cobra, I wasn't suggesting that you be more diplomatic... it's just that I wanted to make sure your meaning was CLEAR. You weren't being "harsh"-- it's interesting that you took my comments that way. I just thought that by saying Rig was being "egotistical," the subtlety of your message was lost.
Also I didn't mean that Rig should totally disengage with his wife... just that he should not jump into the pit with her. Again, you took that wrong. You consistently misunderstand (not deliberately) language that has to do with differentiation. You hear me saying "walk away, don't talk to them, ignore them" and that's not it at all. You aren't ignoring the alcoholic when you leave him to dry out on the lawn overnight, although at first he and the neighbors probably see it that way. You're removing yourself from the internal struggle he is having with the alcohol, so that he can see the struggls is inside of him NOT with you.
And again, you misunderstood when you said
Quote: The danger is that the other person does not ever see the logic
This hasn't got one blessed thing to do with logic or reason. When the drunk wakes up on the lawn, it isn't logic that hits him between the eyes. It's a visceral, below-the-neck sense that the alcohol is ruining his life--- and that he's doing this all by himself.
Still, I DO love these little disagreements between us ... I hope Rig is enjoying this dialogue, too.
___________
Edited to add: cobra, I guess what I'm trying to say is that the kind of dis-engagement I'm talking about forces the other person to have a non-verbal enounter with his/her own Stuff. Instead of you (or whoever) being part of the transaction and trying to "reason" with them, which I believe will not work, you remove yourself verbally from the conversation, you refuse to jump in the pit with them, and that leaves them in the pit with their own sh!t. You leave them in a place where they have an EXPERIENCE... not more verbal back-and-forth.
... I hope Rig is enjoying this dialogue, too.
