I think that with an objective of trying to set the ideal, I would agree with you. But we are dealing with reality, not the ideal. Everyone on this board, as far as I can tell, is dysfunctional in his/her own way. Each has insecurities and fears that need soothing. For Mrs HD, I think she has a lot of those insecurities. I think she really wants to be assured. Anything less is seen as a threat in her eyes and she automatically puts it in an adversarial perspective (which I am not blaming on her, it just how she was “trained.”)
Just as I think it can be VERY useful for some really dysfunctional couples to re-enmesh in order to stop the anxiety reactions and then progress toward differentiation at a slower, more sustainable pace, I am thinking that use of “we” is really what Mrs HD wants to hear. That does not mean it is where the relationship needs to stay. I see it as more of a stepping stone.
I agree with your examples of using “we” in the office. But that is not really the same as what we are talking about with relationships. In the office there needs to be Indians and chiefs.
Corri,
Now, if you look out into the yard and see the weeds that need pulled and grass that needs mowed, you may say to your H... "Honey, the yard, to me, looks like it could use some work. If you don't have other plans this weekend, would you be willing to help me out with it?"
I agree this is the best response and the most “functional.” But coming from a dysfunctional past, that statement would sound to me like it has a certain air of confrontation to it, that my wife would be putting squarely on my lap the need to in turn assert my plans and whether I would be willing to help do yard work with her or not. I requires that I step up to maintain my boundaries, and I may not want to do that. If I choose not to help, then I am worrying whether she will get mad and sour the atmosphere which could then lead up to another fight. It is avoidance, I don't deny that, but let's be real what what we are dealing with here.
So my point is that if two people are not to the point of having worked past this type of enmeshment, the above statement can present a challenge and even a possible threat that could be avoided. I do think it is important the both people eventually learn why your statement is better, but it takes time to get there, and when a push is made to become too healthy too fast, the other person can rebel and set the whole process back a long way. So I still think use of the “we” can be appropriate.
