Well its about time I got around to responding to you.
the way you phrase this you are giving your wife all the power. Instead of having your boundaries, and giving her Choices
We have both moved along in setting and respecting boundaries. We state what we will or will not do, and pretty much leave it at that. Sometimes I feel she makes demands at strategic moments, knowing the alternatives are limited. That feels like manipulation. I call her out on it and confront why she is doing so. I cannot let these things slide by or she will see the green light to repeat them again. Confronting her does seem to help.
There is no manipulation in a boundary. It shows who and what you are, it demonstrates personal strength and power, and lack of fear of the outcome, which a woman does want to see from a man so she can surrender to him.
That is different then what you want from her. That is essentially my disagreement with how I see you handle things. Your not trying to give her what she wants, your trying to force a situation of 'equality' where she soothes you and you soothe her. That forces her to be unfeminine. You can accomplish that, but you will kill her desire. Thats not going to help you accomplish your goal-- A mutually fulfilling sexual M.
I’m not sure I see this the same as you. I do understand what you are saying and if it were anyone else, I would be in complete agreement. But she still seems to be wrestling with her insecurities, one of which is accepting strength, support and guidance from a male. The very thing that gives most women comfort is what she hates. She is already in the “unfeminine” camp. I am trying to find a way to coax her to open up and get in touch with her feminine side. Going through the motions can help her desensitize her resistance, learn that it is safe and try new ways of thinking and feeling (I hope).
To ask her to just become a woman and accept the strength I can offer is to put WAAAY too much pressure on her. She becomes the recipient of the attention, the spotlight is on her. To many women, this is just what they want. But for my W, I think her self esteem is too low to handle it. It makes her too uncomfortable. What she really wants (at least in her mind) is to be treated like an equal, like a man. There seems to be an internal struggle between being treated and nurtured like a woman on one hand and her perceived lack of respect for SAHMs and women in the workplace on the other.
Essay 20 by David Deida 'Dont Suggest that a Woman Fix Her Own Emotional Problem' ( I read his book 2 weeks ago --its most excellent dude ) tackles this subject. I really recommend you get it, Id love to find a forum or discuss it with you some other way.
I don’t have any Dieda books, but I have ordered “The Way Of The Superior Man: A Spiritual Guide to Mastering the Challenges of Woman, Work, and Sexual Desire."
When you soothe yourself via Schnarch, you are tackling you own insecurities and demonstrating to her, what she wants to receive.
This seems to be the case only to the extent that soothing myself then takes pressure off of her to offer soothing, acknowledge my needs, or make compromises. She would be quite happy if I just learned to suck everything up, control my anxiety and let her do what she wants. That would be optimal for her. But it ain’t gonna happen.
Whatever your insecurity is she knows and wants to eliminate.
I agree she wants to eliminate it, but only because I make it a thorn in her side and not because she desires strength from me to then give comfort to her (because of the above rationale). If I didn’t make it a thorn in her side, then I think she would be in her optimal state.
Validating you does feel good. WOA. <insert warm fuzzy> It is a healthy thing for her to learn and a respectful way for her to handle it. It does not 'purge the issue' IMO, becasue it still gives her the power over your emotional state. Witholding it changes your emotional state. They do not want that power. Thats why they 'test' and check to see if they have it.
But this is really my point, in that I do not believe “holding onto yourself” as Schnarch proposes does anything to really purge the issue either. It is just accepting that you cannot change an issue. You may still be unhappy and have resentment over it, but you make a decision to capitulate and accept your lot anyway. I do not see how this changes whether she has emotional power over me or not. She has influence in deciding whether she wants to compromise. If she decides not to, it tells me something about her frame of mind. I feel less commitment and concern from her. That bothers me. If she does compromise, I get another message, one of caring and a willingness to be a “team” player. That comforts me.
I understand you saying that how I feel is not her problem. But I think it is, just as how she feels can be my problem. If I am unhappy, the relationship is stressed. If I am happy, the relationship is smoother. That has a direct impact on her. The reverse is true too.
The only way to purge her “power” is to capitulate. But even then, I can harbor resentment because I concede to something I disagree with in order to preserve the relationship. Plus I have the added irritation that she is not “on board” as part of the “team” and concerned about team (i.e., my) morale.
So I believe the only “fair” method is to split the compromise, share the capitulation and any resentment. After what we have been through I cannot see this being worse than each of us trying to get everything our own way. So to us, the semi-capitulation could actually feel a little like bonding.
Why do you fear the fighting? Havent you noticed that after you fight there is a greater intimacy? That a compromise is the result? Can you learn to have arguments, without lossing control of your emotions, frustration anger? If you can see that it is a opportunity instead of a loss of control and power, it will change your whole perspective on fearing conflict. That happens by having the courage to have conflict and express your self.( i.e. corris recent posts)
I do notice that things improve after a long discussion, which is the main reason I press for these talks. Usually something is bubbling for a while, we grow distant, then one of us erupts. It is the time just after the fight, when I am thinking about D, whether to call the lawyer or not, what will come of the kids, etc that creates the greatest anxiety in me. I am consumed with anger, feel the butterflies in my stomach and cannot sleep well. My only conclusion is that this reaction is fear based.
The problem as I see it is that when she gets mad, all reason flies out the window and there can be no compromising. There is no team, no bond. She falls back to a hard position, so I do the same. I reading the book “Emotionally Focused Couple Therapy with Trauma Survivors”, it says on p. 48:
The survivor as an individual and the couple as partners may never have known a safe attachment bond and may, in fact, have relatively rigid attachment styles that make the creation of such a bond difficult. In these cases, the lack of any kind of attachment security and the ongoing relationship distress seem to actively perpetuate the effects of trauma, and the effects of trauma perpetuate the relationship distress and the partners’ insecure attachment styles. This becomes a self reinforcing cycle that undermines other interventions, such as the survivor’s individual therapy. The partner may also become vicariously traumatized. Both partners end up absorbing states of insecurity and negative cycles of interaction that confirm the world and others as dangerous and themselves as helpless. Inner and outer patterns perpetuate themselves. There is no exit or respite. In this situation, trauma renders the need for safe attachment urgent and, at the same time, frames attachment relationships as direct sources of danger. The attachment figures becomes at once the source of, and the solution to, alarm. Both partners are caught in a paradox.
The anxiety described here is lessening in our marriage. We are getting better at arguing, so there is a little light at the end of the tunnel. Plus I think she is slowly coming to understand my position a little better and not pushing to always “win.”
I do not worry about fighting per se, especially fights with others. In that way I even enjoy some conflicts too, just not with family. The fear I talk about is because I cannot identify any other reason for my emotional reactions. It must be fear.
I dont disagree that you should require validation. I do think you should stop trying to 'fix her' and expect her to see, act and respond to situations like you do. If she breaches a boundary of yours, it is going to cause a feeling. You should do something about it. If she leaves you, (or when she threatens) it will (can) cause an emotional loss. Thats not her problem to fix, anymore then your grief is the responsibility of a loved one who dies, nor necessarily a breach of your boundary. It just hurts, and means your human.
I want to add --- how you deal with that hurt, and demonstrate control over your emotional state, and specifically her control over it will either kill her attraction or allow it to resume.
I understand where you are coming from and the idea of putting forth an attractive, non-supplicating image to her. That is an objective of mine, but at this time, It think it may still be too early in recovery to makes this a top priority. I think it extremely important she understand MY POV, my needs and learn to be more empathic to me. She demands the exact same consideration of me, and even seems to “grade” how well I do from week to week, so this is a good chance for me to pull the same consideration out of her.
I thought you liked Schnarch. I know I do.
I do like Schnarch and still completely believe in his methods. But as I’ve mentioned, I see some gaps in his approach. The example of the interracial couple on Dateline is just such a case.
Regarding the interracial couple on Dateline: Many men have defensive attributes that make them appear masculine. Thru the intimacy of a LTR a woman will eventually see the difference between a insecure defense, and true mature masculinity. In their case (pretty common) once this happened, he was unwilling to step up and grow, had no ability to implement boundaries to protect himself (due to his need for a mother/comforter)from her haranguing and she had no ability to have trust and desire for him (her biological need to have a man- a strong protector) There is no right, or benefit in expecting something from her that he couldnt accomplish.
Personally I think this is a little harsh. I am not so sure his problem was the inability to implement boundaries or protect himself, but an inability to fully recognize and address his inner fears. He was living a false life. He gave me the impression of being an outgoing, personable people pleaser, but that was a means to gain acceptance from others. He needed the form of attachment o make him whole. Inside he was apparently very weak and once his wife pull back on her support and told him to stand on his own, he collapsed.
This is precisely where Schnarch fails. His inability is not something he could address by simply holding on to himself. I believe he wanted to do everything he could to save his marriage. Schnarch’s methods were asking him to grow into something that he simply did not have the building blocks to do.
I saw this as no different than asking as traumatized child (say suffering from PTSD from warfare) to get his/her act together and become a confident person. It can’t happen. There is too much shock, fear and no security at all. As Johnson calls it in her book, the “dragon” is too overwhelming and the trauma victim needs as much help and support to create the building blocks (the security to overcome the fear) to then grow into an alpha male type. Do you see my point?
For example NOP was able to turn his sitch around, exactly because he is a alpha male prime. All strengths are also weaknesses. In men like that its usually selfishness that over time becomes a LB. Lots of situations (usually not important in the mans opinion) putting themselves first over the woman, creating resentment. In most cases, when she becomes LD out of resentment, they just move on.
Yes, NOP was able to present the alpha image which lent security to MrsNOP. But once she learned of his hurt from reading the board, she realized his insecurity and offered him the soothing he was really asking for. Essentially what she did was to address his attachment issues. NOP put her into the crucible in order to make her confront her choices, but she responded. If she had not responded as he wanted, if she had not addressed his insecurities, but only worked on herself, stayed detached sexually, would they still be married today? She heard his SOS and responded to recreate the emotional bond he was needing.
Chrome is a interesting exception. He has very little insecure defensiveness. His masculinity is mostly mature. He goes and gets what he needs. But somewhere/how he learned or was forced to use supplicating and found that hiding his desires was necessary and an effective survival strategy. He does well eliminating it, right up untill he thinks he will be 'punished' somehow.
Yes, Chrome has HAD to learn to get what he wants. No one else would do it for him as a child. His intelligence, logic and self discipline served him well in staying focused on what he needed to do to move out of his childhood misery. But it is his attachment fears that come back to haunt him, that cause him to pursue in a semi-panic mode. And as relationship dynamics seem to always do, he ended up with a wife you gets overwhelmed and runs, perpetuating the cycle.
If he needs a mother he should go home and live with her. Or more realistically- live on his own and learn to take care of himself. If he cant take care of himself, how can he take care of his wife/SO? Of course a equal amount of that is her perception abilities and focus.
Again, I understand what you are saying here, but I am now coming around to the understanding that we men all want a mother figure to take care of us. We look to our wives to fill the role in one form or another, just as they look to us to be the alpha male. Why is that model so attractive to women? Because it is the ideal model of safety that girls want from a father. So what is wrong with men admitting to the same need for security from their partner? As adult men, this translates into the couple’s emotional bond not literally being mothered.
I dont see it as a flaw. I see it as dealing with 'what Ii'. Schnarch is a well respected pro. Even if my synopsis is incorrect, he obviuosly saw something we dont.
I know Schnarch is a pro, but so is Bradshaw, Gray, Gottman, Hendrix and all the others. They are not wrong, but the field continually evolves and even Schnarch’s views will be built upon to the point they may be outdated one day. I fully expect this to happen so I don’t take his approach as the only available gospel.
Sounds like a great woman. She is probably with a great man. Its sounds differentiated. Any Idea why Schnarch didnt focus on the wife working on being differentiated?
I think Schnarch did focus on the wife. She realized she was promoting his dependency and cut it off cold turkey. That is where I think the mistake was made, and it obviously was a mistake since they got divorced. If she had phased out of her mothering role, would their marriage have survived (assuming the H did his part of growing too).
What if her needs preclude her from being able to give it?
I think she had trouble in giving the type of healthy, less enmeshed support he needed while still being emotionally vulnerable to him. BUT, if she could acknowledge this weakness and whatever needs she had, as he would have to do, they MIGHT be able to see themselves as a team trying to slay their dragons together. Schnarch’s methods seem to require each partner slaying his/her dragons individually, which is what his version of holding onto yourself sounds like to me. I see no reason this can’t be done as a team.
He wasnt willing to do it with her. He hadnt changed in all the time they were together previously, when she was supportive. He didnt change when she was mad. So why would she think he is going to change?
I don’t think this is totally accurate because earlier he was not consciously aware of the dynamics, nor was she. Their roles need to be revealed and all the layers peeled back and identified so that they can know what it is they need to work on. Even after the follow-up visit to the couple, I am not sure they were fully aware of why they were reacting as they were and pulling back behind defensive walls. So how could they possibly fix anything? As we all are learning here, everything seems to boil down to education.
So he gets to do it on his own. or not. Most men dont change. You can either change or wait till life forces you too. Most people like to wait and continue to get what they always got.
Yes, but ideally I think a complete approach should include this probability and address remedies to plug the gaps and prevent divorce. Schnarch seems to know these problems exist, but I do not recall any discussion of how to address them. His answer seems to be that people need to grow and they can do so in the marriage or out.
If you want to work on 'should be's' do me a favor and get Bush to stop his obsequious behaviour, whilst dismantling the Constitution. Its incongruent. Im starting to get cranky about it, and ready to go gather my 'indian' bretheren and have a tea party. If he is going to keep it up, at least have the balls to wear a blue helmet while he is doing it.
Uggghhhh! Don’t get me going on Bush. Folks here in Texas thought he was God’s gift for some reason and the only thing I could see that he did when governor was suck up the lieutenant governor (who holds the real power) and get a concealed handgun law passed. From the sound of the latest polls, you may have a lot more people joining in on your tea party.
