If someone put my H, my dad, my kids and my sister into a room and said they were going to shoot them but I could save one of them would you expect me to choose my H?
There's no way I could choose any of them over the others. I would far rather the villain shoot me.
When I married my H I accepted him as a member of my family, someone I would not turn my back on no matter what. We have recovered from his affair and are finally in the process of recovering from his alcoholism. I don't go over and over what he did to me, they are bygones and I am happy that we are living through happier times these days. When my mum died my brother just went off the rails, he maliciously accused my dad and my sister of all kinds of mistreatment of her while she was ill (which just plain was not true) and later he tried to get me to play along with his bid to prove that my dad had falsified her will. (He uses pretty much every drug you can imagine). When I did not agree with him about the will he cut me out of his life too and made all kinds of nasty vicious comments to me in the process. But if he were to knock on my door right now, tell me he'd given up drugs and was sorry for the heartache and pain he's caused I would welcome him back in an eye-blink. And that's because he is FAMILY. I would lay down my LIFE to save one of my own children without question. And I would certainly risk my life to save other close family members. Raising someone who is not a blood relative to that same level as that to me is as good as it gets. Don't ever ask me to choose between them.
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
Mojo-- brava for the move, for taking care of yourself and DD, and for imagining a better future. I totally understand the embarrassment and not wanting others to know how lame your partner is. Many hugs to you.
Hairdog, when your W asked, "do you want me to stick around?" what did you say. I definitely agree that she should have stayed without being asked.
When I had my ankle surgery, bf stayed until they wheeled me into the area where he couldn't go (and then my surgery was delayed by an hour for an emergency, and I was stuck listening to Christmas muzak... who knew "Mary's Boy Child Jesus" had, like, a ZILLION verses?). When I woke up, he and his daughter were there to greet me in the recovery room. Meant a LOT to me.
(hap) If someone put my H, my dad, my kids and my sister into a room and said they were going to shoot them but I could save one of them would you expect me to choose my H?
Kids always come first.
Let me rephrase it: if my wife's H (i.e. me), her sister and her dad all had heart attacks at the same time, I would expect her to come to the hospital and support me rather than her sister or her dad.
You're not my wife so you can do whatever you want. It's interesting to me that for you, getting married places the spouse on the same level as a sibling or parent. That wouldn't work for me.
Don't ever ask me to choose between them.
I'm not the one doing the asking.
ETA:
(Lil) Burg, you come across as pretty resentful, and very much into score-keeping.
Okay. Of whom do you see me being resentful?
Last edited by Burgbud; 02/04/0807:56 PM.
Stop WaitingFeel EverythingLove AchinglyGive ImpeccablyLet Go
But if the roles were reversed, I'm not buying that anyone would give a fig that the wife didn't explicitly tell her H to come home to her.
Burg, There seem to be two different issues you have with those that have ANY compassion for Brian's wife's dilemma.
First you clearly seem to believe that the women here are either dishonest or ??? when they say that whether Brian was a man or woman they would have the same opinion of how the spouse acted. Is this the correct interpretation? If so, there is not much to say to that. You are entitled to believe we are lying to you or ourselves.
Second you seem to take issue with the idea that a spouse would not be a 100% priority 100% of the time in 100% of all situations. Is this correct?
I'm asking because I wonder if you had a chance to read this paragraph.
Fearless - For ME, if I really felt that Raven needed to be by my side, I would call and ASK him to be by my side. If I didn't ask and his parents had asked, then the fact is he would not be making a value judgment as much as meeting what he thinks is the critical priority at the moment. In other words the person who is closest to death and NEEDS the most attention is the one he would prioritize. IF, by chance, his mother and I were exactly equal in needs, then I suppose I would expect he would choose me. BUT if he was not aware of the equal needs, then why would it be surprising that he would choose the person that voiced their needs the clearest.
Specifically what was it that made it clear to you that the wife should "choose" to be with Brian? If her mother was recovering from By-bass surgery and Brian had the flu (after a harrowing previous stay in the hospital), would she still be obligated, in your book, to come home to Brian? What if he felt lonely and just wanted her home, but didn't tell her and thought she should "know"? If he is to ALWAYS be her priority, then she should really never leave his side, right??? And vice versa.
Raven and I have spoken a lot about this and in our cases we would probably have the opposite problem of Brian. If one of us was with an ill parent and the other had an emergency, we would probably be very cautious about wanting the other to come home to us. If we really felt we needed them to come home, we would be very specific about needing them and why. But granted, that is just us. Raven's XW was someone who felt he should always "just know" what she needed and that created a lot of strain in the marriage. Maybe he was insensitive then but he is certainly not now. He actually does a lot without me asking but I consider anything like that a bonus and it's not expected.
To be clear, if Brian told us that he had told his wife he really needed her to come home to him and she didn't come home, I think opinions of her would shift. Also if she was fully made aware of the severity of his changed diagnosis, that might have made a difference also. Yes I completely understand that he may have been incapacitated to the point of not being able to inform her completely. That does not mean it's his fault or her fault. It's just the way it is. She may have made her decision based on prior knowledge and with the knowledge that her MIL was by her H's side so someone would be there to contact her if she did need to get home.
Burgbud:This whole thing puts me in mind of Blackfoot's point that the only reason a man should let his woman see his puppy is to demonstrate that he'll take it back when she kicks it, and kick it she will.
So you are saying that if Brian had told his wife he was possibly going to die and that he wanted her there, THAT would be showing his puppy to her??
Burgbud:This whole thing puts me in mind of Blackfoot's point that the only reason a man should let his woman see his puppy is to demonstrate that he'll take it back when she kicks it, and kick it she will
I'll guess you'll have to ask Raven about that in our case. To me the "only" reasons a man would let a woman see his puppy is to demonstrate trust and strength and to deepen the relationship. To that end if a woman would "kick" the puppy, not only should he take the puppy back but I would think that would end the relationship. I do not think that showing your puppy (sounds dirty!) should be a game to be played to test a woman or relationship. I told you Blackfoot's a genius.
I have no problem with Blackfoot and his philosophies. I think his philosophies serve him with the lifestyle and goals he has. However I would be leery about stretching his philosophies to working well within a loving committed relationship. I think he's made it clear he has no desire for a committed relationship. Which I happen to find understandable and I think his philosophies serve him well in that endeavor. Showing a woman your vulnerability if you have no intention of developing a deep relationship is not a good idea. I would also say that showing your puppy to test a woman is not a good idea either.
Raven in his first marriage did not share his "puppy" with his wife. She did mention to him that she did not feel like he shared himself with her (and he did not) Who knows whether that would have made a difference in their marriage. I am not sure because I do not know whether she does have the compassion to deal with those issues (sadly for her I am not sure she handles her own issues with compassion.) I do know that Raven's ability to open up with me and share his vulnerabilities is a large part of how our relationship deepened. A big part is that he was able to just open up without expectations. It freed me to just be able to accept his vulnerability without feeling as if I had to somehow fix it for him or "make" him feel okay. And oddly enough that my acceptance seemed enough, I think. I know Raven is absolutely man enough to handle his issues. It did feel good to be trusted to know what we all know in general anyway – everyone has issues. (Fearless) What about my true story of a man who went Elk hunting against his wife's wishes with the birth of their baby impending?
Burgbud - Not analogous. Why such a reach?
It does not seem like a reach other than H took a totally fun, frivolous unneeded vacation (versus meeting a family member's need) specifically against her wishes when his wife was getting ready to enter the hospital. And children and women have died in childbirth so I am not sure why you view it as a stretch???
Oh or don't you believe that childbirth is a serious matter that a wife should be able to expect her H to attend with her??
But what is happiness except the simple harmony between a man and the life he leads? ~Albert Camus
No specific person. You just seem to have a chip on your shoulder, waiting for someone to "wrong" you, keeping score, making sure things are even. It's sort of an existential resentment, a stance, an orientation, a default condition.
ETA:
For example this statement:
Quote:
Burgbud:This whole thing puts me in mind of Blackfoot's point that the only reason a man should let his woman see his puppy is to demonstrate that he'll take it back when she kicks it, and kick it she will.
is pretty pathetic.
This is the statement of a man who is already mad and waiting for someone to kick him so he'll have someone to be mad AT.
Hairdog, when your W asked, "do you want me to stick around?" what did you say. I definitely agree that she should have stayed without being asked.
I'm sure I said something like, "No, of course you don't need to stick around." She may have even pushed, saying, "I know you don't need me to stick around. Do you want me to stick around?" Back then, when I felt it was SO important to not be a burden, I might have even said, "no...please don't stick around."
It would be different now. I imagine myself saying something like, "damn right I want you to stick around. And just so we're clear on this if I come out of this surgery without the ability to express myself: I want you to assume that I will always want you to be there. To the greatest extent possible, I want you to be the last person I see before I go under the knife, and I want you to be the first person I see when I wake up."
Hairdog, who left out the part about how he can't believe he married someone so thoughtless (or clueless) that they'd bother to ask such a question.
I find myself wondering if women, in general, feel a greater obligation to parents than men. That we have a duty to them for raising us etc.
Funny thing is that I would probably stay with my h. He has no one else, parents do. But I understand the dilemma for someone where that's not the case.
For this cause, a man shall leave his father and his mother and shall cleave to his wife, and they shall become one flesh, and the man and his wife were both naked, and they were not ashamed. (Genesis 2:24-25)
It is very clear that a NEW relationship is formed by Man and Woman. The one flesh does NOT include children or parents or anyone else. This makes marriage a totally unique relationship, it exceeds ALL other relationships except the relationship with God.
When you marry, you could very likely spend the next 70 years with one person at almost all times. Parents, they don't live with you, you see them a few times a year. Children, they leave after 18 years. So how on earth could ANY of these people be AS important as your spouse who you will spend almost every minute with for 70 years?
