I don't get this expectation of emotional lockstep, really I don't. If that's what it's supposed to be like, maybe newlyweds should just flip a coin then donate one brain to science.
Hell's bells, @Kett, I wish I'd said that! You know how I've been writing that as time goes on and I move on I've been learning a lot about my marriage and ME in my marriage? This is one of the things I've learned (or remembered I'd subordinated, or something) -- this has ALWAYS been the case with WAW. It's either TOTAL AGREEMENT or "something's wrong."
That's been consistent, really, almost since the day we were married. And since it came out last night, in that forum, in so back-a**wards a way (Smiley's Person has to share MY POV, doesn't he???), I'm really starting to think it's one of those FUNDAMENTAL differences between us.
And I'm starting to wonder why I'd ignored / sublimated it for so long, but that's another topic for another day -- why we subordinate ourselves to our marriage (or, perhaps more precisely, to our spouses' framing of the marriage).
Quote:
Schnarch says something like, "So you're not only allowing *him* to define *your* experience, you're letting him do it retroactively."
Right! But it's even more than that -- she not only lets me (if you will) define *her* experience retroactively, she then essentially punished me for having done so in her mind. Notice the Chicken Little "oh my god things are worse than I thought there's no hope we're all gonna die!" that it elicited.
Quote:
That Assumption of Good Will is good stuff. It's more .... (insert Captain Barbossa voice) ... guidelines.
Love it! But I still would like the thread reference you referred to earlier where that discussion is underway.
