Cobra, I missed a post from you and also was interested in your post to Burgbud. I am going to be daring and specifically state up front that this post is about your tactic of trying to discredit people personally (Burgbud and me most recently) when they have a disagreement with you about opinions on a subject. I do not know if you are aware that you do this or at least if you are aware that it comes across that way. Maybe there is another side to it or reason you do it but I cannot see it right now. I am offering this to you for information in case you do not purposely do it.
So here are the posts from Zoos, swans, etc.
Posts to Burgbud by Cobra:
1) Burgbud - You also can't see what doesn't exist, so it proves nothing.
Cobra - I guarantee there's something there.
ETA: Whether I can explain it and show it is another thing.
2) Burgbud -So when you said you were "certain" something didn't smell right about my posts on Heather's thread, what non-minuscule amount of information were you basing that on?
Cobra - OK, if you want to press the point. How much information did I or anyone else need? You were recently separated. Heather's M was on the ropes. You were wondering how long she should stay in the M and would it be better to D sooner rather than later. You had met her in person. You were very protective of her.
You want to try Nop's method here, the action-oriented..."try x, y and z" or "you will probably have good results doing a, b and c?" Well that situation back then had all the hallmarks of leading into an affair, at least EA. If you kept on the path you were going, It was highly likely you could get something to happen. At the very least it was inappropriate and unethical, especially if you look at it from the viewpoint of Heather's H (had he found out about it).
Just after Corri finalized her D, she posted here that she would not correspond by email with any married man. I thought that was a very good move on her part. I don't know what her motives were, but it seemed that she realized she had a vulnerability and that the married men on this board could have a vulnerability, so she just closed that door.
With Heather, you went the other way. You sought her out to open a door. So I think there was plenty of information to lead me to say that I was certain there was something fishy going on. Maybe not with regard to anything that may have come to pass, or of any intention on Heather's part, but the circumstances were very suspect. I was certain of that.
You cannot explain or show it but there is something there. How did I miss this???????
Cobra, I am sure that what you sense is that first you have an incomplete picture of me which is true. I think it is difficult to have a complete picture of anyone here. For me, I admit I do not feel like I have a complete picture of anyone here. Secondly you sense that my childhood and relationships with my family members are more complicated that can be summed up quickly which is also true. Thirdly you sense my imperfections as a person. Fourthly you sense that there were a lot of contradictions in my life and in myself which is also true. A "happy" family still might yell or argue, an "unhappy" family still may have times of fun and laughter, etc. Also I am mostly a sweet kind-hearted woman who also has a bit of a mean streak and dark sense of humor. Many people think I am quiet yet those who know me well know that I am a chatterbox. I would say that I am a typical Gemini but I do not really believe in astrology and I KNOW Chrome would be all over me!
However I think you have taken the missing pieces of me and my family, contradictory minor stories and my imperfections and mistakenly inserted your personal assumptions, which is why you are left saying that you cannot explain it or show it, but you KNOW it exists. As an engineer it is really hard for me to take actions without evidence. And back to our long ago discussion on assumptions, assumptions are a normal and necessary part of life. The issue becomes when you so firmly believe your assumption that even when you receive evidence that is contrary to your assumption, you dismiss the evidence rather than the assumption.
I hope you can believe me (but I will not hold my breath) when I say it is okay that you disagree with me about differentiation and enmeshment. You do not believe that differentiation is a practical, possible or even healthy goal for people or especially for married couples. That is actually okay because you are not alone in that belief. What I have had a problem with is the fact that it appears your method in our discussions has been to try to "discredit" me in order to prove that you are right and I am wrong. Somehow it seems that you feel if you can prove me to be 1) at worst a liar or at best dishonest about my childhood and/or personal life or 2) at fault for my XH having an affair and leaving me, then my opinion on differentiation is not valid. I cannot figure why else you have taken almost every disagreement we have and turned it into a personal dissection of my life. Admittedly I have let you deflect away from our discussion by answering your questions but that is because I am not trying to hide anything. Plus I like talking about myself
And as far as Burgbud, why the innuendo that "something does not smell right" when BB had a different opinion that you on Heather's H's treatment of her? Why not directly say "Hey BB and Heather make sure you keep all your communication above board and be careful of EA entanglements?" Why assume something "fishy" and not state it specifically? Again it seems that you were more interested in discrediting BB than in just disagreeing with him.
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
