Oh don't leave me Break. You guys all want the same thing I do and I value all opinions. It's my life to figure out which opinions to accept and which to politely decline.
Stay with me and keep the suggestions coming!
Hope4us
Me - 49, W 49 S22 & S18 Dday 9/4/07 W claims NC 4/7/08 8/29/09 - Divorce Busted. Lots to work through, but we're going to make it.
I don't think her old job is open Flynn, but it's a large office and there are so many more opportunities there that WHEN she moves back with us, she'll definitely be in a better job than she is here and I would assume get right back in line for the VP admin positions that she was in before we left.
I really think that one of the reasons W doesn't want to move back is because she thinks she'll lose that independence that she found when we moved. I am trying to show her she won't. I also think she feels like she can't face people in the office because some of them know and she thinks they will treat her differently.
Oh well, consequences. But all that matters is US. F everyone else. But W is really big on appearances and I can see it being a hurdle for us.
And I'm impressed Flynn. A post not mentioning the bed!
Last edited by Hope4us; 11/19/0807:17 PM.
Hope4us
Me - 49, W 49 S22 & S18 Dday 9/4/07 W claims NC 4/7/08 8/29/09 - Divorce Busted. Lots to work through, but we're going to make it.
Certain people's answers are always going to be, in the end, show her who's boss. So I have nothing else to say.
I can only speak for myself, but that is not at all what I'm trying to convey as the basis of my hard-line approach.
My basis is the concept of treating infidelity primarily as an ADDICTION, and -- as such -- that one needs to remove the addict from the source of their addiction, by whatever means possible, and that further contact with that source will greatly set back their recovery.
There are certainly other schools of thought, and mine isn't even necessarily that "DB" (altho I combine it with DB concepts and techniques like "180s", "GAL" and such). But if all you read into it is "show her who's boss," then you're clearly inferring what I'm not implying, and I think it's coming more from your own sitch than it is from anything I'm recommending to H4U over the past several months.
Hope4us likes arguments Puppy, so this is for him...
Originally Posted By: Puppy Dog Tails
I can only speak for myself, but that is not at all what I'm trying to convey as the basis of my hard-line approach.
yet it is what you convey...
Quote:
My basis is the concept of treating infidelity primarily as an ADDICTION, and -- as such -- that one needs to remove the addict from the source of their addiction, by whatever means possible, and that further contact with that source will greatly set back their recovery.
NOBODY is arguing with the idea of infidelity as addiction (though I would argue with seeing it ONLY as addiction). We are talking about how it's presented. HE HAS PRESENTED IT. NC. SHE KNOWS. EXCEPT I will say that I go to Al Anon meetings where the subject of addiction would be...the main subject...and you will never ever ever ever hear anyone who is an EXPERT on ADDICTION say the part in bold, in fact they would tell you the opposite is true. Now what you do for YOURSELF is another matter. But no one is in the position to CONTROL another person's addiction, and trying to is it's own disease.
Quote:
There are certainly other schools of thought, and mine isn't even necessarily that "DB" (altho I combine it with DB concepts and techniques like "180s", "GAL" and such).
I just answered from another school of thought, the one that is the foundation of all 12 step programs in dealing with any kind of addiction.
Quote:
But if all you read into it is "show her who's boss," then you're clearly inferring what I'm not implying, and I think it's coming more from your own sitch than it is from anything I'm recommending to H4U over the past several months.
You would do well to analyze yourself with as much intensity as you analyze others, especially women. Your favorite words in your posts to ANYONE are: righteous indignation responsibility consequences wayward
in fact if I did a site search of those words I would find your name on every hit.
You are also very sure of everything women are thinking, due to your research. It is never good. It is usually about being selfish and getting away with something.
In fact one of your most recent posts says quite clearly we must not "let her off easy." NO. Not that!!!! Don't let her off easy!!! <rolling eyes>
But you're right, I am clearly just projecting myself again. It wouldn't have to do with MY research, or MY experience on the subject...research that would tell you that THIS quote "and I think it's coming more from your own sitch than it is from anything I've said" (which is not the first time you've said that to me)...is right out of the emotional controllers handbook. It's not ME, it's YOU.
You can still tell me I'm full of beans. I don't really care. But I am just callin'em as I see'em.
BTW, I am not "attacking" you, I am being extremely vigorous in my opinions. And I really am running away now, because I am very busy!!!
In one of your early posts on your thread, you said that your husband refusing to stay on his anti-anxiety meds was absolutely a "dealbreaker" for you.
My question for you is, Is that not "controlling"? How is your stance on that any different than my stance on not being willing to have a 100% no-contact/transparency plan in place also being a "dealbreaker?"
As to whether or not you're "attacking" me, I'll let others be the judge, based on what I've posted to you, and what you've posted to me. Again -- your issues, not mine.
