I think I totally get why you decided not to pursue the R with NG. You just felt like you were plunging headlong into something way before you've got yourself sorted out. So although everything was absolutely great, you just didn't trust yourself to know great from not-SSM. Does that sound right?
Fran
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
Let me tell you something about myself. I have masters degree in Agricultural Economic from Texas A&M. I grew up in a small central Texas town of 10,000, where farming is the dominant industry. My father is a research entomologist with the US Dept of Ag. He works with farmers as his research has an impact on some of them. His wife is from an even smaller town, where her father runs a 400 acre farm, leasing another 400 acres. At one time he owned the local feed store and over the years has been able to support his family and stay in business, so as small farmers go, he is successful.
The fact of the matter is that if you do not operate 10,000 acres or more as a “corporate” farm, you will have a tough time making it. The produce generated by small farms is negligible. The small family farm is a dying breed but the taxpayer supports farmers more to help maintain a lifestyle than to ensure our food supply.
Some farmers have it together. Many others don’t. They drop out of high school and go into farming because they do not like being told what to do working for someone else, they do not want to learn a skill, they did not take school seriously and would have a hard time getting into college, or some other reason. Farming can be a form of escape for these people. I grew up with some of them. For those farmers who are really farmers and serious about becoming efficient and competitive, I have a lot of respect. But I do “get it” when it comes to farming.
As for “posers” on Harleys, we have some here in my office. These people are all middle aged professionals who have worked their whole life to raise kids and put them through school. Now that they have fulfilled their responsibilities, they have taken some money to buy a bike and enjoy themselves (some buying the junky Harleys and some buying Goldwings). I find that admirable. To call these people “posers” is a complete show of disrespect IMO. Many of the “true” bikers who take issue with the “posers” are actually blue collar workers who are NOT meeting their obligations, rather going off on their bikes, getting drunk and neglecting their families. I find NOTHING admirable in that. _________________________
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
AgEcon??? That was my XH's undergrad degree before going on to Law School!!
I grew up in a small central Texas town of 10,000
I imagine our childhoods were very different then. Ohio culture and farming and Texas culture and farming. But I do “get it” when it comes to farming.
But you were mocking the idea of loving the land and farming being part of the founding values of this country, weren't you?
Anyway, it's clear that you have some issues with me and, like you said before, there is something about me that "sort of turns you off," so I am not sure what your point was in your long post to me. I've started to respond but it is just such a long post and I'm not sure what your point of wanting to continue a conversation with me is really about...
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
But you were mocking the idea of loving the land and farming being part of the founding values of this country, weren't you?
I'm mocking those who use that as an excuse to defend family farming and the continued farm subsidies that come with it. Farming is no more noble than computer programming, medical research, oil drilling, manufacturing, retailing or anything else.
Anyway, it's clear that you have some issues with me and, like you said before, there is something about me that "sort of turns you off," so I am not sure what your point was in your long post to me.
Fearless - Anyway, it's clear that you have some issues with me and, like you said before, there is something about me that "sort of turns you off," so I am not sure what your point was in your long post to me.
Cobra - Funny, I thought the same thing about you.
Why do you think I think the same of you? You directly wrote this to me:
IMO, you are still espousing a very feminist mantra, one in which you think men need to be in touch with a woman’s emotions, that the men should be focused on the woman’s feelings for in that way conflict can be minimized and both will feel validated, secure and able to stand in a differentiated mode. But you model is not the kind of man I want to be or the kind of man I think anyone should be. I feel that a part of your "message" has a subtle emasculation of men that sort of turns me off the more I think of it. Sorry, that’s just how I feel. I'm also beginning to develop suspicions why your H left you.
This seemed like a pretty clear personal attack on me and my opinions. I didn't have to read between any lines to see that you don't understand me (because I don't fit the above description) and that you are sort of turned off by me.
So again my point was: I am trying to understand why you want me to answer all sorts of questions about myself given that I am not some one you "like" interacting with...
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
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
Let me try to explain again my thought process. It really isn’t that deep. I go on the premise that couples come together with similar levels of differentiation. I believe this holds up in almost all marriages because if it were not true, there would never have been enough initial attraction to bring the two people together in the first place. So 1), can we agree on this?
If we use the logic a + b=c, we can sometimes assume that c resulted from a+b. If we know c and we might know a, we can infer possibilities for b. This is not ironclad, but I believe it holds most of the time. So 2), can we agree on this assumption?
Using only these two premises, you can look at a marriage and understand some of what is going on if you only speak to one person. If you speak to both spouses, you can firm up the issues at play plus also learn what one or the other’s childhood was like, as far as emotional attachments, trauma or the like is concerned. That does not mean you know what happen, only that if one person exhibits abandonment issues (which may need to be confirmed by discussion with the other spouse), then it is likely something happened to cause that condition. Few of these things happen for genetic reasons (except personality disorders or chemical imbalances).
With my experience, our counselor stuck her neck out regarding my FOO with my mother. Part of her insight was based on what I said, on what my wife said, but a lot on how our marriage worked, what she saw in me, and ruling out other explanations. What she was left with is a reasonably good picture of what I had to have experienced as a child.
One VERY important point is that I am not a fully credible witness to what I experienced myself. At the time I was a child. I knew nothing other than what I experienced up to that point. I thought my life was normal. All children think this too. Those thoughts carry forward into adulthood and become the tinted lenses that we use to see others. So while I thought my mom was great, my counselor saw otherwise. Do you see what I mean?
This is the heart of denial. It is not intentional. It is not conscious. It just is. Until you know otherwise, what you know of your past is what you know. Even after you see the “truth” it does not seem right and it is hard to accept. Seeing the “truth” requires reprogramming everything you have used up to that point in how you see the world. It means understanding what a true boundary is, what control and manipulation is, what love is. Until that programming is changed, the “truth” looks just like an attack. Does this much make sense?
I don't have time for a response yet but this is the type of discussion I was looking for. We will disagree but this makes it much easier to see where our differences of opinions come from. Obviously highly trained, educated and intelligent psychologists have different opinions so it isn't surprising that we would also.
Since you ignored my post I am unsure whether you agree or disagree with it. if you would prefer not to discuss it and just carry on with discussions about the subject matter at hand, that is okay with me.
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
Which part did I ignore? I ignored the part about Burgbud. The part about your FOO is a bigger topic that we can lead into if you want, but unless you understand why I say what I say, and understand that I am not attacking you but rather challenging your perception of the "truth" then there is not point in going there. You will only think I am trying to tear you down, which is NOT the case. But if you want to discuss it, I will challenge what you regard as your reality.
I don't know for certain what we will uncover and I revoke my previous guarantee that something is there, but we can discuss it.
If you speak to both spouses, you can firm up the issues at play plus also learn what one or the other's childhood was like, as far as emotional attachments, trauma or the like is concerned. <...> With my experience, our counselor stuck her neck out regarding my FOO with my mother. Part of her insight was based on what I said, on what my wife said, but a lot on how our marriage worked, what she saw in me, and ruling out other explanations. <...> I thought my life was normal. All children think this too. Those thoughts carry forward into adulthood and become the tinted lenses that we use to see others. So while I thought my mom was great, my counselor saw otherwise. Do you see what I mean?
What you aren't glomming onto is that many people, from their teens or early adult years *have* recognized many of their family's faults and strengths. They *do* recognize and acknowledge their parent's parenting failures. And they have made and continue to make changes in their own behaviors in an effort to not continue poor or unhealthy attitudes and choices.
Many of the participants here have been *self* examining for years. They are able to look back at their childhood and see how they were affected and impacted by their parents, for good and ill, AND THEN THEY WORKED AT NOT REPEATING THE SAME MISTAKES.
Off the top of my head, I recall Lil, Mojo, Fearless, Honeypot, NOP and I all posting about our parents and some of their parental shortcomings. I don't recall any of those posts seething with anger, nor did any of them excuse poor choices they were currently making because their childhood sucked. They used their awareness to make changes in themselves and to look out for their own unhealthy tendencies.
When people are posting about their situations or something that just occurred in their relationship - almost across the board *they examine their own contribution to the dynamic*. They continue to *self* examine. I don't see that in your posts. You are either examining your wife or the person you are posting to, but I can only recall one post in which you gave your own personal inventory. Your focus seldom seems to be on yourself.
I can look back on my parents, see where they didn't do a great job, see where they did do well, see what I can do not to repeat the bad. I can look back on them with some grace and understanding. I can talk about the fun times, their good attributes, their strengths and I can even laugh at their over-the-top behaviors. And if I do so, it isn't some deceptive or self-deceived attempt to present them as the "perfect" family.
I have read what Fearless has posted about her family and herself. It sounds like she has done what several of us have done - and that was to build on the good, learn from the bad. She didn't try to present them as perfect, she didn't try to present herself as perfect - I don't know why you continue to hear it in that way. You did the same with us by accusing us of presenting our marital recovery as "the way" or "the only way" - when in fact we had done nothing of the kind.
IMO, you haven't built on the good and learned from the bad in your foo. And because you haven't done so, you think none of the rest of us have.
