Originally Posted by Steve85
Originally Posted by CaptainN
I have to say, I'm a bit confused. Some of the information I hear seems contradictory.

Completely detach and have as little interaction as possible, but work on seducing?

And the "detach" I hear about here, in many respects sounds very different than the impression I got from reading DR.

It sounds like detachment in ways is somewhat akin to becoming kind of a childish jerk. Some of the behavior sounds less polite than I would give someone who I wanted nothing to do with and wished would just leave me alone.

I thought I was supposed to be about working on being the best me I can be, not becoming something I hate.

I get not pursuing, and being restrained, but *some* (some does not and seems more like the idea I got from DR) of this stuff sounds like the immature babble. No offense.

Maybe, I am just not clear on what is being suggested, but I don't want to become a somewhat absentee dad, who is rude and dismissive.


Boy this sounds awfully familiar.

Captain, assuming you aren't a previous poster that always liked to belittle this forum, detachment is not RUDE nor being childish or a jerk. Google: self-differentiation in marriage. The opposite of detachment/differentiation, is being overly attached and codependent. That is never a healthy way to be. Being overly attached and codependent means you rely on your spouse for YOUR happiness. Not only is that not a way to live your life, but it puts a tremendous burden on your spouse. No one want to be solely responsible for the happiness of another. A person eventually collapses under the weight of that kind of pressure.

Captain, I did a ton of reading, watching videos, etc during my sitch. Of all the experts I listened to and read, there was a lot contradictions between them. But one thing they ALL agreed on was to give your WAS time and space. To remove all pressure and pursuit. To not try to control them.

Lots of newcomers struggle with detachment. It is a complex concept. That is why studying and understanding it well is important. One expert I read said it best. He said: Give your WAS time and space. Become the best you can be. And then when the opportunity arises, show them your new and improved self. The problem with LBSs is that when we do 180 on bad behavior we want to strut those changes in front of our WAS like a peacock. And that comes across as disingenuous.....a kiss of death for the LBS.

This is why we say to never point out your positive changes to your partner. "Look how good I am now!" It comes across as "I've changed to get you back, and once you are then I will go back to the way I was."

Never be dismissive or rude. However, when you get BD your spouse is telling you "I want time and space". All you are doing is giving that to her. But when you DO interact you are attentive, present, upbeat, and happy. Just do not be the one to start conversation, but when she does then fully engage. Read sandi's writings on the friendly cashier. Great stuff.

I've been on this forum for over two years and NEVER EVER have I heard one of the vets here say "Be an absentee parent". Where did you get that!?! Coparenting, putting a child care plan in place, is NOT being an absentee parent. It is again giving your WAS what they asked for.

As far as seduction. That is an art. Most men especially can't pull it off subtly. R2C likes to see LBSs apply some seduction...and done right it can be effective in certain sitches. However, we men seem to think "Hey, you wanna?" is seduction. It isn't. But dressing nicer. Taking care of grooming (trim those nose hairs!). Smelling good. Being quietly confident. That is all seduction and you haven't done a single thing explicitly to "seduce" her. Remember, seduction isn't going after her, it is getting her to come after you. Think of the WAS like a cat. Any movement towards them will send them fleeing. Sitting quietly and invitingly will sometimes draw them towards you.

So as you can see, this can all fit together if you let it. Or you can just argue and compare us to another forum. Up to you.

Oh, I think you could stand to read the distance pursuit dynamic thread. PURE GOLD. In fact, did you do all of the reading cadet linked in his first response? I think it will clear up a lot of this for you.


This is more clear and makes more sense.

I should be clear that, my impression was not just from this thread, but from reading some of the others as well.

If this post describes detachment, then I feel like I'm doing pretty well on that (at least the last couple of weeks - and in some areas, longer).

I haven't seen a lot of talk about children on here, which kind of surprises me, because they are a pretty significant aspect, and I think probably expected there to be more dedicated discussion to that subject. But, with work, and other things I have going on, I only get to see my daughter so much as it is, so I like to take advantage of those opportunities when I can. Sometimes (most of the time during the week) that means my wife will be there as well. But, that doesn't mean that my wife and I have a lot of interaction during that time. My attention is focused on my daughter.

This may be where I get confused, and maybe I read it (or rather the contrasting part) wrong:

Quote

But when you DO interact you are attentive, present, upbeat, and happy. Just do not be the one to start conversation, but when she does then fully engage.


Contrasted with advice on texting and then to avoid being around her at all made it seem like I should limit my engagement, even if she initiated.

Also, we do have a co-parenting plan in place already for when the divorce is final, but also, my wife has intimated that she doesn't expect me to leave the house after the divorce either, so what exactly she wants is not clear, at least not to me. Time for herself maybe (see my comment in the last post about thinking part of her thinking is to avoid responsibility for our kid half the time), but I'm certainly not prohibiting her from going out and doing anything she wants to do.

Last edited by job; 03/10/20 09:23 PM. Reason: Removed referenced name to another site