Accuray, I know exactly what you mean by presenting a scenario where the reader will arrive at a conclusion. I can do that very well if I want to, but that's not what I'm looking for. And honestly, in the hypothetical about the lemonade, I was trying to focus on the fact that he isn't intentionally being thoughtless and callous. He actually thinks he's being nice, or at least rationalizes/convinces himself that he is.
As for my leading the listener/reader, H and I have discussed specific issues in the past with couple friends, where H was able to present his perspective, and the guy/H said to my H, "What the hexx were you thinking??!" So I don't think I'm just twisting it to make me look good. I will also add that most of our counseling sessions were focused on H's behaviors because the counselor had an issue with it, too, in spite of H presenting his defenses. The counselor would work with H, he would say/commit to all the right things, and the counselor thought progress was made. It just didn't stick for more than about two days, if he really ever got it at all. Plus, if it isn't exactly the same thing, (ie. lemonade/tea vs. sandwich/burger) H can't transition. "It's not the same thing," he always says. So even if I set a boundary for a drink, he wouldn't be able to relate it to a sandwich. He would be completely blind-sided and accuse me of over-reacting. BTDT.
What you're saying about it being an overwhelming task is where I am right now. I find myself spending all my energy trying to intercept the infinite number of possibilities of things he might do. I feel like I'm having to watch a two-year-old. Even if I am completely consciously aware of the fact that he's not doing things to be mean or vindictive, I carry the result regardless. Like the lemonade vs. tea. This is only if I'm trying to fully engage. It's not a problem if I'm off doing my own thing, which is why I tend to do that so much, as opposed to trying to punish him. (He knows this, btw.)
There are times when he is courteous. In fact, in the hypothetical, he's being courteous when he offers to get me something to drink. I think everything falls apart when his selfish desires come into play. If there was only one drink he was interested in, or he didn't want a drink at all, then he would get my drink as I asked. But how to predict when there might be a conflict?
I don't know how to answer if it's "as bad" as my example portrayed. I thought it was a pretty calm example, actually. That sort of thing happens all the time. I could use the same scenario and substitute the lemonade/tea with real-life van or boat or step-kid sitches, but I just used a hypothetical to keep it simple. I guess all I can say is that it's bad enough for me to want to leave my M.
BTW, I used my analogy with him previously and he immediately denied that he's like that, appalled that I would even suggest that he would act that way. I referenced an example for him, and he said that it was a long time ago. So he went from completely denying it to acknowledging it but discounting it because my example was a long time ago. So I gave him a more current example, and he went into his rationalization of why he did it. Bottomline, it's just not "real" a problem for him. It's either not true, not current, or justifiable.
Convincing people that he's wrong and I'm not doesn't help my sitch. It means there's nothing I can do. Regardless of whether he's right or I am, I would prefer that people tell me what *I* can do. But I'll be honest and say that I am looking for some sort of payoff ultimately.
