without me present and told me about it." Agreed that ignoring the little "tug" of concern is not advisable, but she seems to have addressed it with him, and he is aware of her attention, to the degree that he is pro-actively keeping her appraised. Good gracious, the guy's a boy-scout in this matter!
Feeling "dishonored" by one's spouse talking to someone with an elevated level of PA, for that reason alone, would, as I maintained previously, likely become a dissatisfier to the spouse. ("I've got to sacrifice normal, casual human interaction, for unjustified jealousy?" Sacrifice, remember is an MB no-no!)
Good lord, if I resented my bride talking to anyone more PA that I, her universe of conversation partners would be reduced to Ernest Borgnine, and "Gollum" from Lord of the Rings!
You have carefully presented this young lady in unflattering terms that suggest you disapprove of her beauty and talent ("strapless tops and short, short shorts" while Hula-dancing at church? Wow! Some church!)
Strapless tops and short, short shorts are a behavioral choice.
And avoid talking to women who dress like that, myself.
Feeling "dishonored" by one's spouse talking to someone with an elevated level of PA, for that reason alone, would, as I maintained previously, likely become a dissatisfier to the spouse. ("I've got to sacrifice normal, casual human interaction, for unjustified jealousy?" Sacrifice, remember is an MB no-no!)
Asking your spouse not to speak to some little hoochie mama in short shorts is not a "sacrifice;" it is a protective measure for the safety of the marriage. That is NOT how Harley defines "sacrifice." Asking your spouse to stop annoying behavior is not what he means by sacrifice. If it annoys your spouse, it has no place in marriage in the first place.
She did the right thing in telling him she felt threatened so he would have the opportunity to stop speaking to hoochies in short shorts.
Remind me during my next road-race to wear sweat-pants! I'd hate to be a temptation to any
dames d'un certain �ge, and impediments to their marital situations!
And if the suspicions are unfounded, but the unjustified prohibitions are nevertheless compelled/mandated, sacrifice would most certainly be the definition of the resulting coerced acquiescence.
Remind me during my next road-race to wear sweat-pants! I'd hate to be a temptation to any
dames d'un certain �ge, and impediments to their marital situations!
dream on, yankee boy! I have seen your scrawny legs!
And if the suspicions are unfounded, but the unjustified prohibitions are nevertheless compelled/mandated, sacrifice would most certainly be the definition of the resulting coerced acquiescence.
First off, the issue is her comfort level, not whether a suspicion is founded or unfounded. She felt it was a threat to marriage and her feelings alone are justification enough. It doesn't matter if any suspicion were founded or not. She perceived a threat and when she feels threatened he should stop doing that thing. That is not a "sacrifice" in the context we use it here. If it is bad for the marriage it should be eliminated.
It is like child molesting. Sure it might feel sacrificial in some aspects to stop it, but it should have never been there in the first place.
sacrifice would most certainly be the definition of the resulting coerced acquiescence.
It is not "coercion" to ask your spouse to stop doing something that makes you unhappy. The whole foundation of POJA is to:
Never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement
between you and your spouse
A man should not feel it a 'sacrifice' to stop chatting up scantily-clad women who are not his wife, whether in church or not. If he does, he has a problem.
It is not "coercion" to ask your spouse to stop doing something that makes you unhappy.
Here we go!
It took a while, but we're in the realm of "unhappy with reason" or "unhappy without reason"
How about if hubby were to decide to say "no", which is apparently what happened here. Evidently he believes his behaviour was not inappropriate and said so. The way this segment started was SC wanted, somehow, her husband to instinctively know to whom he was permitted to speak.
EXCUSE ME????
Normal non-wayward American male here saying, "Sweetheart, the request NOW is that you stop acting overly jealous and controlling about non-problems because you are making ME unhappy."
Go ahead ladies, tell me why it works one way and not the other!
I don't think she was asking for him to instinctively know; she told him she had a problem with THIS. Most women would. Especially with boundary problems in the past.
YOUR way doesn't work, NG, because it is dismissive of the original complaint and includes the darling word of the IBer who doesn't care about their spouse's feelings: CONTROLLING. Alkso dismissive: overly jealous and non-problems. If she has a problem with it, it is a problem.
The point is to care about your spouse's feelings and their safety in the marriage, and there is no way to justify a NEED to chat up little young hotties. It just can not be done. Telling a young hot barista, "I'd like a caramel soy latte, please" is a whole different animal from "Hey, I saw your pictures, you looked really good!" Why do you not seem to get this? He had NO REASON to even speak to this person. He chose to, and he can choose not to if he cares at all about his wife.
[
It took a while, but we're in the realm of "unhappy with reason" or "unhappy without reason"
Here you go...........and there you STOP!!! Telling a spouse they have "no reason" to be unhappy is a DISRESPECTFUL JUDGEMENT. And a violation of the POJA. Again, the POJA states:
Never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement
between you and your spouseNormal non-wayward American male here saying, "Sweetheart, the request NOW is that you stop acting overly jealous and controlling about non-problems because you are making ME unhappy."
And what is Dr Harley's answer to that?
Remind me during my next road-race to wear sweat-pants! I'd hate to be a temptation to any
dames d'un certain �ge, and impediments to their marital situations!
And if the suspicions are unfounded, but the unjustified prohibitions are nevertheless compelled/mandated, sacrifice would most certainly be the definition of the resulting coerced acquiescence.
NG, no one is asking the hootchie to wear - or not wear- anything in particular. SC is well aware of her H's ENs and knows a concern when she sees one. She is the ultimate authority over threats to her M. You're distracting yourself with the colorization of this particular event of SC's. I suspect that SC would just as quickly have perceived a concern if her H was overly impressed by a woman of their age who was able to untangle their checkbook account and was good with finances.
A man should not feel it a 'sacrifice' to stop chatting up scantily-clad women who are not his wife, whether in church or not. If he does, he has a problem.
A man should not feel it is a 'sacrifice' to avoid
any woman who is not his wife, for any reason.
Remind me during my next road-race to wear sweat-pants! I'd hate to be a temptation to any
dames d'un certain �ge, and impediments to their marital situations!
And if the suspicions are unfounded, but the unjustified prohibitions are nevertheless compelled/mandated, sacrifice would most certainly be the definition of the resulting coerced acquiescence.
You'll notice, NG, that I am steering away from the original description of the 'person of interest'. Because it really doesn't matter what the person of interest looks like, or acts like, or does for a living, etc. The point is that SC is concerned, her H has expressed that he finds the woman attractive. That's really all that needs to be addressed. By the way, someone might consider you 'hot' in your sweatpants. It's all about the other person's perception of you. You don't control that.
Telling a spouse they have "no reason" to be unhappy is a DISRESPECTFUL JUDGEMENT.
It is certainly LESS a disrespectful judgment than telling HIM, for example, "I don't want you talking to that good-looking woman (because I do not trust your ability to resist the urge to peek under those short-shorts)!"
Never do anything without an enthusiastic agreement between you and your spouse
I wonder if SC had the enthusiastic agreement of her spouse in unilaterally deciding to whom he could and could not speak!
Over and over we come back to the same issue here:
Everything in a marriage is a balance, kids, and there are no absolutes. One spouse's perceived DJ is (flipped) the other's need to feel comfortable. One's insistence on POJA is another's resentment of stagnation and inaction.
Whatever marriage is, was meant to be, or could actually be, what it is NOT is an indentured servitude to control by the first one to complain and gave vent to fears of (potential) damage to the union.
A man should not feel it is a 'sacrifice' to avoid any woman who is not his wife, for any reason.
Did you really type that? Seriously? Regardless of how inane, unjustified, neurotic, or misguided the "order" may be, the MAN should mindlessly follow the dictates of the woman? Wow! No, not for THIS correspondent!
(And now I must stop, because my least favorite "trailer" is poised to respond and once again accuse me of being a "wayward", without having her slur "zapped".)
[
Everything in a marriage is a balance, kids, and there are no absolutes. One spouse's perceived DJ is (flipped) the other's need to feel comfortable. One's insistence on POJA is another's resentment of stagnation and inaction.
That's a nice personal philosophy but it is NOT Marriage Builders advice. Telling a spouse she is jealous and insecure is a DJ.
How much reading have you done on the policy of joint agreement? Which books do you have?
A man should not feel it is a 'sacrifice' to avoid any woman who is not his wife, for any reason.
Did you really type that? Seriously? Regardless of how inane, unjustified, neurotic, or misguided the "order" may be, the MAN should mindlessly follow the dictates of the woman? Wow! No, not for THIS correspondent!
So you are saying that if your wife told you it made her uncomfortable when you did something you would only stop doing it if you felt it was reasonable? Why would you purposely torment your wife? What could possibly be important enough for you to torment the spouse you allegedly love? that strategy pretty much ensures your wife will fall out of love with you if you practice it enough. Is that what you want?
Harley covers the subject of a "jealous spouse" in these clips:
go to 9:55 http://www.marriagebuilders.com/radio_program/play_segment.cfm?sid=3666and continue here:
http://www.marriagebuilders.com/radio_program/play_segment.cfm?sid=3667Whatever marriage is, was meant to be, or could actually be, what it is NOT is an indentured servitude to control by the first one to complain and gave vent to fears of (potential) damage to the union.
We are ALL free agents and are free to annoy our spouse and make them unhappy. We are also free to do our best to make them happy. Since I want to have a happy marriage, I am FREE to eliminate behavior that makes my spouse unhappy. Since I want to have a great marriage and I want my spouse to be happy, I am FREE to stop doing things that upset my husband. THAT is the key to having a happy, romantic marriage.
A complaint is an irritation in a bad marriage and an opportunity to change in a GOOD MARRIAGE. In a MB marriage, it is an opportunity to change. It is a CHOICE of free will to have a good marriage or a bad marriage.
Neverguessed, do you have the book, Lovebusters? That is where I would start if I were you.
Telling a spouse they have "no reason" to be unhappy is a DISRESPECTFUL JUDGEMENT.
It is certainly LESS a disrespectful judgment than telling HIM, for example, "I don't want you talking to that good-looking woman (because I do not trust your ability to resist the urge to peek under those short-shorts)!"
But she didn't say that. You are
dangerously close to re-writing the incident to bolster your argument.
One's insistence on POJA is another's resentment of stagnation and inaction.
Not when POJA is followed by both parties and they come to a satisfactory agreement together. There is no reason for resentment when POJA is properly addressed by both parties. You are confusing a situation where one party grudgingly 'gives up' something to make the other party happy. If her H is upset at 'giving up' this interaction between himself and the youngster, I'd sense there was a deeper interest than he was admitting.
A man should not feel it is a 'sacrifice' to avoid any woman who is not his wife, for any reason.
Yep, I said it and I'll say it again
: And that road travels two ways. There is NO man so important in my life that I would cause my husband unhappiness by refusing to end interaction with him.
Now, before you rile yourself up into arguing a situation that doesn't exist: don't make the mistake of immediately assuming that I have a Master List of women my husband isn't 'allowed' to talk to. Incorrect, mon frere. We both have high boundaries and are very aware of EPs, so the issue of staying away from certain people is not an issue for us.
If it was, again, yes. I'd eliminate that male from my life. And we'd need to re-examine any areas of my conduct to determine whether my boundaries need attention. Mr. Bliss operates the same way. We have POJA'd that.
Did you really type that? Seriously? Regardless of how inane, unjustified, neurotic, or misguided the "order" may be, the MAN should mindlessly follow the dictates of the woman?
Please direct me to any part of my post that bestows this protective measure to only the woman and not the man.
A man should not feel it is a 'sacrifice' to avoid any woman who is not his wife, for any reason.
----Did you really type that? Seriously? Regardless of how inane, unjustified, neurotic, or misguided the "order" may be, the MAN should mindlessly follow the dictates of the woman? Wow! No, not for THIS correspondent!
My GF is none of the above and I don't mindlessly follow anything, nor would she dictate me to do so. We practice openness and honesty with each other (I already know what happens to a marriage without it). If I was to have a conversation with a woman 20 years her junior, she would have every opportunity to ask me about it. One question would lead to another. Ultimately, we would come to the basic fact: I was seeking a pleasurable interaction with another woman. That would hurt her feelings. I don't want to hurt her feelings, it's not worth whatever momentary thrill I might get from it.
-The opposite is also true when she knows that she is the only woman I'm interested in. The benefits of that are....worth it.
opt
*****************EDIT***************
A reminder that the purpose of this forum is to help posters understand and implement Marriage Builders principles. It is not to promote personal philsophies and disrupt threads. Please familiarize yourself with Marriage Builders materials before posting to those in need. If you do not understand the concepts, kindly refrain from posting until you do!
Last year, I wrote to Dr Harley on the private forum about interactions between my STBX and a female that were seemingly benign (happened right in front of me and didn't overtly break any EPs) but made me uncomfortable. We went back and forth a little but this part I think is applicable to what is being discussed on this thread.
Do you also have any specific tips that my H should keep in mind when interacting with women? Should he keep the joking and casual conversation to a minimum? He said he has trouble understanding where the "line" is...
SusieQ:
We recommend general precautions, such as to avoid having a close female friend, avoid discussing personal issues with another woman, avoid business trips and recreational activities with another woman, etc. But we also look at the conditions that made the affair possible. Whatever your husband was doing that increased the chances of an affair should be eliminated, such as flirting. As to the specifics of what exactly he is to avoid doing, your judgment should be sufficient. Besides, the Policy of Joint Agreement dictates that anything he does around other women that makes you feel uncomfortable should be avoided, even if it seems as if you are being overly sensitive. Quite frankly, you have good reason to be sensitive, and whatever your husband does to relieve your anxiety should be the least he can do.
Best wishes,
Willard F. Harley, Jr.