The argument - believe it or not - was about trying to find a way to talk about things without getting into an argument.
We both did a lot of separate things this weekend. I was disappointed we didn't have more time together, but the time we had, was pretty good. There was some friction at times, but I sense a shift. It started a little while ago, I think H is more committed to the M and the process. It just feels like he has changed some of his behavior (less angry, which was one of my main complaints), and that he bounces back from arguments faster and more solidly, without pulling the plug on our R every time. I think the A might actually be over and he really wants to save the M.
Today, he actually admitted very willingly (in a casual conversation) that one of his behaviors contributes equally to arguments. That is pretty huge - it's all been my fault for a really long time!
Also, he immediately said yes when I asked if he wanted to plan an activity together! That's the first time in years that he has agreed to any suggestion I made for anything.
About the invalidation and validation - I recognize a lot of openly invalidating statements from H - that I 'shouldn't feel that way', 'feel/think too much', 'should let it go', etc. He seems to do it less these days.
On my end, I probably invalidate when I try to find common ground but end up overriding his input. 'We'-statements.
M 16 yrs, WH62, P54 3 adult blended kids EA 11/13, BD1 6/14 PA fall 14, BD2 2/15 Piecing 2015, BD3 12/15 Separated 4/16 WH moved OW in 5/16 Divorced 6/15/17
The argument - believe it or not - was about trying to find a way to talk about things without getting into an argument.
Not quite sure what to say except arguing well can create harmony. There is little problem when we start and end with arguing and validating. Agreeing to disagree is perfectly good.
You may like to consider googling the term blamestorming which started as a workplace structured argument strategy system. That discussion is how to argue well. Even if the argument is about how to argue.
We both did a lot of separate things this weekend. I was disappointed we didn't have more time together, but the time we had, was pretty good. There was some friction at times, but I sense a shift. It started a little while ago, I think H is more committed to the M and the process.
Seems that your strategy is working and may just need minor adjusting.
It just feels like he has changed some of his behavior (less angry, which was one of my main complaints), and that he bounces back from arguments faster and more solidly, without pulling the plug on our R every time. I think the A might actually be over and he really wants to save the M.
Hold back until you know for sure, in case it's underground or in a cheeseless tunnel.
Today, he actually admitted very willingly (in a casual conversation) that one of his behaviors contributes equally to arguments. That is pretty huge - it's all been my fault for a really long time!
That's good as an indicator.
Also, he immediately said yes when I asked if he wanted to plan an activity together! That's the first time in years that he has agreed to any suggestion I made for anything.
Sounds good.
About the invalidation and validation - I recognize a lot of openly invalidating statements from H - that I 'shouldn't feel that way', 'feel/think too much', 'should let it go', etc. He seems to do it less these days.
Sounds like you have a monitoring tool. You could consider monitoring the invalidation to validation ratio. According to stats we need 5 validating to each invalidation.
On my end, I probably invalidate when I try to find common ground but end up overriding his input. 'We'-statements.
That is a good observation what can you do to change this?
Regards
V
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to loose. V 64, WAW
