Sometimes, the spouse just doesn't love you anymore.
Accept it, forgive and move on.
Honestly, that is the advice that I want to give 90% of the posters here. I hurt for the children and the innocent bystanders, but the LBS can move through the grief stages then start a new life...a happier one IME.
me: 42 | STBXH: 41 | T: 18 | M: 10 | separation: Jan 3, 2010 | they deserve better: S7 & D4 current thread: http://tinyurl.com/3y8sxcp .: first breathe, then heal, then start LIVING :.
Sometimes, the spouse just doesn't love you anymore.
Accept it, forgive and move on.
Honestly, that is the advice that I want to give 90% of the posters here. I hurt for the children and the innocent bystanders, but the LBS can move through the grief stages then start a new life...a happier one IME.
Unfortunately, this is the myth that is antithetic to DB, as I understand it. See p. 54 of DR (for those who require references).
Unfortunately, this is the myth that is antithetic to DB, as I understand it. See p. 54 of DR (for those who require references).
Oh, I don't think it's a myth. Maybe any positive feelings they have ever had for you have been burried and strangled to death by resentment or such, or if they are having an affair, you really aren't on the radar at all except as a possible backup plan (and you can be used as a flotation device in the event of an emergency).
The DB stuff comes in when you know this: just because they don't love you anymore, doesn't mean they can't love you again. Unfortunately, no ammount of perssuasion on your part, no attempt to hang on that makes you miserable and unhappy, and so on is going to bring them to that conclusion. In fact, all of these things accomplish just the opposite for the most part, yet a certain amount of this stuff seems destined to happen at the onset of the crisis.
Accepting they don't love you when they are cheating, filing for divorce, and so on is a neccessary step, IMO. Deal with reality. They don't love you.
Once you are grounded, you can work on improving your life and getting it to stick, and if you haven't had so many hateful crazy interactions with your spouse that you have killed every hope of reconciling, who knows what happens when you are really embracing life with or without them?
M-47,W-40,No kids D-filed 5/27/2010 Piecing - 10/21/2010 -=Soon to be banned=-
This may be true for some and may be a useful perspective, but it does not seem to be consistent with what MWD writes. So I would file this under "Not-DB".
Let's examine that, shall we? DR states that love is a choice, not a feeling. Well, that's good because if they are cheating or filing for divorce, they surely aren't feeling warm and affectionate toward you. They have also made the choice to end the marriage, not love you.
They don't love you.
How is that opposed to anything in there?
Now just because they don't love you (have chosen not to), doesn't mean they will not chose to love you in the future, but begging, pleading, acting miserable, arguing about their feelings, and so on, don't work.
How is that counter to DR principles?
I don't see how accepting the reality of the situation runs counter to any of the DR principles.
I don't see how deciding to have a good life with or without your spouse (GAL and PMA) are counter to DR principles.
Explain.
M-47,W-40,No kids D-filed 5/27/2010 Piecing - 10/21/2010 -=Soon to be banned=-
Gotta go with TH here. You lay the groundwork for the possibility of a future relationship with this person by the way you behave and deal with the sitch, but you have to accept that under the present circumstances it's over, and it probably will never come back. If you have children, the way you behave will effect them, too.
You're reacting to things that aren't there. The myth is what was quoted about "just" falling out of love, and the recommended response to just "accept and move on." Nothing about what was written in the last post was mentioned.
Regarding the myth - MWD is quite clear; have you read what she wrote in DR? Reading what she writes about "The Marriage Map" is also useful.
And there's nothing wrong with something being "not-DB" - there are things I advocate that are not-DB. Since this thread is about DB and not-DB, I think it is important to put things in the correct category.
And there's nothing wrong with something being "not-DB" - there are things I advocate that are not-DB. Since this thread is about DB and not-DB, I think it is important to put things in the correct category.
The problem arises when there's a conflict in principles... One method says do A and the other says in the same situation to do almost the opposite... Something's gotta give...
And there's nothing wrong with something being "not-DB" - there are things I advocate that are not-DB. Since this thread is about DB and not-DB, I think it is important to put things in the correct category.
The problem arises when there's a conflict in principles... One method says do A and the other says in the same situation to do almost the opposite... Something's gotta give...
The problem arises when there's a conflict in principles... One method says do A and the other says in the same situation to do almost the opposite... Something's gotta give...
