Stig, your posts are always so long. But usually have lots of good stuff in 'em. I just wanted to be point out that we need to distinguish between "love" and "codependence". You sort of looked to several different points to "prove" that her H really loves her but most of those points simply supported their continued codependence/undifferentiation than "love". So I guess you could argue what really is love. Nothing her H has displayed looks like love to me. I'm not saying he is doing it purposefully to hurt her, but let's not fool ourselves into thinking he is showing love to her. I also think you were way off on this comment: I don't see you as an F who would collapse to the floor in tears and beg H for forgiveness and pleadings of sorrow after he discovered your A. If my thinking is right on this I think if you had done such with an display of total vulnerability at the figurative feet of your H back then his current attitude would be much different and he would have been satisfied that was the remorseful behavioral display he still seeks from you today. Are you saying her groveling for forgiveness would help this mess? I think that just perpetuates their codependent power-play interactions. It's like saying a man who beats the crap out of his W and then begs for forgiveness, must really love her. Or even worse, the fact that they stay together in that R proves they really love each other. Hope I'm not coming off too harsh. I just find the word "love" thrown around so easily that I wonder if we will justify any and all behavior on a S part, because they are M and must therefore be showing love for each other. Not all R/M are really built on love. And beyond love, lots of R/M are not even built on respect. The level of codependence in Heather's M is obvious. I think BOTH of them need to GAL. You sort of told her that detachment would just create more "paranoia" in her H so she shouldn't do that. I feel an complete GAL detachment while still living under the same roof is only going to aggravate his paranoia. Don't you think this is also playing into their codependency. His "paranoia" is not her issue. She cannot be responsible for his feelings, right? And vice versa. Cobra made a great point that she should be living her life the way she wants whether she is M or not. And I don't mean a mariied single, I mean that she should be an independent person FIRST and then bring that healthy independence into the M. Her H should do the same. They clearly have a long way to go to even starting that journey. Maybe you could bring that up in MC Heather. Plan a GAL stategy for both you and H.
Heather, It's good that you are reading PM; I hope you get lots of good stuff out of it!
You keep stating that all you wanted was an answer to a question and you are differentiating by insisting on that answer. However, let's look at your question:
Quote: "The way we're interacting, with you ignoring me and staying down in your room....does that mean that that you're not willing to continue working on the R?"
In the first part you accuse him of ignoring you, thereby putting him on the defensive. In the last part, you presume to know what's inside his head and assign a very negative meaning to what he's 'going' to say.
In other words, that was an extremely controlling way to go about "asking" a question, girlfriend! There is no man, no person for that matter, who would have responded well to an inquiry phrased this way. I understand that your H has done more than his fair share of trash talkin, but if you *really* want an answer to this question, you have to put aside your own anger and resentment and make yourself vulnerable so that a real convo can ensue. Going on the attack, as good as it feels, will never net you the loving results you are after.
Now. Knowing your H, doing it in a perfectly perfect way may not net any results either, but at least he will be alone in the knowledge that HE is the one being the butthead, not you. This is a big part of the Schnarch philosophy..setting the scene so that it is the other person's buttheadish behavior that urges them into the crucible. It can NEVER be you who urges your H into the crucible. I could write that a million times over. It can never be you.
What about this: "H I feel so lonely when you are not here with me and you are off in your room. I feel ignored. I'd like to start working on ways we can spend time together."
Then allow him to say/do whatever. State your feelings clearly and calmly. If his reaction is hateful, then you can calmly let him know that you will not stay in a marriage forever where you feel ignored. Then walk away.
There was a time in which triggering your H's abandonment fears (and he has them STRONGLY) would have been foolish, in light of your A. However, I think that 2 years is a long enough penance and the time is right for you to start stating what you will and will not tolerate within your M. He has done a bangup job of making the A the focus of your lives, instead of the dynamic between you two that LED to the affair. However, you finally creating some boundaries will even the score a bit.
Expect him to freak out immensely and use every ugly A reference he can, so that he can re-establish the status quo of Groveling Heather and Punishing H. Stay teflon, baby. You can do it. Shrug off his hateful words and keep repeating what your boundaries are. Do not get sucked in to his ridiculous attempts at making it All About Heather.
Finally, work on making yourself vulnerable. I know it's hard because of the person he is..he'll take advantage of it, mock it, whatever. But it sounds to me like you have such a hard time being direct (with him) that you have to work yourself up to it...and the way you work it up is by phrasing it in vaguely attacking language.
Well I could be way off, but this is what I see from an outsiders POV.
Following up on your thoughts and my comments about the hurt I felt with my college girlfriend, one thing that would have stopped me in my tracks was to was to have seen her breakdown, crying and say something like “OK, I’ve said a hundred times I’m sorry! You have torn me down to where I have nothing left. I know I have destroyed your vision of our future and I am sorry. I will do what I can to repair it, to prove my worth and my love to you. But right now can’t you see how much YOU have hurt ME, can’t you see how sorry I am, how terrible I feel. Can’t you see MY pain!!”
Now before everyone jumps on me for proposing such a groveling statement (and yes it is groveling) let me say that this is in the idea of re-enmeshing, knowing how dysfunctional that is. But I think this is necessary to overcome HIS defenses and could bring a warming of relations so that communication can begin. This is a façade, no doubt. It is a partially false statement. But it may serve as the “reset” button that Stig mentions.
cobra, I think your idea is a good one. I suppose you might look at it as "re-enmeshing," but the important thing about it is that it makes the groveler vulnerable. Both parties have to be vulnerable.
honey wrote
Quote: Now. Knowing your H, doing it in a perfectly perfect way may not net any results either, but at least he will be alone in the knowledge that HE is the one being the butthead, not you. This is a big part of the Schnarch philosophy..setting the scene so that it is the other person's buttheadish behavior that urges them into the crucible. It can NEVER be you who urges your H into the crucible. I could write that a million times over. It can never be you.
This is where the chessboard analogy comes in handy. If you leave the chessboard... if you stop moving your pieces in response to his moves... if you stop kicking his pieces to the floor... then ALL if the movement and conflict is revealed to be coming from him.
I also like the analogy of the wrestling pit: he jumps down there and motions for you to jump in and go at it. If you don't, then he cannot fight with you. Any conflict is generated only by him.
But Lillie: this is where I get tripped up. When she's motioning me to join her in the wresting pit, and I refuse, then I get accused of not communicating, or withdrawing, or not wanting to resolve things.
Wow. This is a very interesting thread. For whatever reason I feel compelled to jot down a few points and clarifications.
I've met Heather. I consider her a friend. I ran low on ideas for helping her months ago so I'm very glad she's found a source of new ideas and hopefully a sense of optimism. I'm thankful for everybody contributing here.
I often get concerned for Heather because of two things. I believe her to be a very smart, sharp and competent woman who, like many of us, would desperately like to be able to control her sitch and right the ship of her M. If the problems are hers and all she has to do is change herself, then that's what she's going to do. Probably I *am* more fatalistic than Cobra for although I believe our actions certainly influence the actions of those around us, I believe our actions fall well short of having the effect of controlling those around us. This distinction is important to me because of the other thing about Heather that is concerning; a certain penchant for guilt. Very natural in her sitch because she's the one who had the little A (due to my own circumstances I'm rarely able to call what she did "an affair" without qualifiers), because she has small children and because she's the one considering walking away from the M at this point. I fear that when she's told very authoritatively, and I'm paraphrasing here, "If you'll do these things you'll fix your M except in the very worst of cases", she'll internalize that to "Therefore if your M doesn't get fixed it's because you didn't do things correctly." In the first place, nobody's perfect and nobody will do everything correctly all the time. A marriage must be able to withstand these imperfections. Secondly as I've stated before, I don't have as much confidence as others in the certainty of one person's response to another's actions. I think human behavior varies more greatly from person to person than the impression I get from many of you. I'd be more than happy to be wrong about that. But my belief makes me wary of statements that look anything like: "If you do <some behavior>, your H will do <some positive behavior in response, eventually>."
So I'll say this, which perhaps everyone agrees with implicitly but I like to be explicit about it: I don't think Heather *owes* H anything. I don't think she *owes* him any more apologies than she's given. I don't think she *owes* it to him to go to counselling. I don't think she *owes* it to him to read any books or work on the M at all. If she walked away tomorrow I think she'd be perfectly justified. My perspective is that she's reading and working and going to counselling because that's what she *chooses* to do in order to get what she wants. In this case, what she wants is very noble and worthwhile and I think she should pursue it as long as it's not damaging to her spirit.
Having said all that I agree with a great many of the points and ideas proferred in this thread, including a few that I wouldn't have agreed with at first blush. I think the idea of H as a "married single" may still be useful but I completely agree with Stig that he's not functioning as a truly independent person who just happens to be married. This example may not mean much to many of you but I think it does for Heather, so I'll say that NYS's OM would fit the the true idea of "married single" if he and K actually got/get married, much moreso than H. I like almost all the ideas about differentiation that have been put forth but I think the possibility of H not reacting positively, even long term, is greater than many of you believe.
And while I instinctively loathed the idea of the incredibly-heartfelt-almost-to the-point-of-grovelling apology for her little A, I've come to feel there may be possibilities there. Heather, I'm very curious to find out what you think about it, even if you completely hate it and would never consider doing it in a million years.
Stop WaitingFeel EverythingLove AchinglyGive ImpeccablyLet Go
I have a ton to do, but I just read through everone's posts....I have so much to think about and digest and will need to re-read them. But I want to make one thing VERY clear. I DID grovel when I revealed the affair. I DID fall down on the floor crying. I shook. I rocked back and forth to keep myself somewhat calm at work. I told H I was sorry a million times and that I would make it up to him. If groveling was what he wanted to see, he wanted it for a lot longer than two weeks. Because I was down, and I DO mean down, for about that long.
"Happiness is a butterfly, which, when pursued, is always just beyond your grasp, but which, if you will sit down quietly, may alight upon you."
I can certainly understand your perspective and why it seems that actions by one person will rarely change another. But that statement is true of neither person understands how differentiation can shift the balance. If one person keeps engaging in the same dance, then of course, nothing will change. All attempts are just variations of the same power struggle. And that is what I think Heather and her H have done and why it seems nothing will work.
I also agree that no one owes anyone anything. She must go through counseling because she understands that value to her and her kids. Not because of some obligation. Phase3, if you personally know Heather, then reading Schnarch could be one of the best ways to help her, as well as advance your understanding about human psychology in general.
Phase3, I completely agree with cobra, but let me expand a little. You're completely mistaken if any of us here think that doing this or that will produce a predictable response in our partner. If there's one gospel we preach over and over again, it's that you can NEVER control someone else's behavior or ever make them do anything. All you can do is request and then take care of yourself.
We're trying to help heather find a solid center inside herself that she can act from and make decisions from regardless of how her H reacts. She will need that strong core whether or not she and her H stay together, whether or not this marriage works.
And your remark "she doesn't owe it to him to go to counseling"-- whoa! Counseling is not some punishment that you submit to as a penance. It's not like being sent to the principal's office where you will get your knuckles rapped. Holy moley, is that what people think in the other forums?
Counseling is consulting; it's coaching. It's you redecorated the living room yourself and now the ceiling is black, you can't see the tv from the sofa, the front door is blocked, and now you need expert advice to get you out of this because you can't figure it out on your own. It's using three different hair colors and going to Nick Arrojo to get it fixed. It's doing your own tattoo, and going to a pro to get redesigned.
In fact, your litany about how heather doesn't "owe" her H anything-- where in the heck does THAT come from? Heather is the one who is wanting to get her M back on track. It isn't about who owes whom; it's about what WORKS.
I agree that heather's H should sh!t or get off the pot. To keep her dangling for two years is insane... but if you read Stig and cobra, you'll get some insight into why he is prolonging this insanity.
The point is that to keep saying he should do this, he should do that-- well, is POINTLESS. All that does is make him wrong. Well, I already think he's wrong for continuing to punish her for the A that was or was not an A. Now what?
If you stick your key in the car and turn it and the engine does not start, do you just sit there and keep turning it and saying "it should start"?
Quote: But Lillie: this is where I get tripped up. When she's motioning me to join her in the wresting pit, and I refuse, then I get accused of not communicating, or withdrawing, or not wanting to resolve things.
What then?
Ah, Grasshopper, you have learned so much... and yet you have much to learn.
These accusations are a continuation of the invitation to jump into the pit. You must continue to resist, no matter what she says.
Remember the scene at the end of "Raiders of the Lost Ark," when they were getting ready to open the ark and Harrison Ford was tied to that post, and when the ark opened, he felt all the forces of heaven and hell pulling him toward the vortex? Well, that's YOU when Mrs. HD invites you to jump into the pit.
And then when you resist, she pulls out the big guns and accuses you of the three main things that you are NOT, i.e., a bad communicator, a man who wants to withdraw, and a man who does not want to resolve problems.
And yet the vortex exerts a magnetic pull on you: How can you possibly let those accusations go unanswered??? How can you let her think that about you??? How indeed can a lawyer resist the gauntlet that has been cast down by another lawyer that he's married to?
You must handcuff your mouth shut (so to speak) and throw away the key. You must rise above the chessboard and watch her shaking her fist at the non-communicative, withdrawn man who doesn't give a sh!t crouched on the board and know that that man is not YOU! I don't know who she's talking to, but it isn't the hairdog we know.
I heard something really beautful on Fresh Air this morning. Terry was interviewing a man who's a therapist and a quadriplegic. The interview is worth looking up on the web and listening to. He said one time a client said to him, "I feel like I'm a many-faceted prism, but my family and friends only want to see one facet of me. I want someone who wants to see and know all of my facets." Those accusations are nothing you need to answer. They aren't you.
Don't forget: our task here is to let the other person get in the crucible and turn the heat up all by themselves. That's why you have to leave her in the pit/crucible by herself. Don't rescue her.
