No, sorry, I meant where you mentioned she was doing the right thing in your first response. I was looking through DR and got to LRT where it's described as being similar to a 180 but only used in an extreme situation (i.e. BQT's H said he wants a D, looks like he means it, and it wasn't said out of anger).
No, J, that's not the LRT I was referencing in my first post on this thread. The LRT is to go dark completely. I don't recall that technique covering how to deal with a request for a divorce. It's not even really about doing 180s. I don't even think it's in the book at all. I pretty much explained the concept in that post.
Going dark, according to DR, is for when the spouse has left. That kind of extreme situation.
I'm sorry, Michele. I don't agree.
Anyway, regarding how to handle a request for a divorce, in my sitch, I got mentally anguished - correction - I let myself get mentally anguished - over my WAW living with OM and here I was still legally married to her. I felt embarrassed and started the divorce proceeding. Well, it took my FEELING of embarrassment away, but that's all it did. Now I'm getting divorced, duh.
Well, I realized how stupid that was on my part after she got served, and she eventually got to signing the papers. Now I know that D papers don't mean a thing, it just dissolves a marriage license, not a relationship. But still, it's sad, you know? So, I spoke to her and - stupid me - told her I was sad about it. She said it was for the best. So I agreed, and let it go. That, finally, was a smart thing for me to do.
Imagine if I had contended with her instead. Imagine if I had said, "No, dammit! You're my wife! This marriage I'm dedicated to come hell or high water! It's sacred to me! I'll fight you over this divorce!" Where would we be? We would be adversaries. She's off in a new relationship. The marriage was over a long time ago in her mind. That's why she could walk. The relationship was painful to her. Do you really think having the "source" of that pain... in her mind, me... rising up full strength and insisting on keeping that marriage intact, the marriage she felt trapped, hurt, frustrated, unhappy in, a marriage she felt where her life was draining away in, that life was a hopeless prison, that she had to run from... (again, in the WAS's mind)... do you really think insisting that I'm dedicated to that marriage and will fight a divorce will bring my wife back to me? No way! She'd look at me and think, "This S.O.B. wants me to be forever unhappy! He doesn't care about how I feel! He hurt me and all he cares about is himself because he's hurting now!" That's the WAS's mentality.
Agreeing with a divorce if the WAS wishes to initiate the proceedings removes the adversarial nature of fighting against it and helps align the WAS with the LBS.
Again, this does not mean that the LBS needs to agree with the decision. The LBS is agreeing that the viewpoint of the WAS is valid. The LBS is not under obligation to run out and initiate the proceedings. Having the WAS do everything that's needed to get a divorce allows for the WAS to determine if that's what they really want to do, not just say they want to do. And if it does happen, as in my case, it's not the end.
