Fair Fighting?

[AlektraClementine]

My best friend said something very interesting to me the other day. She was in the middle of reporting a fight that she and her husband were having in which he had gotten irritated with her for eating out for lunch rather than eating the left-overs she brought in the first place.

 

I was there (we work for the same company). Ate at a pizzaria with several other staff members and spent about $7.50. We never really join the crowd at lunchtime because A) they're always gone so long and B) it would cost too much to eat out every day. Anyway, she and her husband have an agreement (which he breaks all the time) wherein they don't eat out, they eat leftovers. Often times, he "forgets" to take his leftovers and "has" to eat fast food. When I asked her how he reacted when she threw back at him, all of his fast food outings, she shocked me:

 

She said, and I quote "I didn't say anything to him about his fast food. I wanted to but....the conversation wasn't about him. It was about me. I acknowledged that I made a decision that went against the agreement. He's a grown up. He knows was he does and it's not my job to tell him. In fact, that retort would only have come across as a justification of my own behavior. I don't let other peoples bad behavior justify my own." !!!!

 

 

I thought of this just a moment ago when I was reading 2 posters back and forth "you started it" kind of exchange.

 

What do you think would happen in our marriages if we employed this singular mentality?

[Els]

I think it really depends.

 

In the first place, I feel that the fact that he is getting irritated at her for something that he does more often than her, should be addressed instead of swept under the carpet. That doesn't mean she has to 'throw it in his face', but that she should acknowledge her mistake, and then discuss his habits as well. Think about this... If you really need to save electricity, and your SO gets irritated with you forgetting to turn the living room light off, but himself leaves the air conditioning on all the time... should you not mention it? Him doing that doesn't justify what you did, but it shouldn't be left aside despite that.

[ColumbiaD]

If she doesn't say anything to him about his habitual breach of their agreement because he knows what he does, shouldn't the same logic apply to him not yelling at her about it?

[AlektraClementine]

When she was confronted about the breech of agreement, she did not use his repeated breech of agreement as justification for her own. That's the point.

 

What she's saying is that she's responsible for her own actions.

[Els]

I agree with the 'not using it for justification' part.

 

I don't agree with the 'not mentioning it at all' part. Some people are so concerned with looking out for things that other people are doing, be it good or bad, that they neglect to look at their own until they are nudged to that reality. Her case sounds like a prime example. In such a case, a gentle reminder of one's partner's breach, after having acknowledged one's own fault, would not be amiss.

[AlektraClementine]

When I asked her further about it, she said that she just lacks the overwhelming desire to control him. She said that he knows he is not supposed to eat out as much as he does. What's to gain from reminding him? She certainly didn't seem to feel like he was getting away with something.

 

I think some people who do all the "nudging" may have an issue with never wanting anyone to get one over on them. Therefore, they let nothing go unnoticed.

[Els]

I agree also, but there is a huge spectrum between 'doing all the nudging' and 'not doing any at all'.

 

The issue here isn't only that he is breaching their agreement, it is that he is nitpicking on her eating out once when he does it more often. There are two fair ways to address this: One, they both accept that 'the other person should know better and not to 'nudge' unnecessarily, or two, that they can both remind each other in a friendly and gentle way when one breaches the rule. There is no 'fair fighting'about her partner getting irritated at her (which is an unproductive way to treat a singular breach of rules to begin with!) for eating out once while he himself is free to eat out all he likes (which he evidently seems to be doing).

 

I am sure this bothers her to some degree, and that kind of thing should not go unmentioned if she feels it. Otherwise, where do you draw the line? Should one remain mute about everything one's SO does that bothers you, just because 'he should know what to do and it's pointless to remind him'?

 

Again, I agree that one should never use the 'Well you did this! Why can't I do this?!' and 'No, YOU started it first!' approach to arguing. I'm just stressing that that shouldn't mean one can never bring up one's partner's faults either, as she seems to be doing.

Edited December 6, 2010 by Elswyth

[Lauriebell82]

I agree with the theory about throwing things back in the other's face during arguments is not fighting fair. However it sounds like her husband is a bit of a hypocrit for giving her a hard time about something he does himself. There is a difference between fighting fair and letting someone walk all over you.

 

She needs to talk to him about this while they are NOT in the middle of a fight, just a set aside time for her to communicate her frustration in a healthy manner. He had his chance to "talk about her," she deserves her chance to "talk about him."

[pablopedro]

I think there are far more problems than a simple pizza.

If it is about saving money, then I can see a conversation, but an argument? That's absurd. And if he eats out every day, then what is he really arguing about? It surely can't be money.

 

It's a good thing when a couple needs to save money and one of the sacrifices is eating left overs for lunch. If one person violates this sacrifice, then it should be brought up in a normal conversation. It shouldn't be some argument though.

 

And the woman should bring up the fact he always eats out, maybe not as an excuse about her going out, but about the whole concept of saving money. If they really need to save money, then both people need to sacrifice, not just one. It seems he's doing whatever the hell he wants and she has to bow down to him. Who wants that?

[AlektraClementine]

I don't know. Maybe all of you are right and she should make time to have a discussion with her husband about the hypocrisy. However, it doesn't go unnoticed to me that she is one of the happiest, most well adjusted people that I know. And pretty happy in her marriage.

 

She's the type of person who always thinks before she speaks. She owns all of her actions and words. She picks her battles. And genuinely is one of the most confident people I know.

 

I wonder, if her overall view of accountability has a little something to do with it?

[hoping2heal]

I can see her point.

 

The husband knows he shouldn't be doing what he does, but he insists on doing it anyway. She can tell him, scold him, kindly remind him, whatever method in the world but the fact is, he is a grown man - he knows he should not do it, and yet he is choosing to do it regardless.

 

Husbands and wives are not our children. We can put the word out what we'd like and we may or may not get it. Accepting a person for who they actually are, can be a real key to overall happiness in a relationship. If you can't accept them as they are? Then you probably shouldn't be married or continuing that relationship since you will both be undergoing a lot of stress.

 

Him getting on her case for doing it, when he does it too - looks like a major hypocrisy. It is one. However, that doesn't take away from the fact that she did indeed do what she wasn't supposed to, just because he does also.

 

Chances are - HE also knows he has "no room to talk" and I'm sure upon further thought he probably realised he was being a big, fat "H". The fact that she takes accountability for her actions may be something that humbles him and helps him to be reflective about his own errors.

[Els]

I don't know. Maybe all of you are right and she should make time to have a discussion with her husband about the hypocrisy. However, it doesn't go unnoticed to me that she is one of the happiest, most well adjusted people that I know. And pretty happy in her marriage.

 

She's the type of person who always thinks before she speaks. She owns all of her actions and words. She picks her battles. And genuinely is one of the most confident people I know.

 

I wonder, if her overall view of accountability has a little something to do with it?

 

I suspect it is also because she is unusually willing to overlook faults and compromise much more than the partner.

 

Not that it's a bad thing necessarily. I mean, if she's happy and he's happy, who are we to question?

[hoping2heal]

I suspect it is also because she is unusually willing to overlook faults and compromise much more than the partner.

 

Not that it's a bad thing necessarily. I mean, if she's happy and he's happy, who are we to question?

 

I think that's kind of a far stretch to assume based on one post. We have no idea what things she's done that he's been more of the compromising one on. We do not know what faults of hers, that he overlooks also. Every person has their little quirks and no matter what - there are things they do, and will always do. Most people get irritated and upset and exhaust a lot of time and energy into trying to change those things. Then there are people who recognize "Okay, this is just one of those things, and compared to all of the good I get out of this relationship? It is pretty damn small."

 

There are times both I and my partner - could name something the other has done and I am pretty sure based on those alone people would be telling us both {OMG! Dump him/her!} yada yada yada, but we are one of the closest, most connected, and deeply passionate loving couples I know.

Those moments don't take away from those things and while it certainly depends - as Alektra mentioned, the woman picks and chooses her battles wisely.

[Els]

I think that's kind of a far stretch to assume based on one post. We have no idea what things she's done that he's been more of the compromising one on. We do not know what faults of hers, that he overlooks also. Every person has their little quirks and no matter what - there are things they do, and will always do. Most people get irritated and upset and exhaust a lot of time and energy into trying to change those things. Then there are people who recognize "Okay, this is just one of those things, and compared to all of the good I get out of this relationship? It is pretty damn small."

 

There are times both I and my partner - could name something the other has done and I am pretty sure based on those alone people would be telling us both {OMG! Dump him/her!} yada yada yada, but we are one of the closest, most connected, and deeply passionate loving couples I know.

Those moments don't take away from those things and while it certainly depends - as Alektra mentioned, the woman picks and chooses her battles wisely.

 

I understand completely. In fact, I have almost never advocated dumping immediately, except in very extreme cases. It peeves me off when people go the 'OMG DUMP' route immediately after reading just ONE post of mine as well.

 

However, in this case, I was just stating what I suspect - as in, what it sounds like to me. In no way was I saying that their relationship is a bad one, just that I think this trait of hers (and his) in particular MAY not be as good as it sounds. Heck, I could even be wrong about what I suspect; just throwing out an alternate point of view to the OP's opinion.

[AlektraClementine]

It's so hard to tell how well something works when you're on the outside of a marriage. But from what I can tell, and let me preface this by saying that I've known my best friend for 20 years and the 3 of us (husband included) went to high school together.

 

She has always maintained an intellectual stance of logic and reason. Her abilities are uncanny. Her husband is by far more emotional than she. They've been married for 10 years, friends for 20. She's expressed to me on many occasions throughout their marriage that he's the only man for her. Wouldn't dream of parting from him. Accepts him for who he is, etc. I could not be married to this man. He is insecure, jealous, and hypocritical at times as evidenced in the OP. However, my friend doesn't seem as put off by these things as the rest of us are who are on the outside.

 

She's mentioned that she's sure that she does things that frustrate her husband. Namely, being insensitive to him sometimes. Her perception of his "childish" behavior turns her off and she can be uncaring at times. I'm an emotional person also, and from my point of view, I know it can be tough when it's time to hash something out with an "unaffected" personality type.

 

But for what it's worth, I know she loves him unconditionally. Accepts him unconditionally. If he ever did something truly heinous, I also suspect that she'd handle it differently. i.e. if he cheated on her, I don't think her tolerance would be as unwavering.

[hoping2heal]

It's so hard to tell how well something works when you're on the outside of a marriage. But from what I can tell, and let me preface this by saying that I've known my best friend for 20 years and the 3 of us (husband included) went to high school together.

 

She has always maintained an intellectual stance of logic and reason. Her abilities are uncanny. Her husband is by far more emotional than she. They've been married for 10 years, friends for 20. She's expressed to me on many occasions throughout their marriage that he's the only man for her. Wouldn't dream of parting from him. Accepts him for who he is, etc. I could not be married to this man. He is insecure, jealous, and hypocritical at times as evidenced in the OP. However, my friend doesn't seem as put off by these things as the rest of us are who are on the outside.

 

She's mentioned that she's sure that she does things that frustrate her husband. Namely, being insensitive to him sometimes. Her perception of his "childish" behavior turns her off and she can be uncaring at times. I'm an emotional person also, and from my point of view, I know it can be tough when it's time to hash something out with an "unaffected" personality type.

 

But for what it's worth, I know she loves him unconditionally. Accepts him unconditionally. If he ever did something truly heinous, I also suspect that she'd handle it differently. i.e. if he cheated on her, I don't think her tolerance would be as unwavering.

 

I think that makes plenty of sense. She knows who he is and she loves him for and in spite of that. Not many relationships I've observed can say that. There's nothing wrong with personal growth, but each person has capabilities and barriers to that. In some cases some certain habbits or ways of reacting may never change. Yet people seem pretty bent on changing those things. I think the people who can just accept and tolerate are the happiest. That doesn't mean you put up with abuse, or infidelity, or someone who constantly steamrolls over your feelings and is not thoughtful about you.

 

But it's things like what you mentioned. I could tell in her decision to take accountability just how much she genuinely cares about him. I think other people saw a weak, doormat type woman. I did not.

[KikiW]

I have to say I am very impressed by her ability to not go "tit-for-tat" with him, when most women (I'd probably be in there too) would not be able to do so.

 

But I don't think it would be unreasonable for her to say "I heard what you said about my lunch out, and I agree I shouldn't have... but I would like to also make the point that you often 'forget' your lunch and I do not come at you about it. Either we are both held to the same standard, or we should each be given a little wiggle room... which would you prefer?"

 

I am a fan of "whats good for the goose is good for the gander" and find it can grow resentments if one person gets held to a different standard.

 

But then again, I am not in their marriage, perhaps this just works for them.

Edited December 9, 2010 by KikiW