Compromises

[MissBee]

In my view, anybody who feels like they are being used in any relationship should not be in that relationship. And I'm as guilty of that as the next. I spent a long time in denial about feeling used within my marriage, and facing up to that was an important step in learning to leave it. But it's only a step. In and of itself, admitting to feeling used changes nothing unless it's matched with either a renegotiation of the relationship, or an exit from it.

 

Ditto.

 

It takes a while though for many to 1. admit to being used and 2.have the courage to walk away. It seems the common response is to self-deceive into thinking you aren't being used, and then even defend your user, lower your own expectations and compromise so that it does't quite seem like you're being used at all. So renegotiation often does take place, but towards the end of a negative compromise for many, versus it being renegotiated by mutual concessions, where the user no longer gets that power to use. The renegotiation of many LS As seem to follow a pattern where the user gets to continue using, but now the person being used decides they quite like it after all. The user made no change, does nothing different than they'd normally do...the one being used is the only one changing perspectives, expectations etc.

Edited July 13, 2012 by MissBee

[MissBee]

So then is the perception of compromising linked to one's expectations of what is acceptable in a relationship?

 

I think yes.

 

If I have no expectations of unlimited access and time with my romantic partner, than I am NOT compromising when I do not get it.

 

If my need is to have fun, an emotional connection, and an empowerment from saving him from sadness, and I have that when I do get to see him, then I am not compromising.

 

And in any self-help program, detachment is a useful skill which many can apply in their lives.

 

It is harder to apply to a life partner when there is an expectation of shared duties: bill paying, child-rearing, household chores.

 

I could wish my life away hoping the addict finds sobriety. Many do divorce because marital expectations cannot be filled by the addict.

 

More interesting to note is how many divorce AFTER the addict reaches sobriety and stability.

 

THe enabling spouse can no longer feel empowered by their daily rescuing of the sad, dependent, spouse. The drama is over. They grow bored or uncomfortable with no longer being the "savior."

 

Astute post!

 

This is very true.

 

So long as you have the story, the issues, the problems, the reasons why the person can't....it's fuel for those who play the role of enabler. The relationship is wrapped up and almost wholly dependent on those identities and the other person's problems. You can pretend fix to infinity and the relationship will continue so long as you play enabler. Most if not all enablers have the best intentions....yet, in the treatment of addictions and other dysfunction in families and relationships, it's never just the addicted person that needs counseling, but the parents/husband/wife/gf/whoever else who often wrongly believe they are "supporting them" and helping, when they are not. They are probably more difficult to manage than the addicted person....as it would seem more obvious the addicted person has a problem, while the enabler is shocked that anyone would even think that they deserved anything less than a starry crown for perseverance and service.

[MissBee]

Ummm . . . . that he was allowed to date me while married.

 

I read an article about relationships/marriage and discussing that there is no scorecard and they aren't equal. Someone is going to give more than the other at times and even one does give more. But it is about that bigger picture and the happiness of the couple as a whole. Are there times that dMM has had the better end of the stick? Sure. Have there been times where there is more invested in me? Yep. I do not want to start keeping track of things because then I am focusing on ticking off a pros and cons score sheet than enjoying the relationship.

 

What I lean on is my gut and my boundaries/sense of self. I know that if the bad outweighs the good I will know and make the appropriate decisions. What I know is that both parties are investing everyday into the relationship. That to me is key. We are both putting in energies into our partnership for the good of it. If it starts becoming one sided we will know and I trust that we will do something about it. If not then I know I will.

 

What I had in mind was also the bigger picture. Not score keeping of every big or small compromise.

 

I'm certain, as you said about your gut, one can feel when a relationship causes you to compromise in a way that paints a rather questionable bigger picture.

[cocorico]

I haven't read the whole thread - just skimmed it.

 

But.

 

I was struck how some claim to make no compromises. I think it was Cocorico. How does this work? I would love to always get my way . How does your MM (is it MM or is he your H now) not feel resentful?

 

And, on broader terms, I cannot see how every OW doesn't compromise <something>.

Time is the easiest one really. How does an OW NOT compromise her want if her MM has to go home that night? Has she not compromised what she wants based solely on the MM's need to get home (presumably to keep the BS in the dark)? To me, it seems the OW compromises herself (her desire for more time) when her MM has to "get home".

 

It's a sad deference to his W and his M. Repeatedly.

How is that not a compromise and compromising?

 

I did not compromise on time. My time was scarcer than his. He fitted in with my timetable. He travelled a lot, so not sleeping at home did not arouse suspicion. I wanted no more time than we shared, because of my own constraints.

[cocorico]

It seems the common response is to self-deceive into thinking you aren't being used,

 

If you think you are not being used, who is to say you are? Surely that's your choice, rather than some Universal Arbiter? If you as a consenting adult freely choose something, then that is on you alone.

[MissBee]

If you think you are not being used, who is to say you are? Surely that's your choice, rather than some Universal Arbiter? If you as a consenting adult freely choose something, then that is on you alone.

 

Choosing to be used doesn't really mean you aren't being used.

 

Further, this is in reference to people who have explicitly expressed certain feelings and desires, who they themselves feel they are being used...who all of a sudden decide they aren't. That's the specific context.

 

It's not unheard of that people talk themselves into all kinds of things, even if it truly isn't what they want or how they really feel. Have you ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? That's a perfect example of that kind of dissonance.

 

I respect individual's right to choose, and also to self-deceive. Humans are good at this. Psychology would not exist if the premise were true that just because someone says something is true, it is, and it is steeped in self-awareness and should be taken at face value. This is simply not true.

 

We can't shove things down people's throats, but we certainly don't have to take it at face value either and it is completely untrue that only individuals know. Universal Arbiters have nothing to do with anything. People tell people things all the while on LS, and in real life, the person denies, denies, denies and perhaps believes it on many levels....then comes back and says the same thing perfect strangers were able to intuit and even admit to their own self-denial. It's not uncommon.

 

Sometimes individuals don't know....sometimes their family and friends know, but it of course silences the argument when they say "You're not me, you don't know". Unfortunately, that's not always a true sentiment and when we're in self-denial, the last person to know (or rather, acknowledge) is often the individual. I also see no point to a place like LS if it were true that the only person who can know or who may offer a correct insight about a situation/individual is that individual. Then it's pointless for any of us to say anything to anyone or point out anything then, if the only way it is correct is if the person agrees lol.

Edited July 13, 2012 by MissBee

[Furious]

From a different angle, it seems the WS has the upper hand in the concept of "compromise", in that the OW/OM be willing to wait until the children become adults, or that they wait until the finances are sorted, or until the house is sold, or until grandpa dies....until their grandchildren graduate college....

 

What do the WS's compromise?

[MissBee]

From a different angle, it seems the WS has the upper hand in the concept of "compromise", in that the OW/OM be willing to wait until the children become adults, or that they wait until the finances are sorted, or until the house is sold, or until grandpa dies....until their grandchildren graduate college....

What do the WS's compromise?

 

I am curious and have asked this several times as well.

 

My initial question was anticipating some concrete examples of the compromises.

 

It seems in most As the compromises are mostly on the part of the OW/OM.

 

I can more readily think of compromises the OW/OM has to make versus the MP. It seems like most accept the person is married, has limitations because they are married, so to be with them, esp if the OW/OM is single, they have to accept that they're going to be the one who needs to be more flexible.

 

So perhaps as the thread continues, and to get back on topic, we can discuss these concrete examples.

Edited July 13, 2012 by MissBee

[Furious]

I am curious and have asked this several times as well.

 

My initial question was anticipating some concrete examples of the compromises.

 

It seems in most As the compromises are mostly on the part of the OW/OM.

 

I can more readily think of compromises the OW/OM has to make versus the MP. It seems like most accept the person is married, has limitations because they are married, so to be with them, esp if the OW/OM is single, they have to accept that they're going to be the one who needs to be more flexible.

 

So perhaps as the thread continues, and to get back on topic, we can discuss these concrete examples.

 

 

I believe the greatest compromise an OW/OM makes is that they become enablers by accepting the WS's reasons why they cannot be together just yet.