This is an interesting thread. I was watching a Friends-like sit-com with my daughter a while back in which the characters were talking about relationships and finding "the One". One of the characters said "The One is the person who you think is a little too good for you but they like you too.". I think part of the reason people generally try to have "even-steven" relationships is that if you feel as though your partner has nothing obvious to gain or lose by being paired with you in a relationship then you are free to believe that they love you for the special mysterious, not-so-obvious thing that makes you you.
I think Corri made some good points about competition. From my POV, I think you can know that you're out of competition mode when you can drop your anger or feelings of martyrdom. However, unfortunately, I don't know if this has much to do with the further success of any relationship. There are people who have been divorced for 20 years who still carry feelings of anger or martyrdom towards their ex-spouse and there actually are people who are able to drop the competition and bad feelings but end up amicably divorcing because they recognize that their needs/wants aren't being met in a relationship but they no longer blame their spouse for not being capable or willing to meet those needs. I don't think you can get closer to having a happy marriage without simultaneously getting closer to having an amicable divorce. By doing all the same things that you might do in order to prepare yourself for an amicable divorce, you will necessarily improve your marriage. If you consider an amicable divorce (or the emotional/practical equivalent for those unable to divorce for religious reasons)to be the opposite of a happy marriage then you will necessarily become more fused and conflicted. That is why I think those of us who have gotten to the point of being willing to divorce have seen more success. Not because our partner is "scared straight" and responding to the threat but because in order to get to the point where we are willing/able to suggest divorce as an option, we have had to improve our own functioning to the extent that it doesn't seem like such a scary option. The reverse is also true. I'll use poor Hairdog as an example. What if he were to say to MsHD the next time she makes it clear that no sex is forthcoming any time in the future "Okay, but I guess I might move forward with my plan to live in a trailer with a college girl.". If he was really okay with this alternate plan for his life then there would be little reason to be angry with MsHD for turning him down or feel martyred if he continues in the marriage. Also, the extent to which he might feel guilty in following through with this plan would depend on his ability to understand that any anger MsHd was expressing was simply a reflection of whatever low functioning she might have that would limit her options for continued happiness beyond their marriage. Thus, the person who wants to have a happy marriage should improve their own functioning to the extent that they can envision themselves as an amicable participant in a divorce and do what they can to help their partner improve their functioning to the extent that they would be better able to function post-marriage also, thereby mitigating their anger. However, both things that you might do to prepare for an amicable divorce will also lead to a happier marriage so the less necessary divorce might be at all. I think what it all boils down to is you have to get over the feeling that you need to be angry at someone in order to leave them and once you get over this feeling you might find it easier to stay.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
H was one-up when we met and he was able to keep that balance for a very long time because of...guess? GUILT. I was guilty of a sordid past. Guilty of betraying a person I'd never even met yet, will all of my indiscretions. An older more mature girl would have looked at my H and said "Get a clue dude, this had nothing to freakin do with you. I was going through a troubled time, butcha know what? I'm better now, so fahgeta bout it". But I didn't say that. In fact, the drama was endless. And it wasn't until I got to the point where I truly would not take anymore of his controlling BS (about 3 yrs into the R) that the balance started to shift. And H couldn't fight the shift in balance because he was too busy tending to his alcoholic callings and probably felt one-down as a result of that anyway, so might as well let the pendulum swing. Fast forward to now. H has the one-up again. Why? Guess....GUILT. I feel guilty about what I did to myself, what I did to my family, what I did to H. Guilt has been eating me up. But much to H's dismay, he hasn't seen the pendulum swing entirely back in his direction-being one-up doesn't feel like it did back when I was a young girl. This time, despite my mistake, I'm still strong, I still make good money, I'm still a good Mom, I still take care of myself, my family and friends still love me. And so he keeps me in the one-down as best he can because he knows if he lets go of these last few things, I'll be in the one-up again. So, he keeps me down by insisting that I haven't done enough, haven't tried enough, blah blah blah. So, if history repeats itself, what have I got to do folks? It's like DUH! Just be done with the guilt. That means sleeping in my own bed. That means not accompanying him on his trips down guilty lane. I'm not playing anymore. You cannot use guilt against someone who doesn't feel guilty-I just heard that the other day at my son's football practice. The girls were talking, all the H's were absent and they were talking about their infidel spouses. One of them said, 'you can use the guilt to your advantage for a really long time'. The other said 'well, they have to feel guilty in order for that to work'. So, can I make a distinction at this point between guilt and regret? Because I can't forget about the A altogether and H certainly never will. So, I don't feel guilty anymore. Guilt serves no purpose anymore. Regret OTOH will always have a place in my heart.
Mojo, you had some really good points in your post
I think part of the reason people generally try to have "even-steven" relationships is that if you feel as though your partner has nothing obvious to gain or lose by being paired with you in a relationship then you are free to believe that they love you for the special mysterious, not-so-obvious thing that makes you you.
It is much easier to believe someone loves you for you when there aren't obvious advantages to being with you. Such is life for Hollywood people and why very wealthy people may choose to withhold that info until well into a R.
That is why I think those of us who have gotten to the point of being willing to divorce have seen more success. Not because our partner is "scared straight" and responding to the threat but because in order to get to the point where we are willing/able to suggest divorce as an option, we have had to improve our own functioning to the extent that it doesn't seem like such a scary option.
Perfectly said.
"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 think anyone in a sex-starved marriage who is considering having an affair should consider doing the opposite and encourage their spouse to have an affair. I don't mean suggesting having an open marriage. I mean actually recognizing the fact that whether LD or HD your spouse is in some way just as frustrated with your sexual relationship as you and doing them the favor of giving them the option of looking elsewhere for fulfillment. Consider how unfused that would be. I'm not suggesting the reality as an option that would be successful just that inhabiting the mental/emotional state that you would have to achieve in order to make such a suggestion might be helpful.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
I think we are passing by each other but see the same things. I agree that hope comes from within, just a self confidence comes from within, and being alpha. No one else can do that for you, it is a purely individual and self centered state of being. But it is an emotional condition, a way of thinking and FEELING. Some of this is innate, genetic. How we react due to those factors cannot be changed. But the rest is environmental, learned, and conditioned. This part can be reprogrammed.
When fear is too high, it can block the feelings of confidence and hope. It can prevent the reprogramming from taking place. Fear is the most powerful feeling we have and it overrides everything else. That is why it must be controlled FIRST before the good stuff can emerge. How to control that fear is the issue. I say do whatever works. If that means getting support from your spouse, then do it. If you need to climb to the top of the Himalayas to find enlightenment, then do it.
I see nothing wrong in looking to your spouse for support, and having hope that s/he will provide that. This is exactly what perfectly healthy couples do with interdependency. Expecting that support and consciously and overtly manipulating the other to get it is not what I am proposing, though I can see situations when even that might be a necessary last gasp strategy. At those times,
Mojo,
I agree with what you are saying. Acting “as if” you were going through with D can bring about the needed changes in both people. Confronting that prospect brought about changes in my marriage. But with your Hairdog example, moving into a trailer has the added consideration of the effect on the kids. I know he is concerned about that, as we all are in our relationships.
This guilt issue seems to be a big problem for some, at least more than what I have personally experienced. I might regret having done something in the past, but I do not feel guilty for it because I realize that I did not know then what I know now. My actions then were simply out of ignorance. No one can be faulted for that.
So why the guilt? If you really did know then what you know now, then I can understand. You consciously chose a decision against your ethics and beliefs. But what if that is not the case? How much of guilt is based in playing the victim or even the martyr? In this case could the guilt really be an internalized call for sympathy and compassion? Is the person subconsciously wanting to the rescued? Does holding onto the guilt allow you to hold on to the anger, anger at yourself, and avoid the scary intimacy that might arise from the emotional reconciliation with your spouse?
Does holding onto guilt also give you a one-up position because you have learned the error of your ways, you are willing to acknowledge and accept your punishment (what ever that may be) and you are now a better person for doing so? Is it a sort of Jesus complex, that through suffering you are now the more noble and moral, one-up person?
Quote: When fear is too high, it can block the feelings of confidence and hope. It can prevent the reprogramming from taking place. Fear is the most powerful feeling we have and it overrides everything else. That is why it must be controlled FIRST before the good stuff can emerge. How to control that fear is the issue. I say do whatever works. If that means getting support from your spouse, then do it. If you need to climb to the top of the Himalayas to find enlightenment, then do it.
Ah yes, the plot thickens. Fear is directly linked to power struggles. All kinds of fears, real or imagined. However, and I believe this... it only takes one person in the R to begin to lose fears for change to take place. You, yourself, are proof of that.
You are still struggling with some of them, and you will tackle them one at a time, as you are ready. Some of the personal fears you've thus far faced have removed the potency from your W's power plays, i.e., her divorce threats. So in a round about way, you are actually proving my point.
Quote: I see nothing wrong in looking to your spouse for support, and having hope that s/he will provide that. This is exactly what perfectly healthy couples do with interdependency.
But you are not part of a perfectly healthy R, and to expect behaviors of a healthy R in a dysfunctional R, I think, can bring a lot of pressure to an already struggling relationship. That doeesn't mean those behaviors cannot be the goal, but to expect them to appear before the fears and power struggles are resolved, IMHO, are putting the cart before the horse. But I also think we agree on that point.
But back to what got this whole convo started to begin with was Fran talking about "The Passion Trap." The One-Up vs. the One-Down. That dynamic typically happens through power struggles... and power struggles are often based purely on real or imagined fear.
Fear between people is often bred through the dismantling of trust. Trust is often broken through poor communication and lack of honesty. That typically comes about because we do not feel we can be, nor may not know how to be, our authentic selves. I mean really, how many of us have actually figured that out?
I know you think it is easy for me to say these things because I am now out of a tension filled R. But I can tell you, the introspection that came on the heels of that break-up far out weighs the self-realizations I had prior.
In long-term Rs, the line between where I stop and another begins often times gets blurry.... if for no other reason than simple longevity and habit. The sense of self, and Who Am I, can get lost, because you always view yourself in the context of the R.
When I got out of my M... I have to tell you... I had a major identity crisis, and that really shocked me. I realized I had never had a solid sense of self to begin with... and through 16 years of marriage, it just got blurred even further. That, to me, is the greatest mistake I made in my M. I don't fault myself for it. As you say, how can you blame yourself for not knowing something? But in not having a solid sense of self, I could never ever figure out what I feared, what I struggled against or with or why... for I had not idea who "I" was...
I could be wrong, but I think what The Passion Trap did for Fran was bring into focus for her the blurred line between her and her H. Where one stops and another begins, and HOW that happens to begin with.
This, to me, is the first step towards awareness. I cannot contemplate myself within the context of an R if I don't know who I am in absence of that context. And once you become AWARE of it... it changes everything. Everything.
It has already started happening with you. You had the courage to own Who You Are and What You Want, and you are not apologizing for it. I'm not so sure your W has come to the same realizations yet... and as you well know... it is a DAM HARD place to get to.
But now that you know this... you don't have to fight about it. You don't need anyone's approval for it (especially your wife's)... you just be it. Consistently. As you become more solid and confident in Who You Are, the arguments begin to fade... because your boundaries become more clear. That doesn't mean you are going to get a happy marriage, it doesn't mean that divorce won't eventually happen... doesn't mean it will. It just means you now have the very best shot you've ever had at making it work... for you are becoming authentic. Gradually, your need to have your wife BE a certain way will fade... you'll give it up and stay out of her sh!t because you have a life to live. And she will have choices to make. The more authentic you become, the more consistent you stay with that... the less you will feel a need to engage in her pettiness... and when she has no one to engage, no one to struggle against... she will be left staring at herself. Things WILL begin to happen. What they are, I don't know. But change WILL happen. You are already seeing it.
Does that make any sense? Sounds sort of idealistic, simplistic, I know...
But you are not part of a perfectly healthy R, and to expect behaviors of a healthy R in a dysfunctional R, I think, can bring a lot of pressure to an already struggling relationship.
This is actually my point. Ideally I think the Schnarchian concept of being fully differentiated an not depending on your spouse is the way to go. But on this board we are dealing with damaged souls. I don’t really know of anyone here who is healthy and strong enough to be completely their own person in a marriage. (The very fact you are in a marriage means that you will come to depend on your spouse to one degree or another.)
So because we are all working with our own flaws, I see no reason why we should not get as must help and assistance as possible. The person we ALL want that from is our spouse, whether we have evolved to realize that consciously or not. To me a dysfunctional relationship is the PERFECT place to depend on your spouse. What needs to be learned are the boundaries an minimal levels of respect to make this work, rules of engagement if you will.
That does not mean there must be any emotional bond, at least not at first, but only a mutual agreement that it is in the interest of both people to respect these rules, otherwise fighting escalates and innocent children suffer. The rules may not be comfortable or enjoyable, they just need to be reasonable and FAIR.
The only other requirement that I see is acknowledgement and understanding of the fear issues each person has and a willingness to accept some type of soothing from the spouse. The particular form of soothing may need fine tuning, but if each person can simply admit they do not know the answers and are trying their best, then it may be possible for each person to avoid growing a chip on their shoulder.
That doeesn't mean those behaviors cannot be the goal, but to expect them to appear before the fears and power struggles are resolved, IMHO, are putting the cart before the horse. But I also think we agree on that point.
Actually, what I am proposing is to put the cart before the horse, because in too many Rs I see the horse before the cart as not working. So maybe that model is incorrect.
Fear between people is often bred through the dismantling of trust. Trust is often broken through poor communication and lack of honesty. That typically comes about because we do not feel we can be, nor may not know how to be, our authentic selves. I mean really, how many of us have actually figured that out?
I don’t agree with this. Knowing your authentic self may not be possible at all until the deep seated fears that block the view of your inner self are first removed. How is it possible for Happy giant’s wife to ever come to know herself until she can even be willing to confront her fears, much less work through them.
I am coming to believe that ALL dysfunctional couples are victims of trauma, some more severe than others. But whatever it is, the trauma was serious enough to have a strongly negative impact on that person, or they would not be on this board.
In long-term Rs, the line between where I stop and another begins often times gets blurry.... if for no other reason than simple longevity and habit. The sense of self, and Who Am I, can get lost, because you always view yourself in the context of the R.
Yes, I agree, but even more blurry if there is great fear.
When I got out of my M... I have to tell you... I had a major identity crisis, and that really shocked me. I realized I had never had a solid sense of self to begin with... and through 16 years of marriage, it just got blurred even further.
How could you or anyone else ever develop a solid sense of self if under constant attack? Your world was too caught up in survival, just as others who grow up in narcissistic families. Their number one priority is in appeasing the dragon, not finding the luxury of time for self introspection. That is no fault of yours.
This, to me, is the first step towards awareness. I cannot contemplate myself within the context of an R if I don't know who I am in absence of that context. And once you become AWARE of it... it changes everything. Everything.
Yes, I agree too. But who knows what that sense of self should be? You could find peace within yourself as a monk on top of a mountain. But you could also find peace with yourself in a mutually soothing, semi-dependent/interdependent relationship. Who says inner peace must be a solitary condition?
But now that you know this... you don't have to fight about it. You don't need anyone's approval for it (especially your wife's)... you just be it. Consistently. As you become more solid and confident in Who You Are, the arguments begin to fade... because your boundaries become more clear.
I think this swings a little too much into the idealist camp. Remember, we are all dysfunctional, and as hard as we may try, I do not believe any of us will ever by truly “functional,” whatever that is. So there will always be fights, insecurities, fears. There is no way those can ever be purged. They can be controlled.
That doesn't mean you are going to get a happy marriage, it doesn't mean that divorce won't eventually happen... doesn't mean it will. It just means you now have the very best shot you've ever had at making it work... for you are becoming authentic.
This begs the question of what is authenticity? What is the objective of that authenticity. I have decided my goal is to preserve the marriage. That might not be an ideal decision from a purely selfish point of view. I might be more authentic to myself in getting divorced, making a new start, and shacking up in a trailer with that college coed Mojo mentioned.
For me, I must be realistic, learn to understand my limitations and those of my wife, accept the fact that she will not always be fair, compassionate and considerate of me, that we will both backslide and sabotage when our anger flairs, and that at times I will have to exert power when she refuses to recognize and respect my legitimacy. I may never be able to reach my full authentic self, and neither may she. But that is a choice and a constraint. I must find a way to optimize our lives and those of my kids under our severe limitations. That is real life. That is what will surely come to pass.
Quote: That does not mean there must be any emotional bond, at least not at first, but only a mutual agreement that it is in the interest of both people to respect these rules, otherwise fighting escalates and innocent children suffer. The rules may not be comfortable or enjoyable, they just need to be reasonable and FAIR.
Reasonable and fair according to WHOM? The view that the R is NOT reasonable and fair, according to both spouses, is what is cauing the problems to begin with...
Quote: The only other requirement that I see is acknowledgement and understanding of the fear issues each person has and a willingness to accept some type of soothing from the spouse.
You're joking. In order for me to accept soothing from someone, I have to TRUST them.
Quote: The particular form of soothing may need fine tuning, but if each person can simply admit they do not know the answers and are trying their best, then it may be possible for each person to avoid growing a chip on their shoulder.
The only way I see you getting to this point is through an agreed upon 'cease fire.' That means you STOP fighting... stop engaging, get a grip... as much as possible. But I think I suggested that to you already, and you agrgued the point with me. I told you... "stop engaging." At least as much as you are able.
Quote:
Quote: That doeesn't mean those behaviors cannot be the goal, but to expect them to appear before the fears and power struggles are resolved, IMHO, are putting the cart before the horse. But I also think we agree on that point.
Actually, what I am proposing is to put the cart before the horse, because in too many Rs I see the horse before the cart as not working. So maybe that model is incorrect.
You are expecting a person to learn how to run before they know how to walk. Okay. Good luck with that.
Quote:
I don’t agree with this. Knowing your authentic self may not be possible at all until the deep seated fears that block the view of your inner self are first removed. How is it possible for Happy giant’s wife to ever come to know herself until she can even be willing to confront her fears, much less work through them.
Agreed. On a personal level. I was speaking more about the fears that develop between two people. We don't go into an R expecting it to dismantle, to fear the other, to mistrust someone... I was talking about how this happens between people in an R.
Quote: I am coming to believe that ALL dysfunctional couples are victims of trauma, some more severe than others. But whatever it is, the trauma was serious enough to have a strongly negative impact on that person, or they would not be on this board.
But remember the difference between a victim and a martyr. A victim will seek help and change as soon as they recognize the issue(s), and will typically stick with it until it is resolved. A martyr recognizes the problem and gains some sort of personal satisfaction by remaining a victim. I personally believe that many people in dysfunctional Rs... at least the ones I've seen here... have one victim and one martyr. The martyr being the one who stiffles growth for their unwillingness to change.
Quote: Yes, I agree too. But who knows what that sense of self should be? You could find peace within yourself as a monk on top of a mountain. But you could also find peace with yourself in a mutually soothing, semi-dependent/interdependent relationship. Who says inner peace must be a solitary condition?
I didn't say it had to be a solitary condition. But in any R... there is a you, a me, and a us. If I don't know who the 'ME' is... there is no US. Or it's some very undefined version of ME I'm throwing into the mix... and we all know the damage an undefined ME can do within the context of an R... for I have no boundaries, no sense of self. That was my point.
Quote: I may never be able to reach my full authentic self, and neither may she. But that is a choice and a constraint. I must find a way to optimize our lives and those of my kids under our severe limitations. That is real life. That is what will surely come to pass.
You can find and be your authentic self within the context of an R. You don't have to get a D or be on your own to find it. You don't have to give up your authentic self for the sake of family... I think if you do... you are not being honest. Being authentic, to me, does not give you license to do whatever it is you want in life, shirking your reponsibility and respect for those around. Quite the opposite, actually. Jeese, I keep thinking of the Serenity Prayer when I talk to you: Accepting the things you cannot change, changing the things that you can, and finding the wisdom to know the difference.
Reasonable and fair according to WHOM? The view that the R is NOT reasonable and fair, according to both spouses, is what is cauing the problems to begin with...
Reasonable and fair as mutually agreed (which is the big trick, right?) That things do not seem reasonable and fair is only PART of the problem in an R. The biggest problem that I can tell is that one or both people have a distorted view of reality, for whatever reason, and they are trying to wrestle that reality back to what they think it should be.
You're joking. In order for me to accept soothing from someone, I have to TRUST them.
No, I do not believe this is true. Trust comes from emotional bonding. Soothing helps create the bond. Without this, how do you propose that you build trust? My wife makes exactly this same argument. It is a deflection to maintain her walls. Just as you mentioned to HP, accepting gifts from others is much harder than giving, but only for those who avoid emotional bonding.
The only way I see you getting to this point is through an agreed upon 'cease fire.' That means you STOP fighting... stop engaging, get a grip... as much as possible. But I think I suggested that to you already, and you agrgued the point with me. I told you... "stop engaging." At least as much as you are able.
The reason I could not hear your message is that it was in terms of self differentiation, trying to be independent for one another. That is not the message that gives me comfort. My twist on this same basic action is to stop fighting for the purpose of reestablishing that missing bond. This may seem subtle, but to my ears, there is a world of difference because it addresses my anxiety issues.
You are expecting a person to learn how to run before they know how to walk. Okay. Good luck with that.
Only from the standpoint of traditional individual based therapy.
But remember the difference between a victim and a martyr. A victim will seek help and change as soon as they recognize the issue(s), and will typically stick with it until it is resolved. A martyr recognizes the problem and gains some sort of personal satisfaction by remaining a victim. I personally believe that many people in dysfunctional Rs... at least the ones I've seen here... have one victim and one martyr. The martyr being the one who stiffles growth for their unwillingness to change.
In some cases I agree with you. But in other cases I do not. My wife has a tendency to really play the martyr. This sidetracked my focus for a long time. I am now seeing it as wrong. She may have some martyr tendencies, but I think more and more now that what appears to be martyrdom is actually an avoidant strategy. It is a complicated way to set up a catch 22 situation intended to result in a stalemate. For the avoider personality, stalemates are safe. They know their partner is still there, is not leaving, but cannot get too close either. My wife does this. Bringing the martyr issue to her attention never struck a chord, but showing her how she was being untruthful to herself plus manipulating me into a catch 22 did get her attention.
I didn't say it had to be a solitary condition. But in any R... there is a you, a me, and a us. If I don't know who the 'ME' is... there is no US. Or it's some very undefined version of ME I'm throwing into the mix... and we all know the damage an undefined ME can do within the context of an R... for I have no boundaries, no sense of self. That was my point.
I fully agree.
Jeese, I keep thinking of the Serenity Prayer when I talk to you: Accepting the things you cannot change, changing the things that you can, and finding the wisdom to know the difference.
And here is where I differ. How do you know what it is that you can or cannot change until you try? Who has the full wisdom to know the difference? If I had gone with a more literal and simplistic interpretation of this prayer, we would have divorced years ago. Our first therapist threw up her hands in frustration, saying she saw no way out. The way it has turned out is that what once seemed to be something I could not change, has in fact changed. Tenacity plays a big part in this. I see many on this board willing to work long and hard to save their relationship. That tenacity is one of the most admirable features I see in everyone here. It is truly an inspiration. My only gripe is that if something is not working, try something else, adopt another philosophy, ask why things stall, why each person reacts as they do. Only people with true mental disorders act irrationally. Everyone else is rational, we just may not have the insight to understand their reasoning, so keep pushing. No, I do not subscribe to the serenity prayer. It is much too fatalistic.
Quote: No, I do not believe this is true. Trust comes from emotional bonding. Soothing helps create the bond. Without this, how do you propose that you build trust? My wife makes exactly this same argument. It is a deflection to maintain her walls. Just as you mentioned to HP, accepting gifts from others is much harder than giving, but only for those who avoid emotional bonding.
The context in which I said this statement is in regard to receiving soothing from someone I view has hurt me repeatedly. Someone I once trusted but now do not, for whatever reason. In order for me to receive soothing, I have to take a risk (my problem) that they will not hurt me again... which is unrealistic. We are all falible. This, to me, is where your sense of self comes into play, my ability to self-sooth.
Re-establishing emotional bonds is a tough one. But it can be done. It is not just in the soothing, but in acting as consistent as possible, creating a safe environment... and taking baby steps.
Quote: The reason I could not hear your message is that it was in terms of self differentiation, trying to be independent for one another.
Partly.
Quote: My twist on this same basic action is to stop fighting for the purpose of reestablishing that missing bond. This may seem subtle, but to my ears, there is a world of difference because it addresses my anxiety issues.
Then we agree.
Quote:
Quote: You are expecting a person to learn how to run before they know how to walk. Okay. Good luck with that.
Only from the standpoint of traditional individual based therapy.
You cannot expect someone to face a fear if they cannot muster the courage to do so... or at least have a willingness to try. Throwing someone into a pool who has a fear of water and does not know how to swim is not going to get them over their fear and teach them to swim. The opposite is probably true.
Quote: No, I do not subscribe to the serenity prayer. It is much too fatalistic.
I believe the serenity prayer, in saying 'accepting things you cannot change,' is referring to past behaviors. You cannot undo the past, and there is no reason whatsoever to wallow in self-pity, which keeps you from changing the present or the future (changing the things that you can). The wisdom in knowing the difference, I believe, is referring to acceptance, and not backsliding into self-pity or self-loathing for things which you cannot undo. Having the power to understand that you will trip and stumble, maybe even revert at times to old behaviors, but also having the conscious awareness to know that when you do slip, you pick yourself and try again.
cobra: No, I do not subscribe to the serenity prayer. It is much too fatalistic. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Corri: I believe the serenity prayer, in saying 'accepting things you cannot change,' is referring to past behaviors. You cannot undo the past, and there is no reason whatsoever to wallow in self-pity, which keeps you from changing the present or the future (changing the things that you can). The wisdom in knowing the difference, I believe, is referring to acceptance, and not backsliding into self-pity or self-loathing for things which you cannot undo. Having the power to understand that you will trip and stumble, maybe even revert at times to old behaviors, but also having the conscious awareness to know that when you do slip, you pick yourself and try again.
Let's not forget one of the bits of wisdom from this board, namely, that the only thing you can change directly is YOU. You cannot change someone else. Something you do may in fact shift the dynamics of the sitch such that the other person changes, but the basic law of nature is that you can only directly change yourself.
So one of the things that the serenity prayer asks you to accept is the FACT that you cannot change someone else. It does not ask you to accept someone else's unacceptable behavior, just to accept the fact that you cannot MAKE them stop doing the unacceptable behavior. This comes in handy when dealing with alcoholics.
