None. That's my considered opinion. Carol bears absolutely no responsibility whatsoever for my feelings.
What she DOES bear, however, is the karma of her own decisions.
I also have been a loving and faithful husband who has established my integrity by doing the right thing yada yada. But man... if Carol ever came to me and said that she had questions about the very fundamentals of our marriage I would not be insulted. I'd be mortified that I had failed so utterly in my mission to make her feel like the most loved woman on the face of the planet. To me, that would be a "time to get busy" conversation. To me, the fact that she had those questions is obvious indication that I am failing at my own goals.
At some much later point in time, after I am utterly certain that I have fixed whatever got broken in our marriage I might bring up the insult part. But honestly, that would be very low on my priority queue and might well get forgotten by the time it was actually time. For me, this whole thing would be a lot like hiking through the woods and suddenly coming across a mountain lion peering at me through the shrubbery. I'm pretty clear that how the lion got there is not my most immediate concern.
I see no right or wrong in this. It's just a completely different sense of priorities and values. For me, I do not value my own personal autonomy and freedom. I find my "self" in "us". Compared to my marriage, I don't value my "pride" much either -- I got lots of that -- I can probably afford to spare some. For me, the marriage is at the absolute top of the priority heap. The moment that there was peril to that, everything else ceased being a consideration. The reasons for that peril... right or wrong... can be sorted out later.
Are you certain about that? If she has no emotional affect on you, then why on earth are you with her?
Take joeydinap’s situation. His wife’s behaviour is causing him say to feel (emotions) very insecure with her and therefore in his marriage to her. Her behaviour is also causing him to “feel” suspicious and probably other things like angry, confused etc. Insecurity in a marriage is pretty awful. If she wasn’t behaving in the way she is, then he wouldn’t feel insecure, angry, suspicious et al. So his emotions are a direct response to his wife’s behaviour.
Us humans do not live in emotional isolation, vacuum, from one another. “No man is an island …… for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee”. Some are more deeply connected emotionally to one another than others. Seems the only ones that aren’t connected emotionally are psychopaths and the like!
What we are responsible for though is sorting our emotions out. Naming, understanding them and understanding how they arose inside of us.
And perhaps most important of all we are totally responsible for how we respond to our emotions. But there’s even a caveat with that in that courts say take a lenient view when say something is done in a moment of passion compared to something that’s done in a cold, unemotional and premeditated way.
Are you certain about that? If she has no emotional affect on you, then why on earth are you with her?
I've been misunderstood. Carol has massive emotional impact on me. But hey, if we want to look at it in the way this thread has gone, all I was pointing out is that I'm fine with saying that Carol bears no responsibility for my feelings. But what she does bear is the karma of her choices. If Carol were to take a stand that my emotions were not here issue, then I guess I'd just have to cope with them all on my own and whatever decisions or conclusions I came to she would have to live with.
The truth for Carol and I though is that this is a hypothetical situation. It's implausible to imagine her taking a stance that says, "My significant feelings are meaningless to her." If I said, "Get a different trainer" there would be a different trainer. Anything else would be a betrayal on a great many levels. Anything else would be unthinkable to her.
Jeff/BC - Bob,
I am going to start a thread on this specific topic. I am going to call it, "Silence gives Assent". The basic theme is simple:
If a woman hits on me I have 3 basic choices:
1. Shut it down. I can do this in any number of ways up to and including terminating all interaction with her. Generally, pointing directly at your wedding ring and giving them a WTF look works like a champ.
2. Remain carefully neutral. This is just wrong as it implies that you are perfectly fine with the other person continuing to pursue you. BAD message, bad behavior. It would be unacceptable to my W if I did it, and it is not acceptable to me for her to do it.
3. Encourage it. Flirt back.
I read lots of posts on here about online stuff. The husband writes that his W isn't flirting with her male friends on line, THEY are flirting with her. That is a crock. If they are flirting and she doesn't shut it down hard and warn them she will break contact if they resume (and follow through on that), she IS subtly encouraging it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff/BC
I've been misunderstood. Carol has massive emotional impact on me. But hey, if we want to look at it in the way this thread has gone, all I was pointing out is that I'm fine with saying that Carol bears no responsibility for my feelings. But what she does bear is the karma of her choices. If Carol were to take a stand that my emotions were not here issue, then I guess I'd just have to cope with them all on my own and whatever decisions or conclusions I came to she would have to live with.
The truth for Carol and I though is that this is a hypothetical situation. It's implausible to imagine her taking a stance that says, "My significant feelings are meaningless to her." If I said, "Get a different trainer" there would be a different trainer. Anything else would be a betrayal on a great many levels. Anything else would be unthinkable to her.
Jeff/BC - Bob,
I am going to start a thread on this specific topic. I am going to call it, "Silence gives Assent". The basic theme is simple:
If a woman hits on me I have 3 basic choices:
1. Shut it down. I can do this in any number of ways up to and including terminating all interaction with her. Generally, pointing directly at your wedding ring and giving them a WTF look works like a champ.
2. Remain carefully neutral. This is just wrong as it implies that you are perfectly fine with the other person continuing to pursue you. BAD message, bad behavior. It would be unacceptable to my W if I did it, and it is not acceptable to me for her to do it.
3. Encourage it. Flirt back.
I read lots of posts on here about online stuff. The husband writes that his W isn't flirting with her male friends on line, THEY are flirting with her. That is a crock. If they are flirting and she doesn't shut it down hard and warn them she will break contact if they resume (and follow through on that), she IS subtly encouraging it.
Great idea for a thread. I totally agree with the choices you have listed.
I've been misunderstood. Carol has massive emotional impact on me. But hey, if we want to look at it in the way this thread has gone, all I was pointing out is that I'm fine with saying that Carol bears no responsibility for my feelings. But what she does bear is the karma of her choices. If Carol were to take a stand that my emotions were not here issue, then I guess I'd just have to cope with them all on my own and whatever decisions or conclusions I came to she would have to live with.
The truth for Carol and I though is that this is a hypothetical situation. It's implausible to imagine her taking a stance that says, "My significant feelings are meaningless to her." If I said, "Get a different trainer" there would be a different trainer. Anything else would be a betrayal on a great many levels. Anything else would be unthinkable to her.
Maybe it’s just semantics here.
I’d still say that she is most definitely responsible for how you feel. In the case of feeling insecure, if you were to stay together then in my mind she’s certainly responsible for helping you overcome your feelings of insecurity by changing her behaviour.
But if you were to leave her and go your own way because she wont change her behaviour (which is what I eventually did, for other reasons that made me feel insecure), then the feelings of insecurity would no longer exist because you’d no longer be in the marriage!
But I do understand and agree our wives can and do have massive emotional impact on us.
Jeff/BC - Bob,
I am going to start a thread on this specific topic. I am going to call it, "Silence gives Assent". The basic theme is simple:
If a woman hits on me I have 3 basic choices:
1. Shut it down. I can do this in any number of ways up to and including terminating all interaction with her. Generally, pointing directly at your wedding ring and giving them a WTF look works like a champ.
2. Remain carefully neutral. This is just wrong as it implies that you are perfectly fine with the other person continuing to pursue you. BAD message, bad behavior. It would be unacceptable to my W if I did it, and it is not acceptable to me for her to do it.
3. Encourage it. Flirt back.
I read lots of posts on here about online stuff. The husband writes that his W isn't flirting with her male friends on line, THEY are flirting with her. That is a crock. If they are flirting and she doesn't shut it down hard and warn them she will break contact if they resume (and follow through on that), she IS subtly encouraging it.
Should be an interesting thread.
I disagree with your posit that these things done by woman are subtle!
From a Man’s perspective, as to whether they are participating or observing, they are subtle. In fact so subtle I think the vast majority of men are blind to them or they are only seen/felt through the subconscious.
But from a Woman’s perspective these things may just as well be shouted from the roof tops through the loudest speakers in the world because they are just so exceedingly obvious.
So from a man’s perspective sure she’s subtly encouraging it. But from a woman’s perspective she’s so obviously encouraging it!
Even the woman doing the “subtle” encouraging knows she’s doing it outlandishly obviously. Yet she’ll lie, scapegoat, deceive etc. to cover it up and mostly us men are dim enough to believe what they say as opposed to what they do!
Woman are I believe the other way around. They believe what we do, not what we say!
MominM,
Athol hasn't cheated on his wife. Where did you come up with that?
Posted via Mobile Device
Maybe she really is in the fog and will make anything up as a way of scapegoating and denying. My wife came up with some truly strange ones in order to deny any responsibility for her own actions and what had happened.
Sis,
You were asked a direct question about how you would respond if genders were reversed and you ignored it. This isn't about trust, it's about respect. If I had a 25 year old female trainer who was not even willing to say hi to my wife, my w would not even have to ask me to ditch her. Any woman hostile to my wife is out, well unless she is my daughter...
The truly strange thing is that Sis is one of the very first here to say to us men that if a wife is denying him sex it’s because he hasn’t looked after her emotional needs.
But when the tables are turned in that it’s a wife who has no care for her husband’s emotional needs Sis wants no part of it. To me it’s like she thinks men are emotionless robots just there to provide their wives with everything they could possible need!
The truly strange thing is that Sis is one of the very first here to say to us men that if a wife is denying him sex it’s because he hasn’t looked after her emotional needs.
But when the tables are turned in that it’s a wife who has no care for her husband’s emotional needs Sis wants no part of it. To me it’s like she thinks men are emotionless robots just there to provide their wives with everything they could possible need!
I find that so exceedingly deeply hypocritical.
She believes men oppress women with their concerns to their interactions with other men. A very fundamental man and woman relationship thing and certainly valid in any discussion over a marriage. I could go on but it belongs in that new thread.
She also indicates that a woman can feel good around a 25 year old good looking guy because he is like a puppy dog. Of course this puppy dog wants to have sex with her. But that is not her problem to avoid. I have seen many women in my time refer to thier love interests in this manner. As he is her cute little pup[py dog. So I take no solice from this. I really do not want my wife hanging out with a hot puppy dog guy. Yes these guys are dogs ladies and most of you know it.
And of course people have every right to their opinions and how they run their lives. However in a good marriage you have to be able to have good boundaries. One spouse or the other does not have to accept what they consider to be risky or disrepsectful behavior from the other.
I think that's likely... coupled with interpretation errors. I have to work hard to try to interpret these scenarios into something which somehow might actually occur in my marriage. But in real life I'm speaking out my ass in vastly hypothetical situations that cannot occur... which means I probably shouldn't have posted on this thread to start with.
MominM,
Athol hasn't cheated on his wife. Where did you come up with that?
Posted via Mobile Device
I read this :
He told MailOnline: 'It's almost surprising that people don't have sex. When you get married, you put all your eggs in one basket, so you may as well enjoy the basket!'
And he should know. He confesses he began writing his sex blog early last year after having two 'emotional affairs', which forced him to seek advice on the internet.
He told MailOnline: 'I realised that a lot of my problems were solved when I realised how wonderful my marriage actually was.'
If it helps people then good. I just wonder about advice from a person who has cheated twice.
Here is the whole article. There are some other pictures on the sides that might not be good for work though.
He told MailOnline: 'It's almost surprising that people don't have sex. When you get married, you put all your eggs in one basket, so you may as well enjoy the basket!'
And he should know. He confesses he began writing his sex blog early last year after having two 'emotional affairs', which forced him to seek advice on the internet.
He told MailOnline: 'I realised that a lot of my problems were solved when I realised how wonderful my marriage actually was.'
If it helps people then good. I just wonder about advice from a person who has cheated twice.
Here is the whole article. There are some other pictures on the sides that might not be good for work though.
I remember that. Athol talked about both incidents. If I am not mistaken this is how he described them. The first time he was feeling very down on himself as a man. He started chatting with a woman online to see if he could interest her. He admits it was all an ego thing as he wanted to see if he still had it. As soon as he knew he could have her he ended it. The second one was with a woman looking for advice. He got too involved in her personal life and felt the relationship was becoming too chummy. He cut off contact at that point. He calls both of these EAs. I'm not really sure they were but I guess if you're writing about relationships you have to have a very strict definition of what an EA is.
Remember that all MCs, psychologists, psychiatrists, therapists etc are human too. They all have problems in their own relationships. That doesn't invalidate their advice. Dr. Phil got a vasectomy and never told his wife until she said she wanted to have another child. Relationship guru Sharyn Wolf admitted her own marriage was a farce. She and her husband never slept together and had sex only 3 times in 15 years. If you're waiting for someone in a perfect relationship to give you relationship advice you have a long wait.
There are two distinct dimensions to this type interaction. You have the subset of males who suffer from testosterone poisoning. Those men physically intimidate, or beat or at the extreme end murder their female partners in these type situations. Thank god for anti stalking laws and much more aggressive law enforcement. Still even with that, the stats are very ugly and sad. In the non-physical relationships (where the men are truly civilized), the skew goes in the opposite direction. The average male is simply not emotionally equipped to go head to head against his partner. And in those cases you have this endless list of incredibly one sided behavior. Puppy dogs and passive encouragement of sexual aggression and ridiculous claims of controlling behavior - when that behavior is purely boundary enforcement.
Really I love women, they are marvelous beings. Without them life would not be worn living. That said, men need to better understand women or these very one sided models of behavior will become ever more common.
UOTE=Entropy3000;661792]She believes men oppress women with their concerns to their interactions with other men. A very fundamental man and woman relationship thing and certainly valid in any discussion over a marriage. I could go on but it belongs in that new thread.
She also indicates that a woman can feel good around a 25 year old good looking guy because he is like a puppy dog. Of course this puppy dog wants to have sex with her. But that is not her problem to avoid. I have seen many women in my time refer to thier love interests in this manner. As he is her cute little pup[py dog. So I take no solice from this. I really do not want my wife hanging out with a hot puppy dog guy. Yes these guys are dogs ladies and most of you know it.
And of course people have every right to their opinions and how they run their lives. However in a good marriage you have to be able to have good boundaries. One spouse or the other does not have to accept what they consider to be risky or disrepsectful behavior from the other.[/QUOTE] Posted via Mobile Device
149Likes
Re: my wifes trainer 
