Is this cake eating 7

[bustorama]

Funny thought, really... every biological creature is all about influencing other biological creatures... if only just to mate...

I'm just not sure that falls into the co-dependent or controlling frame.

From an evolutionary perspective, this is probably where the drive to attach and remains attached comes from (and also so as not to be excluded from protective family, group units, etc.).

It's not healthy/adaptive once you subjugate your sense of self or your own wishes, feelings or values for the sake of attachment.

[NLW]

Hey Busto, Just a quick reply as I'm off to work,

But in thinking about your questions, i feel like I can say that i don't seem to hit the Co-D criteria very easily:
[quote=bustorama]
NLW, do any of the below seem familiar to you from pre-D-Day OR to how you have felt in your sitch during the past few months?

Co-dependency involves compliance patterns of implicitly subjugating your own value to that of someone else, usually in order to gain "acceptance" or prevent loss:

For example:

• Do you assume responsibility or feel guilty for others’ feelings and behaviors. I sense that you were taking partial responsibility for your WAS' A behavior. That is his responsibility, not yours, NLW.

No, I don't. I go straight to a holier-than-thou position and judge and blame them. And yes, i do take partial responsibility for driving my H away. I behaved badly towards him; tore him to shreds, psychologically.

• Do you worry about how others may respond to your feelings, opinions, and behavior. I sense that you are even concerned about how I will respond to you, NLW. You are worth so much more than that.

No, I usually manage to rub people up the wrong way with very little effort. I am concerned that you'll get p-ed off with me as I seem not to pay attention to what you are suggesting. I value your input very much so i am trying to ensure that you don't give up on me!

• Are you afraid of being hurt and/or rejected by others?

Well, by some people; but not in general.

• Do you have difficulty expressing feelings?

Not at all, and this is probably one of my problems.

• Are you afraid of your own anger, yet sometimes erupt in rage?

Nah, not afraid of it. Just seems normal to me to 'blow one's stack' occasionally.

• Do you have difficulty making decisions?

Not really.

• Do you minimize, alter or deny how you truly feel?

Hardly ever. I probably do the opposite.

• Are you very sensitive to how others are feeling and feel the same?

No, again, I probably lived by the mantra 'Toughen up, buttercup' in relation to telling others, particularly H, 'how it is'.

• Are you afraid to express differing opinions or feeling?

Not at all, and sometimes I wish i would remember to hit 'pause' before I open my mouth.

• Do you value others opinions and feelings more than your own?

Nope.

• Do you put other people’s needs and desires before your own?

Don't think so; again probably one of my shortcomings.

• Are you extremely loyal, remaining in harmful situations too long?

No, I probably cut and run in most situations where I feel let down in any way - that's why I find my current situation SO difficult.

• Do you not ask others to meet your own needs or desires?

I do - probably to the point of being too selfish.

• Do you not perceive yourself as lovable and worthwhile?

Mmm, these days, not so sure, but I've been pretty convinced of my own worth.

• Do you compromise your own values and integrity to avoid rejection or others’ anger?

Hardly ever, I would say.

Codependency at its core is the attempt to manage your own negative feelings (of low self-worth, fear of loss, fear of being alone, fear of rejection, of life being out of control) by implicitly or explicitly controlling those around you (e.g., to "bring them closer").

But yes, I do feel like this - although i'd say that most people on these boards might answer likewise.

The real healing comes in breaking that cycle to learn how to manage your own feelings directly, to act in your own interest DESPITE those feelings, and to recognize that you will be ok even if you are rejected, even if you experience loss and even if you are totally and 100% alone.

Yeah, I'm ok, but I don't want to be alone. I want someone to share my life with.

[~ kd ~]

As you state, co-dependency is actually behaviours and language which condition an emotional dependency in one or more people, versus one's desire to "influence" another to purchase a product, vote for a specific person, have sex with someone or marry someone.

That is the "broad stroke" that I was suggesting. I think I got caught up in the use of the word "influence" vs. a word like manipulation (which really is a form of control). Influence is as benign as standing in another's presence.

What is coming up in this thread as well as a few others, IS about influencing others, AS OPPOSED TO controlling or manipulating another. For all intents and purposes, the pretext of DB and any effort to save a M is about influencing, and in the case of DB, it is about changing one's behaviours in positive ways which MAY influence another to change their ways and possibly save a M.

This, IMHO, is why the boundaries issue comes up so often. Boundaries are not about influencing others, rather they are about protecting ourselves.

A boundary comes from fear and while benign on its own, is actually all about controlling another when triggered. At least as I often see described here.

I would say, yes, if the WAS has walked away from the R (with or without an OP), the non-co-dependent thing to do would be to accept that and for NLW (or any LBS) to begin working on herself and moving on in her own life, absent the WAS.

Definitely agree. The post that I made was convoluted and not well presented.

It's not healthy/adaptive once you subjugate your sense of self or your own wishes, feelings or values for the sake of attachment.

Definitely agree, again.

There are only a handful of animals that mate for life. No idea why that is, for them. They are all avian species.

I mention this here (and have before) because we put so much weight on whether our spouses have had an A or not.

If we go by non-co-dependent behaviour, an A, among many other things our spouses "did to us" should have no bearing on us moving on with our lives without our spouses.

Except...

We have a fear of lost or loosing love. So we grasp onto boundaries as a way to protect ourselves. As a way to control another, under the premise that it is to protect ourselves.

Very few people live a life of complete acceptance. Those people are truly blessed.

So this brings us really back to what the purpose of boundaries really are.

They are to protect ourselves from real or perceived fear of danger to our physical or emotional well being. And they are a form of attempting to control another.

I understand that boundary very well. I live it, daily. I left my W because of it. It served me when I was emotionally in pain. It does not serve me to rebuild a friendship and bond with my W, regardless of whether my M is saved, or not.

[~ kd ~]

NLW, everything an individual does, says, thinks... at any time, is layered in the individual's reasons and meanings.

We call these justifications, morals, ethics, philosophies. Our belief systems serve us.

We should be open to allowing ourselves to change our belief systems. To peel back the layers and look at them and decide if it's something we want to keep, discard, improve upon.

In the end, life is a journey of actions and results. A fly watching us through our lifetime will only see what we do and the results of that. Nothing more, nothing less.

Do what ever serves you and be responsible for those actions and results.

[bustorama]

So, it sounds like from the below that you characteristically view yourself in the past as sometimes:

1) Too impulsive and expressive with your emotions
2) Insensitive of others' feelings, especially when expressing your own feelings or agenda.
3) Assuredly elevate your own needs at the expense of others, sometimes to the point of selfishness
4) Quick to cut bait in relationships

BUT, you also mention that this sitch has you acting a bit differently than usual in that you:

1) Are hesitant to cut bait
2) Are not going holier-than-thou on or blaming your WAS for his A
3) Are somewhat less sure of your own worth
4) Are not expressing your emotions (positive or negative) to WAS
5) Are concerned about being alone (what would it mean if you are "alone" right now? or even for years? why was it ok to be alone when you "cut bait"?)

These marital crises often switch the dynamics in a relationship (the pursuer becomes the pursued, the dominant becomes the submissive, the abuser becomes the abused, etc.). Do you see that pattern here? In finding your change and the best NLW you can be, see if you can find a middle ground. And not swing the pendulum to the other side.

The sweet spot is somewhere in the middle.

[BklynMom]

I really think two years ago I would have answered the questions above exactly how you did. Now for me, I realize a lot of my toughness was really a front for how sensitive I really am. I was a huge ice block that would just tough it out or just do it and in some ways I really just hiding. I hid behind the "acceptable" position that society had and defended it to any extreme. I did not want anyone to see that I was "weak".

I am a delicate flower and its a definitely a different perspective being truer to myself.

[25yearsmlc]

NLW,

first let me say that I don't pretend to have all the answers. what worked in my sitch did NOT always work...

It was hard to know sometimes what is the WAS cake eating and what is progress.

There are some different approaches discussed here and I accept that and I like that.

But there are also a few folks who advise things that are specifically NOT DBing and I wish they'd post on a site that supports their views more

b/c they are on THIS site...to me it's like going to a Presbyterian site and spouting off about my Catholic views...like, "why go THERE to discuss Catholicism? Why not go to a Catholic site instead?"'

Sometimes they get banned but come back under a different new name. They can be strident in their approach and dismissive of those who disagree.

They hammer what they say worked for them but the truth is often murkier than they might wish to admit, but they carry on with THEIR views knowing full well it's not part of this site's belief system. I don't get that. It's damn stubborn.

ANYHOW--

DBing is NOT about being punitive or teaching our spouse a lesson or showing them the consequences of their actions...as my DB coach said:

"It's not our job to do that; Life does that for them"

She also said to "listen like a lover" when h talked about his dreams or work related issues. That was NOT EASY or consisently done by me. But it helped to have goals like "have no conflict in our next conversation"...I mean, talking about starting small...

but IF he'd duscussed an OW to me, the conversation would END...I can only do my Mother Teresa act for so long...

Although your h doesn't lie about OW b/c you said he told you they deserve each other? I find that very telling. You don't need to lower your standards to make him feel good about himself. But it's an odd remark to make if he "loves" her and is "so happy". it's the opposite of what I'd say.

...anyway...here we go.

Just some feelings/musings that are probably a result of reading Zig's thread today.

I am sitting at my kitchen table working on my computer while my H sits a few feet away from me on the lounge with our 2 kids. He's still here after bring them home from school today.

Everything is normal and civilized. He and I have been laughing and talking and interacting with the kids in a completely normal way. The dogs are cuddled on his lap and everyone seems happy and relaxed.

But I have just been overcome with a sense of the complete weirdness of the situation.

It is weird. But it's also giving him a glimpse of what forgiveness might look like and that you are contrasting his constant need to go out to dinner with OW

and a warm loving home life...

how is that a bad thing? If nothing else, you are giving your children some good memories of what family life was once like, when dad acted normal around you...


He might just as well bring OW into the room, introduce her to all of us as his new wife, and we could all get on together swimmingly.

I’ve just been replaced by a new model and we are all just getting on with things as if nothing has happened.


This is ^^ all mind reading. If things were as you described he would not step into the family home. YOU are there and he had no problem with that.

Don't get me wrong. Your ego is bruised and your pride is deeply wounded. I get that.

But let's not decide things based on wounded pride and bruised egos.


Sometimes it just hits me how completely insane this limbo really is.


I dont' know if I told anyone this so I don;t think Bustorame knows it so, here is something that might help you from my sitch.

Limbo was not going to last forever FOR ME.

I knew I had an internal timeline. So in a sense I don't find the Stockdale paradox helpful. IT sound hopeless to me...whereas

I knew that at some point I would in fact be free and my limbo would end. I would end it if it were not already over by then, by action on HIS end.

Til then, I'd do my best to hold on. Why? B/C My older d was 16 at the time and my first goal was to provide stability for the girls. They told me their biggest fear was having to move again. (We had been in the military for years before and moved A LOT).

As long as the bills were getting paid, my goal was to last it out until d graduated from high school. Then I'd downsize the home but stay in the school district for my younger d. And I'd be done...I had a plan.

So I KNEW that...I didn't tell h it, but I knew there was an end for me in sight.


Is this how it’s supposed to be if one accepts one’s new reality, ignores the OW as a mere symptom, and gets on with acting ‘as if' and being the best you that you can be?

It feels so WRONG at times. And, in this sense, I get what Starsky is saying over on Zig’s thread (I think). I want to scream at my H – How dare you carry on an A and then come in here as if everything is OK and normal!!!!


tell me What is the likelihood of PROGRESS happening if you do this?

And what would your goal be in saying that? Please don't say "setting a boundary" b/c we both know that can be an euphemism we use when we lose our temper or try to punish...check yourself carefully for your motivation.

Ask yourself if your plan of action is coming from a place of light and love, healthy self respect

or a dark place that wants to punish, "teach a lesson to" or "show him"...

I had to do that A LOT. Maybe b/c I'm a L- I rationalize really well so sometimes it took a lot of checking

for me to realize that my goal of "being FAIR" was really a way of me meting out my version of justice to my h.

I was the jury/judge and executioner... not a pretty sight.


I know that if the sitch doesn’t work for me I just have to do what Busto and Starsky suggest – ie lay down my boundaries that state I will have nothing to do with H while he’s carrying on an A right in front of us.


if he's lying to the kids about OW, then is that really "in front of"? I'm NOT defending the deceit.'---

Just wondering if it means something. I mean it'd be different to me IF he were to introduce the kids to OW but he hasn't. Doesn't his behavior seem more in line with feeling shame?

And he takes your "failure' to take his advice as an insult which reeks of insecurity. And self centeredness as if all choices are HIS or wrong...or as if it's about him.

If he says you "need a NEW car" you can agree that you "need reliable transportation" which is validating but setting a boundary b/c you share his concern with having crappy cars, but you are NOT in alignment with his financial habits...correct?


But my nagging doubt is that this doesn’t seem to be what’s advocated in DR – where ‘let him experiment with an OW’, act ‘as if’, and so on, are described as the keys to any possibility of reconciliation.


Obviously I agree with you here^^^. But that does not mean you keep going to save your m, at all costs.

There may come a time when you just can't do it any longer.

there may come a time when you think "he's NOT who I thought he was" (or ever was?? Moot point b/c all that matters is who he is NOW and who he becomes)

There may come a time when you feel so financially threatened that you make a move. I DID FILE FOR A LEGAL SEP as I mentioned to you. I did that b/c I worried about losing our home. As it was we lost WELL into six figures while H went off to make his fortune...yes, I realize, OH THE IRONY...

There may come a day when you decide that for your children's sake and your sanity, you must put an end to your limbo.

but ask yourself if that day, is today.

Maybe it’s just another instance of do the opposite of what feels right?

In terms of baby steps, at least, things do seem to be getting better.

H has stayed for more than 2 hours tonight after dropping off the kids from school. This is longer than he’s stayed here for months and months. And, indeed, it’s a huge step forward from the days, not so long ago, when he refused even to come into the house and would wait outside on the front porch. (He’s just this minute taken off his jacket so it looks like he’s staying even longer.)

I need to think about him as a learning how to walk again. I need to have patience and remember that it will take a long time to re-build his trust and overcome his hurt.

In the meantime, I need to thought-stop about OW and keep focusing on myself and my own goals for 'seducing' not H, but the world! (Thanks for that thought, Busto)

I like that closing a lot.

[25yearsmlc]

As you state, co-dependency is actually behaviours and language which condition an emotional dependency in one or more people, versus one's desire to "influence" another to purchase a product, vote for a specific person, have sex with someone or marry someone.

That is the "broad stroke" that I was suggesting. I think I got caught up in the use of the word "influence" vs. a word like manipulation (which really is a form of control). Influence is as benign as standing in another's presence.

What is coming up in this thread as well as a few others, IS about influencing others, AS OPPOSED TO controlling or manipulating another. For all intents and purposes, the pretext of DB and any effort to save a M is about influencing, and in the case of DB, it is about changing one's behaviours in positive ways which MAY influence another to change their ways and possibly save a M.

This, IMHO, is why the boundaries issue comes up so often. Boundaries are not about influencing others, rather they are about protecting ourselves.

A boundary comes from fear and while benign on its own, is actually all about controlling another when triggered. At least as I often see described here.

I would say, yes, if the WAS has walked away from the R (with or without an OP), the non-co-dependent thing to do would be to accept that and for NLW (or any LBS) to begin working on herself and moving on in her own life, absent the WAS.

Definitely agree. The post that I made was convoluted and not well presented.

It's not healthy/adaptive once you subjugate your sense of self or your own wishes, feelings or values for the sake of attachment.

Definitely agree, again.

There are only a handful of animals that mate for life. No idea why that is, for them. They are all avian species.

I mention this here (and have before) because we put so much weight on whether our spouses have had an A or not.

If we go by non-co-dependent behaviour, an A, among many other things our spouses "did to us" should have no bearing on us moving on with our lives without our spouses.

Except...

We have a fear of lost or loosing love. So we grasp onto boundaries as a way to protect ourselves. As a way to control another, under the premise that it is to protect ourselves.

Very few people live a life of complete acceptance. Those people are truly blessed.

So this brings us really back to what the purpose of boundaries really are.

They are to protect ourselves from real or perceived fear of danger to our physical or emotional well being. And they are a form of attempting to control another.

I understand that boundary very well. I live it, daily. I left my W because of it. It served me when I was emotionally in pain. It does not serve me to rebuild a friendship and bond with my W, regardless of whether my M is saved, or not.

(Except that I think dolphins mate for life, and a few other mammals,) I agree with ALL of this post.

Well said KD!

[25yearsmlc]

NLW, everything an individual does, says, thinks... at any time, is layered in the individual's reasons and meanings.

We call these justifications, morals, ethics, philosophies. Our belief systems serve us.

We should be open to allowing ourselves to change our belief systems. To peel back the layers and look at them and decide if it's something we want to keep, discard, improve upon.

If you'd told me a few years before my h went all tundra on me, that I'd put up with what I put with, I'd have said "NO EFFIN' WAY" But I don't regret it.

Turns out some of my "boundaries" were out of place. And I'm a lot more forgiving now than I was before, w/h and with others and with myself.


In the end, life is a journey of actions and results. A fly watching us through our lifetime will only see what we do and the results of that. Nothing more, nothing less.

Do what ever serves you and be responsible for those actions and results.

Excellent advice.

[NLW]

KD,
great feedback, thank you so much.

I am working hard to process all that is going on here in the recent interchanges.
I am thinking deeply about what's been said, so please don't think that I'm not drinking this all in.

I'm weighing everything up and formulating ways of moving forward. Just don't seem to have much to say in response....

What is coming up in this thread as well as a few others, IS about influencing others, AS OPPOSED TO controlling or manipulating another. For all intents and purposes, the pretext of DB and any effort to save a M is about influencing, and in the case of DB, it is about changing one's behaviours in positive ways which MAY influence another to change their ways and possibly save a M.

This, IMHO, is why the boundaries issue comes up so often. Boundaries are not about influencing others, rather they are about protecting ourselves.

This really helps.