HELL: DAY 3; Sticks and STONES

[BlockHead]

Samson

she went to “DEAFCON 1:” a highly emotional barrage of defensive language began to emerge from her underground silos. Before my own very effective and extremely damaging arsenal could be launched, a mental coup removed the optimist from power. With the optimist’s head in a basket, I withdrew, refusing to participate in the activity that seemed designed to cause marital Armageddon.

Plan ahead. Infiltrate her base using a spy, and have that spy diffuse the bombs. Disarm her if possible.

Hell: Day 1

http://www.loveshack.org/forums/t31164/?highlight=Hell

Samson

To read almost two dozen pages of marriage despite having had our last child 16 months ago. Since I had heard these many grievances before (usually after she'd discussed with close family or friends) I wasn't shocked to hear them again, yet another time, and most for the third or fourth time.

Sounds like she is sowing the seeds of dissent.

 

Samson

I get the impression that your wife is very manipulative after reading HELL: Day 1-3. She seems very unreasonable, and I know direct confrontation is useless because you lose ground from the fallout.

 

In my opinion, manipulators are among the most difficult people to crack. What methods can be used to diffuse and disarm people like that?

I don’t know enough about your wife to suggest a strategy.

 

What methods should not be used? Why?

- Do not reason with an unreasonable person! Logic and emotion are mutually exclusive. Combating an emotional response with reason is like throwing water on a grease fire. Reason will work on people who understand and respect it.

[Benedict]

Hey Samson, I feel your pain. Really.

 

I did 18 months of weekly sessions. Know what? It really helped a lot. No sh*t. Someone, somewhere in one of these threads in LS said something about counseling being effective not so much at solving specific problems, but at making us learn to recognize our patterns and then to change them. I thought this was very perceptive. In retrospect, I would say that this is a very good description of what we did.

 

We went through a lot. Complacency, money troubles, apathy, resentment right on through to adultery (hers, not mine). The initial sessions were pretty rough. Be forewarned though: there were days when we had actually, really started to do better, and something completely unexpected would trigger a real hell-fire session . It happened; it sucked. My philosophy - which you seem to have some of as well - was that even if today sucks, tomorrow will probably be better. Way more often than not, I was right.

 

While I had certainly done my share of putting my marriage in the shape it was in, I honestly felt that more of it was her. I was the one who tried hardest, held strongest to keep it together - both my wife and the counselor (a PHD, by the way) offered this opinion, unsolicited. So, I actually had the satisfaction of being there when my wife was gently, diplomatically, effectively told that in many cases, she was wrong, she was selling me short, and should pay attention to what I was doing to save this for us. I heard my share, too - and I owned up.

 

We have been out of counseling for a year now, and I am glad we went. Maybe I am a rarity; I do not know. We learned a lot. It's pretty cool when we get involved in a hot topic, then we see - usually at the same time - how it is spinning out of control. Then one or both of us manage to get the train back on the track. Know what? We usually resolve things quite nicely nowadays. Even laugh about it too.

 

I, too, like your posts, Samson. It obviously does you some good to post. It does others goos to read it. That not feeling like the "only f*ck-up in the whole world" bond we can share is pretty powerful.

 

And... I sure wish I could write like you do.

[Thinkalot]

In reference to meanon's post, no I hadn't read that thread by Samson... I'm glad though, Samson, that you are trying new things. I hope these threads give you plenty of support and food for thought as you soldier on.

[Kriz]

*Imaginary tv-show*

 

Quizmaster:

 

OK, we're ready for the next multiple-choice question! Who would you rather spend the night with? A: your wife, B:....

 

Contestant:

 

B!

[Samson]

Yes Kriz^, escapism, even if it is only in your imagination, is a great way to deal with the terror. Keep up the good work.

[moimeme]

then I've mistaken. Based on much of your posting I thought you believed humans should control their natural emotionally driven erges, and that morality, seated at the helm of cognition, should be our guide against the evils of .......adultery, for example.

 

There is a difference, Samson, between being able to summon up sufficient rationality to analyze a situation and intercede to prevent a rapid-fire emotional response in the moment in the heat of a discussion and having time, during the planning stages of an affair, to think about what one is planning to do and consider it rationally. That should be fairly obvious even to someone intent on ridiculing my position.

 

Thirdly if every time either of us fail to get the confirmation we need, why would we continue to do it a second, third, fourth,...nth time especially if the result is to "retreat to pain and respond from the anger of self-protection." This would seem less than positive reinforcement for the behavior, wouldn't it?

 

Oh, that's not even the beginning of a useful point. Why would people continue to get drunk if they puke when they get drunk? Why would they go to sports games where their teams lose? Why would they gamble when they continue to lose? Even someone who thinks humans are rational all of the time would have to admit that people do not only do things for 'positive reinforcement'. We are, after all, a little more complex than rats.

 

Finally, the best for last, you speculate that I "interpret her actions within the context of what need to know (if she loved me she'd get a job and relieve me of this burden)?" I am male, and not within the 15% of the male population that would be most likely to ask this question that would be more commonly considered among 85% of females.

 

Right. Macho man. How could I mistake you for someone with a heart?

 

My fear is freezing in the dark under a bridge 25 years from now because my wife refused to work and allow us to save present dollars for inflated future costs.

 

Got news for you. People who live in seething states of near-anger tend to die young of heart disease anyway. So I'd not worry a whole heck of a lot about it.

 

AND: I'll be damned if I don't begin to sound some alarms around here letting her know about these realities so that her feeling won't be hurt!

 

As Dr. Phil would say "How's that working for you?" What was that about the rational person not repeating non-productive actions?

[Arabess]

I don't Moimeme....I'm thinking Samson should keep a journal of his counseling adventures' and do a Dr Phil rebuttal book....called 'Counseling SUCKS Phil'.......LMAO!

[Kriz]

I must admit I've sort of thought of the situation where Samsons wife finds out about LS and reads the HELL-series. I can't help but chuckle a little. I'm sorry Sam, but I'm just the kind of guy that runs after a fire truck to see where the fire is.

 

Keep venting it here. Do hope it works out.

[Samson]

Kriz^, very perceptive post.

 

One of the advantages of being a ghost is that you cannot be injured or killed. So she reads these posts.....what can she do? I haven't embellished reality, regardless of whatever anyone might "presume."

 

In fact, it is quite a realistic probability. She did read my first LS post.

[Thinkalot]

How do you think she would react if she reads them? Do you secretly hope she will? Just wondering.

[Samson]

Well Moimeme, you are the martyr, intent on posting regardless of my “intent on ridiculing [your] position.” If disagreeing with illogical arguments is ridicule, then I am indeed guilty as charged. But once again, I’ll clearly state, that your posts are most thought provoking and appreciated, regardless of the mental gymnastics that must be completed before following whatever point you have intended to make.

 

By the way, to all those who have had positive and supportive comments, please do not interpret the absence of reply as an unappreciative response. I value your posts as much as Moimeme. But I empathize with her feelings of being “ridiculed.” I feel her pain regardless of being “mistaken for someone with a heart,” and must address her posts before my “seething state of near-anger” kills me!!!! (I’d actually appreciate the irony of someone finding my cold body hunched over the keyboard with this sentence on the screen)

 

Now, back to it. Like I suspected, and you have confirmed, you are despite any denial, a moral relativist. You have made this very clear:

 

“There is a difference, Samson, between being able to summon up sufficient rationality to analyze a situation and intercede to prevent a rapid-fire emotional response in the moment in the heat of a discussion and having time, during the planning stages of an affair”

 

 

The recognition that different circumstances require different responses is the definition of moral relativism. Given your moral relativistic logic, then anyone acting spontaneously (or, perhaps more conveniently, emotionally) would then be perfectly justified in proceeding with an affair. And how do we know that emotion must exist only “in the moment.” Passion cannot be more than momentary, and therefore cannot exist “during the planning stages of an affair?” This seems to go against the grain of every norm that defines an affair.

 

“We are, after all, a little more complex than rats.” Well, how can anyone disagree? Although I have met some that might not live up to this expectation. My point was not to compare our behavior to rats. My point was that there are ulterior motives: we’re seeking reward through our actions and the very definition of irrational behavior is activity that harms us. All your examples, excessive drinking, gambling, etc., etc., are excellent examples of aberrant behavior and justly so. I’m simply adding to the list: Seeking, multiple times, to receive “confirmation,” failing multiple times, and living with with the painful result.

 

“As Dr. Phil would say "How's that working for you?" At this early stage, I guess I’d just have to tell Dr. Phil that I was not “counting my chickens before they hatched.” I’d suppose he’d understand that I don’t expect any real change in our ability to communicate to happen after less than one month of counseling.

[Samson]

Thinkaolt,

 

If it is a secret, then I'm not telling anyone, including myself, but, frankly, I'd be surprised if she bothered: there's not any new ground to cover for her here.

[moimeme]

Now, back to it. Like I suspected, and you have confirmed, you are despite any denial, a moral relativist. You have made this very clear:

 

“There is a difference, Samson, between being able to summon up sufficient rationality to analyze a situation and intercede to prevent a rapid-fire emotional response in the moment in the heat of a discussion and having time, during the planning stages of an affair”

 

The recognition that different circumstances require different responses is the definition of moral relativism

 

Ah, well, no, really. That would only be true were we discussing morality, and even so, to be logical, you'd need to change the premise quite a bit. We aren't discussing morality. At least I'm not. I was referring to the immediate reaction your spouse had to a statement of yours. I'm saying that a rapid reaction to a situation can bypass 'think' and go straight to 'emote'. We are built that way; it's our lifesaver when we need to duck without pondering the niceties of how and what posture to adopt while ducking. It's quite a different thing to have an affair (and really I should not have used that example since we're headed back into THAT debate yet again). I am saying an affair. Not a drunken-grope-turning-into-sex. An affair that requires thought.

 

The instantaneous response of an individual to moment of real or perceived physical or emotional pain is definitely a different situation to the planning, wondering, and pondering people go through prior to undertaking most other actions.

 

I feel her pain

 

Really, I'm perfectly well. Dealing with crochety curmudgeons amuses me greatly.

 

I don’t expect any real change in our ability to communicate to happen after less than one month of counseling.

 

Somebody's got to drop the wall. Mind you, it's a pretty scary prospect. But here's a little trick, Samson. Scratch anger, and almost always underneath there's pain. Find and purge or heal the pain and all of a sudden the anger will vanish. Yeah, yeah, I know. Pain is for wussies and you're a MAYUN.

[Samson]

I know. Pain is for wussies and you're a MAYUN.

 

Sexist pig.

[moimeme]

Pigheaded old grump

[Thinkalot]

Now kids...behave

[whocares]

Originally posted by Samson

So she reads these posts.....what can she do? I haven't embellished reality, regardless of whatever anyone might "presume."

Actually, what you've given us is YOUR "reality." Hers may be something totally different.

[Thinkalot]

Now reading HER reality would be interesting...a kind of He said, She said type of thing.

[moimeme]

One of the 'ladies' mags' alwyas had (may still have) a feature called 'Can This Marriage Be Saved'. It was fascinating to read the interviews with both partners.

[Thinkalot]

I've been to couples counselling with my Bunnyboy, who also occassionally hops around LS, and it's amazing the things you think you know, only to find out, you had it wrong. It taught us to always check what the other person is "really" trying to say, rather than assuming. Still hard to do, but we try!

 

Hope you get to that point too Samson, and that it can help you and your wife.

[Samson]

Like I said, I wouldn't assume that she couldn't read these posts. IF SHE IS READING THEM THEN:

 

WHY DON"T YOU STEP UP TO BAT AND POST YOUR SIDE????

 

Ok, there... we'll see what happens... could be really interesting

[meanon]

What, your life isn't complicated enough already??

[Kriz]

I think Samson's wifes perspective is completely irrelevant in this context. Yes, we are only hearing his side, but it is he who comes here for...well...venting? Our concern should not be her complaints, but Samson's perspective on her complaints. If he wants insight on his wife's point of view, he will ask her in person or in therapy.

[meanon]

Yes - I was just imagining the already fraught atmosphere of therapy with discussion not only of who said what when but also under what pseudonym

[jester]

I think Samson's wifes perspective is completely irrelevant in this context. Yes, we are only hearing his side, but it is he who comes here for...well...venting? Our concern should not be her complaints, but Samson's perspective on her complaints. If he wants insight on his wife's point of view, he will ask her in person or in therapy.

 

 

 

I agree with Kriz. Samson, are you sure you want to bring your wife into this disputatious world? "He said, she said" posting could actually interfere with your marriage counseling. Also, to the extent you and your spouse compete for sympathetic posts, that unhealthy competition could further damage domestic relations as you play "who's hot, who's not," on LoveShack.

 

Don't introduce your wife to our world, Samson. Let it be. Sometimes too much communication can be a bad thing.

 

Just continue playing the role of the mordant scribe and alienated husband.