I don’t understand why you see this as an attack at all. I am not attacking. I said she needs to decide to commit to the marriage or not. I won’t stay in a marriage when she has one foot out the door. That is not an attack, it is a simple boundary. The choice is entirely up to her. I sweeten the deal to help her make a choice for the marriage that much more enticing, but I do not need to do that at all. I choose to meet her demands for financial gifts, but I don’t have to do so on her terms. It is a simple choice for me. I can meet her wish or not. She set a boundary. I have elected a compromise instead, conditional on my demands. Neither of us is required to choose. We can both stay stuck. It’s just that if she chooses not to budge, to keep one foot out the door, at some point I will walk out.
I can’t see how setting a boundary and holding to it weakens me in her eyes. I think the opposite is true. I think that in this case, I too am calm and in control and absolutely firm in my convictions. Not engaging with her is not going to force her into the crucible. You miss my earlier point that she does NOT recognize the need to respect any authority other than her own. My wishes and desires do not count. If she thinks she needs to do something, she will do so regardless of how I feel. She has done this so many times in the past I can’t even count them. The problem has always been that I do not set a boundary. If it weren’t for the kids, my leaving the marriage would not phase her in the slightest. How do you think my holding on to myself will cause such an awakening in her to change that?
