I would not. I'd take that for sure. Maybe i'm naive, but i think that i'm at about 90-95% right now. Maybe I can get it up to that 97.5%!
Well all us DB'er's know that you can have a happy life, not be missing out on anything and not have to sneak around on the one you are supposed to be with. Some of us just don't want the stress of even sneaking around.
Pure love, baby it's pure love Milk and honey and Captain Krunch and you in the morning Pure love baby it's pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love Pure love You're the picture of pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love
I wake up with sunshine (sunshine) Laying beside me And bluebirds singing right outside my window Soft warm kisses (kisses) Say good morning Then I get breakfast in bed You know you make me so happy (make me so happy with) go to chorus, lead, key change
Pure love, baby it's pure love Milk and honey and Captain Krunch and you in the morning Pure love You're the picture of pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure lov-ov-ove
Sorry, I know this is your piecing thread Denver, so don't want to hijack it further with this trust, transparency issue. Yet... here I go...
Just an open question. Does trust not really still come down to give trust or don't give trust? We have to assume that there needs to be trust that even a request and stated commitment to transparency is going to "stick". That the AP will remain transparent.
Again, expressed many times there's many ways to hide if the AP "relapses". So intuition truly has to play a huge factor in trusting or not trusting. How does one write a transparency clause that is truly open ended and enforces it?
And I still get caught questioning what appears to be stressing issues of the AP's intent to harm the BP.
It's easy enough to prove or show fact. It's quite another challenge to prove intent. No one but the AP knows that they intended to harm the BP. And striking out in a moment of intention may not prove habitual or chronic intention to harm.
It looks different from an abuse perspective, especially if one takes a zero tolerance position, which I do. I think we're quick to label something as abuse, before we examine whether there was intent.
Pure love, baby it's pure love Milk and honey and Captain Krunch and you in the morning Pure love baby it's pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love Pure love You're the picture of pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love
I wake up with sunshine (sunshine) Laying beside me And bluebirds singing right outside my window Soft warm kisses (kisses) Say good morning Then I get breakfast in bed You know you make me so happy (make me so happy with) go to chorus, lead, key change
Pure love, baby it's pure love Milk and honey and Captain Krunch and you in the morning Pure love You're the picture of pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure love Ninety-nine and forty-four one hundreds percent pure lov-ov-ove
LOL!!!
M 43 X 38 T 13 W moves out of home 11/2010 Roller coaster from hell 2/2011-5/2012 I request divorce 5/2012 W moves home 6/2012 Good time 7/2012 - 1/2015 I leave 3/2016 process of divorce
Sorry, I know this is your piecing thread Denver, so don't want to hijack it further with this trust, transparency issue. Yet... here I go...
Just an open question. Does trust not really still come down to give trust or don't give trust? We have to assume that there needs to be trust that even a request and stated commitment to transparency is going to "stick". That the AP will remain transparent.
Again, expressed many times there's many ways to hide if the AP "relapses". So intuition truly has to play a huge factor in trusting or not trusting. How does one write a transparency clause that is truly open ended and enforces it?
And I still get caught questioning what appears to be stressing issues of the AP's intent to harm the BP.
It's easy enough to prove or show fact. It's quite another challenge to prove intent. No one but the AP knows that they intended to harm the BP. And striking out in a moment of intention may not prove habitual or chronic intention to harm.
It looks different from an abuse perspective, especially if one takes a zero tolerance position, which I do. I think we're quick to label something as abuse, before we examine whether there was intent.
I agree with this completely KD.
BTW, hijack all you want. No worries.
M 43 X 38 T 13 W moves out of home 11/2010 Roller coaster from hell 2/2011-5/2012 I request divorce 5/2012 W moves home 6/2012 Good time 7/2012 - 1/2015 I leave 3/2016 process of divorce
I would not. I'd take that for sure. Maybe i'm naive, but i think that i'm at about 90-95% right now. Maybe I can get it up to that 97.5%!
Denver_2010,
Some of us were down to 10% or even less, so if you really are at 90% and not being naive about it, you are doing excellent. In the sitch that brought me to DB-land, just about everything the at that time wife did was a manipulation or a trick, or a lie. She was hating my guts and getting off on hurting me, I don't care one bit today wish I let go along time earlier.
I would not. I'd take that for sure. Maybe i'm naive, but i think that i'm at about 90-95% right now. Maybe I can get it up to that 97.5%!
Denver_2010,
Some of us were down to 10% or even less, so if you really are at 90% and not being naive about it, you are doing excellent. In the sitch that brought me to DB-land, just about everything the at that time wife did was a manipulation or a trick, or a lie. She was hating my guts and getting off on hurting me, I don't care one bit today wish I let go along time earlier.
I am DLS (almost referred to you as daddy! LOL!)... Anyway, I don't feel like I'm being naive about it.
Despite the fact that I don't agree with many of my W's decisions over the past couple of years, she did do a couple of things that are very helpful to us today.
1) She moved out of our house before she decided to date OM. Yes, her R with him prior to her moving out, as 'friends', was, IMO, an emotional affair, but she did not choose to spend time with him or 'date' him until several weeks after she moved out of the house. Plus, she and I had been almost completely silent with one another for several months prior to leaving the home. I was sleeping on the couch, she did her thing, I did mine. We lived completely separate lives. We were emotionally divorced long before she started confiding in OM, let alone having a physical R with him. Symbolic, I know. But still much better than had she been sleeping with the guy while living in our home.
2) She was, and has been, very upfront about her R with OM from the get go. Brutally honest in fact. Yes, there were times when she was having contact with him while telling me that she wasn't. But I write that off to the fact that I had put her in the position of knowing that if he was in her life, that I would not be. She has said, and I a believe, that she did not know what to do at those moments. She was scared of losing me, but still had unresolved feelings for OM. So, I forgive her for those times knowing that she is generally a very honest person... and a terrible liar (which is how and why I always found out when she was omitting the complete truth).
I know that most people whose wives have had an affair say this, but my W is simply not someone who is unfaithful to the person whom she is committed to. She never has been, even in prior R's. That is why she HAD to move out of the house when she did. It is why she could not look me in the eye even when she thought that she was in a position where it was not morally wrong to date (after she had moved out and said she was done with the M). It is why she was just an absolute horrid liar when I did have to confront her at times when she had omitted the complete truth.
Now? I just feel that committment to me and our M again. It is hard to explain. And just to be clear, even during the times when we were hanging out a lot, and dating, or whatever over the past 18 months, I never felt that way until she came back to me in June and said that she was sure that she wanted to be with me and wanted our M. This is probably the biggest reason that I feel a solid level of trust here.
I don't feel that I'm being naive. Maybe it'll turn out that I am being a fool. I hope not, but I have been wrong before.
M 43 X 38 T 13 W moves out of home 11/2010 Roller coaster from hell 2/2011-5/2012 I request divorce 5/2012 W moves home 6/2012 Good time 7/2012 - 1/2015 I leave 3/2016 process of divorce
M 43 X 38 T 13 W moves out of home 11/2010 Roller coaster from hell 2/2011-5/2012 I request divorce 5/2012 W moves home 6/2012 Good time 7/2012 - 1/2015 I leave 3/2016 process of divorce
