This may be a non sequitur, but the therapist said the other day that the more passive person is always in control of the relationship.
Which reminds me of one of my own personal definitions: Living with a depressed person is like trying to play with a dead dog. No matter how many times you throw that ball, the dog just won't run.
I'm not sure that we fit into this thread, although we certainly have at different times of our married life. When first married, H's libido was higher than mine and I was completely waited on and doted on. I did NOTHING and was a complete Taker. Then things started to shift subtly and I honestly don't remember which was first...a shift in sex drive or a shift in Giving/Taking. My drive was never low; his was just higher than mine for a brief time.
Now I would classify us as equally giving and taking. We just give in different ways to each other and take in different ways. We both do lots of Acts of Service for the other, so that is us giving and taking, but I am the Giver and Planner of Quality time and he is the taker. We both give in the Physical affection area but he is the hugger and pecker and I am the ML'er.
I think there are definitely givers and takers in relationships but I don't know how closely it parallels the HD/LD lines. Just my feedback for your informal survey, newlywed!
I didn't ask her. When she said it, it made perfect sense to me. NO is a very powerful word. If someone just WON'T do something, they do have all the control-- if you let them. What's the alternative?
I had a therapist tell me the same thing...and actually when I got to thinking about it I understood it. I can tell my LDH what I "need" but in reality he's in control over whether or not he gives that to me.
I surprised my LDH one morning when we were casually talking about our situation and I told him "you do realize don't you that you've always been in control of our sex life." His response was "I am?!" So I explained to him that I can ask, I can initiate...I can do absolutely everything I can think of to try to get him to ML with me...ultimately it's up to him whether or not he does. He said "Oh!" (one of his famous responses)...thought about it for a bit...then he said..."you're absolutely right...I just never realized it."
It is interesting isn't it? That's kind of why I have a hard time generalizing LD's/HD's...what seems so apparant to an HD person could be completely missed by an LD...or vice-versa.
Sure either side of the fence could rationalize how they give/take more than the other but sometimes the obvious slips completely past us.
Quote: (Sorry Hairdoggie for using you as an example here).
Yeah, that's okay. My father always told me that I would grow up and be an example to others. I don't think he meant this in a bad way, however.
I'm sure Ms. Hairdog would see herself as a giver. She must be, right? She's exhausted every night. She is the one who moved so that we could be together. What does Hairdog do?
Meanwhile, I think I'm a Giver...but maybe it's just because I'm focused on the SSM aspect, for which there is no taking to be had...or giving, for that matter.
The way I see it is you're both giving...just in your own ways. Sometimes those different ways conflict...and that's where quite a bit of our frustrations come in.
it is the old 'principal of least interest' where the party with the least interest in any transaction holds all the cards. Works for marrage, dating, and even buying a car.
