Divorcebusting.com Forums Open Forums For Newcomers When it's a one-way street...part 5

CV, I do enjoy these discussions!



This is actually another very common issue in marriage, you both come into marriage with a "hidden model" of what marriage looks like that may not match that of your partner, and to your point, it's almost never discussed in advance. For instance, you may have grown up in a house where your father did all the yardwork and took out the trash, whereas your spouse grew up in a house where the parents did those things together, or share responsibility. Because you just assume "that's the way it is", it doesn't occur to either of you to have that discussion before you get married. Then, once your in it, one of you will probably be disappointed -- one will expect that the man does the yardwork and the trash and will be disappointed that the man is looking for help, and the man will be disappointed that the woman just assumes it's his job and doesn't volunteer to help.

Sex is only one example of that, but there are many, extending through parenting, church attendance, household chores, how money is spent, even how clean your house "should" be is typically the subject of "secret assumptions" that have never been negotiated.

I think one silver lining of having a relationship crisis is that it's motivation to reconsider all of this and actually have discussions about it.



That's actually problematic -- in general it's not a good idea to "give in order to get". That leads to score keeping and having "covert contracts" where because you've done X Y and Z, you are "owed" A, B, and C. I don't think it's a good idea to make sex a bargaining chip in a marriage. It's supposed to be an experience that you share that strengthens your emotional relationship and therefore your marriage (at least according to the books and marriage counselors). At the very least it's not very romantic to think about a scenario where you'll provide sex if your partner does the dishes 4 nights in a row.



Women bond by talking, men bond by "doing". When men get together, they get together to "do" things together, not to sit around and talk. They may talk while they are doing their activity, but the focus is the activity. When I think about meeting a friend of coffee versus going on a bike ride with a friend, I'm going to choose the bike ride every time. A lot of my male discussions are conducted on chair lifts between ski runs.

That's typically where men get into trouble with an "office spouse", they feel a bond with a woman they are working with by virtue of the shared work activity.

One tip I saw for women who feel their husbands don't talk to them is to offer to engage in activities with them, because once you start the activity, they will often start talking.



Well, we both read "The Sex Starved Marriage", so we each got to see the situation from the other perspective. I now understand that in order for my W to want to have sex, she needs quality time and conversation from me first. She doesn't derive connection directly from sex like I do, it needs to be built up in advance, in ways that she appreciates.

Secondly, we explicitly discussed frequency versus having "secret expectations" of how things "should" be. Third, the book helped her understand how important it is to me in a way that she did not appreciate before, and that has made a difference.



Regardless of what he tells you, you have experience and evidence of what's actually going to happen.

With regard to your boundary, the key to a boundary is that H doesn't have to accept it, because the consequence is something YOU will do, not something H has to do or not do.

Unless he ties you to your chair, he can't prevent you from leaving the room with the movie once he falls asleep. Sure he can complain, but you were very clear up-front about what was going to happen, so too bad. I wouldn't feel guilty about that at all.

Boundaries are healthy. One thing I read was that although your H will complain, he'll actually feel better about you -- the fact that you set boundaries and stand up for yourself makes you someone he can rely upon to do what you say, and also makes you more valuable!

I don't feel you're argumentative, and even if you were I enjoy it, it makes me think.

Accuray

I'm glad you're sticking in there. My analytical mind sometimes comes out badly.

My point exactly. Sleeping is not "doing."

This....
equates to this....Again, my point exactly.

Don't these assumptions go both ways? If you grew up in a 2-parent home and formed opinions about who did what, wouldn't there be some for yourself as well? If I saw my dad earning the income and mowing the lawn, wouldn't I also have seen my mom cooking and doing laundry? Is it possible that a person can grow up ONLY seeing what the opposite gender does, negating any physical constraints of course?

H and I talked about this a couple months ago. He has a whole list of expectations of me as my role as W. They're all supposedly based upon what he saw growing up. I've heard them, I've acknowledged them. So then I asked him what HIS role was, what I could expect of him based upon his father's example. He couldn't tell me anything, said he'd get back to me. It's been two months and I still haven't heard anything.

Plus, his mother was a teacher, not the primary bread-winner, but H has no problem with my making twice as much as he does. He has no problem that I'm better at construction, better at finances, better at most things. None of this is reflective of his upbringing. How do I work with this?

Wow! If you said this to my H, he would think you were completely, utterly, certifiably insane. Truly.

This is how it should be. H already knows I'm dependable. He does not appreciate the boundaries. Any boundary I have ever set has been criticized and condemned endlessly. He was griping yet again last night that I didn't go to the graduation party a couple of weeks ago. They are healthy for me; they are detrimental to my M.

I'm not sure how to digest this feeling again. Like I can talk to other people and they get it or we agree. I can't have a sane discussion with H. It makes me want to run. I'm trying to just keep one foot in the door and finding it harder and harder.

/\/\/\ Scaredsilly, I agree with all of the above, but it's a little "50,000 foot" if you know what I mean. It's like telling someone to eat healthy and exercise, without them ever understanding how to do that, or thinking they already are because they don't know any different. Plus, a healthy format will look different for everyone. Maybe their problem has nothing to do with eating healthy and exercise, and everything to do with environment.

I think the problem is that I've done everything you've suggested, for years. My standards are so low that, frankly, I don't even expect him to be faithful. Or honest. Or even offer basic courtesy and respect. So I am the WAS. I completely get that I'm a square peg in a round hole on this forum, knew that from the beginning, since it's primarily LBS'ers. But on the other hand, it's absolutely ideal for me to be here. If I was an alcoholic and wanted to quit drinking, I wouldn't hang out with a bunch of drinkers. If I wanted to know what effect my drinking had on my family, I wouldn't ask the drinkers; I would as the drinkers' families. So the LBS'ers should be ideal for getting some insight into my H.

For instance, I've read on here that many LBS'ers complain that they had no idea, that their WAS's just dropped a bomb and left, that if only they had said something sooner things would have gone differently. Well it should have been helpful insight, but instead I just get criticized by H for bringing up the "D" word. Next.

I have other sights that I can go to if I want people to tell me to "dump the a-hole." I want to know what I'm supposed to do to save my M as someone with bags packed and one foot out the door. I would love for people here to talk to me as if I'm the WAS (I am!) Much of the advice, like yours, is offered as if I'm the LBS. It's about as effective on me as it would be on your WAS.

I think perhaps I just need coping skills for living with my H, something like what is offered through al-anon. That or just go completely dark again. I seem to do best when I just think like a roommate and not try to improve things or understand him. I suspect that's what a lot of your WAS's are thinking -- it just seems impossible to reconcile and easy to walk away, while being told to lower expectations of the W/H (when oftentimes the OW/OM exceeds them!)

CV - have you considered moving your thread to the WAS forum? You might get more of the support you are needing and looking for over there.

If you hit the "notify" button in the lower right hand corner of your post and ask the moderators to move your thread over there, I'm sure they'd be happy to do that for you.

Otherwise, keep posting here and we will chime in when we have something that seems relevant for you.

Just checked that out. There's only 3 posts there. I'll put something out there but I'm not sure of much response. Thanks for the idea though, it sounded good.

You never know, CV. Get something started over there and people will find you. Maybe title your thread, "calling all WAS's" and see what happens. I posted something in the Prayer Circle forum a while back. That forum got ZERO traffic then all of a sudden.....

"It's about as effective on me as it would be on your WAS."
those questions have had a positive effect on my R with my WAS. but, you two are different people.

i tried to go to part one of your posts but couldn't get back there. i read all of this one (part 5) but could not find the answer to this question:
why do you want to stay married to your H if you're so unhappy?

CV,

I did want to comment on this:

This....



equates to this....





I very much disagree with my reading of that, although maybe we are saying the same thing.

If you are suggesting that I spend quality time with my wife specifically to get sex in a "tit for tat" type arrangement, then I disagree. Once again, that leads to score keeping and all kinds of unhealthy relationship dynamics.

When I spend quality time with my wife, I don't feel I'm "owed" sex in return. When I want sex, I don't invest in quality time in order to try to get it.

It's really been more of an education and understanding thing. As stupid as it sounds, I really did believe that my W viewed sex the same way I did, which lead to a lot of my frustration with her behavior. I just completely couldn't understand it.

Now that I'm more educated, and understand her needs better, and have read "The Five Love Languages", I get it. I'm motivated to try to meet her needs in the relationship because it makes me feel good to do so. That's why I'm married to her.

She understands that a sex life is important to me, so she agrees to provide one because she appreciates how much I value it. Because I have dealt with her unmet needs and relieved her resentments, it's easier for her to do.

I guess I feel we have more of a healthy cycle going in this regard than a business-like "this for that" type relationship.

That's not to say everything is great, we have lots of other issues as you know, but on this front I feel it's going well.

Just to play out your discussion, however, let's pretend that W came home one day and said she was done having sex with me now and forever, not because of some medical cause, not because of physical discomfort, just because she decided she didn't feel like it. If she said that all her needs were being met, that she didn't have any complaints, but that she was just done with that aspect of our marriage, then honestly I *would* feel resentful, because my model of marriage does include a sex life. That's not to say that she would be "wrong" and I would be "right", it would only mean that I could no longer stay in the marriage, because one of my boundaries had been violated.

Therefore, in line with your original question, yes I do feel there is some level of entitlement to a sex life by virtue of being married, excluding medical issues or prior agreements.

There is also some level of entitlement to having your relationship needs met, being respected by your spouse, and not being abused physically or emotionally by your spouse.

If marriage came with NO implied entitlements, there wouldn't be much point in it.

Where those lines are drawn, however, is a grey area, and discussing them specifically is very important in my opinion. For instance "having your relationship needs met" is fair only to the degree that your needs are reasonable and can realistically BE met. Who sets the standard for what's reasonable though? You probably need to negotiate that with your spouse.

I do believe that you feel your H has failed to provide what you view to be your basic entitlements. Here's the problem -- when you make your assumptions known and discuss them, and your spouse actively refuses to work with you on having them met, then you're in a tough spot. I'm there in several aspects of my marriage. When that happens, you have three choices -- (1) be perpetually unhappy, (2) adjust your expectations to be in line with what you CAN get, or (3) leave. Unfortunately there is no (4) change your spouse to meet your needs, as you well know.



Of course, I guess I fleshed that example out poorly. In addition to having expectations for what your spouse should do, you have expectations for what you should do as well. For instance, my W views it as her "job" to do the dishes. That isn't something I value, because I was raised to do my own dishes, and not to expect someone to clean up after me. When I start doing the dishes, my W gets upset and feels like she's failed, or that my doing them is some kind of passive-aggressive complaint.

I'm sure your H does have expectations and assumptions about what his role should be. The fact that he won't share them with you might indicate that he knows he's not coming through on them, and he's embarrassed about that. Once again, however, I believe he's a narcissist in which case he's always going to expect to receive more than he gives -- it's going to be "all about him", in which case he wouldn't admit to any responsibilities he should shoulder and instead will expect to be served.

You should spend some time reading/researching about narcissism. My mother-in-law is a diagnosed narcissist and it had a terrible impact on her ex-husband and daughters.

Accuray

But YOU'RE not the WAS. That was my only point.

The answer is more in line with "Why do I not want to get divorced?" Because I would prefer not to have to split holidays with my son. I would prefer to not have to sell my house and move away from my beloved neighbors. I would prefer not to have to put my family and friends through that. Most of all, I would prefer not to have to put my son through it. I made a vow I would prefer not to break. There are many, many reasons why I don't want to get divorced. I don't have any reasons why I want to stay married - to him.

I would very definitely prefer to be married -- to a friend, a confidant, someone to grow old with; to look forward to being together, instead of him being someone I try to avoid; to have satisfying sex finally before I'm too old to enjoy it. These things seem impossible with my H. So I'm willing to sacrifice the joys of M in order to avoid the pitfalls of D. I'm just trying to figure out how to make that work, if it's even possible.

But just like the lure of a warm, loving, romantic scene on TV, I read posts on this sight and the efforts and the successes, and it makes me think it might be possible for me to have something better in my R. I want that. I crave it. Nothing in my sitch seems to work like anyone else's. I can at least relate to Accuray's sitch, but I don't believe I could live that life. I've lived too many years in a R that was all about him, I just don't have it in me to give more, and it's still without reciprocation.

I guess I just keep hoping and praying for that elusive "cure;" that simple bit of advice that really changes things for good; that there's someone with my sitch that can tell me what worked for them and actually have it work for me.

This is all I'm saying, you're just saying it much better than I am. It's the motivation to serve/please, not to just sit back and expect.
I see my sitch as a twist on 1,2,and 3 ie (5) choose the lesser of two evils -- be unhappy with being M'd or be unhappy being D'd, because there is a very definite downside to D as well, as mentioned in my post above.
I have. It's very depressing to read because it all points to the fact that he probably is one. That's sort of like reading up on your recent diagnosis of terminal cancer. Not real encouraging. Plus, if that's true, then I really do need to give up on anything being better, because narcissism isn't curable based upon what I've read.