# Compatibility and Chemistry in Relationships



## Deejo

Well this forum has been quiet for quite some time. I will try to remember to post interesting article links here.

This is one is by Mark Manson. NYT Best Seller of "The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F *ck" He has written others as well. He also wrote 'Models' which is a book I often recommend for newly divorced men who find themselves thrust into the dating pool once again.

Compatibility and Chemistry in Relationships - by Mark Manson


----------



## Faithful Wife

I like him. A lot.


----------



## Deejo

Faithful Wife said:


> I like him. A lot.


I think you and I discussed him previously? I indicated his is the only book I recommend as opposed to the Man up, Game, RP, Pickup stuff I have read previously. I have not yet read "Everything is F* cked - A Book of Hope"

He writes like you could be having a conversation with him at a bar or coffee house.


----------



## personofinterest

OK this is a very cool topic. I have read most of the article, and I definitely have some thoughts, but I can't put them down right now. I will say I have made sort of an informal personal study of compatibility when I was trying to figure out why my 1st husband and I failed spectacularly at marriage when We seemed so perfect on paper. And now I am a perfect fit with a man that no one would have expected me to marry and vice versa


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Interesting article. 

One problem. According to the definition of chemistry as given, my wife and I have excellent chemistry. So I wondered where the sexual mismatch comes in, because it sure didn't fit the definition of compatibility. So, sure enough, the article then says chemistry is reflected in the bedroom, which is how I would have guessed before reading the definition of chemistry. 

So even though we fit the preliminary definition of chemistry, we also fit the bedroom definition of having little chemistry.

I think this construct needs to be laid over the HD/LD construct as I suspect there are many possible permutations beyond the simple four square chemistry/compatibility matrix presented.


----------



## Casual Observer

Could this article be summed up as saying there's more to relationships than sex and there's more to relationships than friendship? And the favorable and unfavorable combinations of the two? I think there's more meat to his article about not giving a F.

But for the article in question, I don't think it addressed how both chemistry and compatibility may change over time. Probably chemistry more than compatibility. Leopards don't change their spots; I can look at my wife today, and look at what she wrote in her diaries 44 years ago, and it's the same person. But the chemistry has certainly changed over time. In fact the chemistry changed shortly after we met. Chemistry can change from fun & wild seeking mode to conservative settling in, I've found it mode.


----------



## attheend02

Deejo said:


> Well this forum has been quiet for quite some time. I will try to remember to post interesting article links here.
> 
> This is one is by Mark Manson. NYT Best Seller of "The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F *ck" He has written others as well. He also wrote 'Models' which is a book I often recommend for newly divorced men who find themselves thrust into the dating pool once again.
> 
> Compatibility and Chemistry in Relationships - by Mark Manson


I really liked Models.

He is much more respectful than a lot of the alternatives.


----------



## MEM2020

Rocky,
Yes - chemistry has multiple facets. M2 and I make each other laugh more than all the rest of the people in our respective lives combined. We love playing puzzle games with each other and impromptu estimating games. She is super fun and playful while being competitive in a good way. 

Non sexual touch chemistry - great. 

But our sexual chemistry - has varied a lot over 29+ years together - I only have one rule: No pretending 

But man - sometimes my ego takes a beating....    





Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Interesting article.
> 
> One problem. According to the definition of chemistry as given, my wife and I have excellent chemistry. So I wondered where the sexual mismatch comes in, because it sure didn't fit the definition of compatibility. So, sure enough, the article then says chemistry is reflected in the bedroom, which is how I would have guessed before reading the definition of chemistry.
> 
> So even though we fit the preliminary definition of chemistry, we also fit the bedroom definition of having little chemistry.
> 
> I think this construct needs to be laid over the HD/LD construct as I suspect there are many possible permutations beyond the simple four square chemistry/compatibility matrix presented.


----------



## MEM2020

Casual,
Chemistry is definitely more fragile than compatibility. And - at risk of offending my brethren - I’d say that chemistry is sometimes highly correlated to the degree of fragility of the ego of the man in the relationship. 

I don’t think they realize it, but many men - seem to crave a level of stability that is incompatible with passion. 

I have a sufficient dose of that to recognize it. For example, our sexual routine is excessively patterned. That’s driven by my fear of doing something M2 doesn’t like. 

Now my (sexual) situation is somewhat unusual in two regards:
- M2 is unusually competitive and wishes to be considered an excellent wife and fully grasps the physicality of that role
- She has this intensely conscientious mindset, especially where maintenance of anything is concerned (oil changes, teeth cleaning, ...)

And she considers sex part of relationship maintenance. I know - that sounds somewhere between: Stepford and Aspergers - but the actual experience is quite good and she is highly engaged. 

A lot of folks describe how the staircase of stability was inversely related to their sex life:
- got engaged - sex life decreased
- got married - decreases more 
- had first kid - became sexless
- had last kid - sex stopped totally 






Casual Observer said:


> Could this article be summed up as saying there's more to relationships than sex and there's more to relationships than friendship? And the favorable and unfavorable combinations of the two? I think there's more meat to his article about not giving a F.
> 
> But for the article in question, I don't think it addressed how both chemistry and compatibility may change over time. Probably chemistry more than compatibility. Leopards don't change their spots; I can look at my wife today, and look at what she wrote in her diaries 44 years ago, and it's the same person. But the chemistry has certainly changed over time. In fact the chemistry changed shortly after we met. Chemistry can change from fun & wild seeking mode to conservative settling in, I've found it mode.


----------



## personofinterest

I have often wondered if the deep, long lasting type of chemistry is tied to the level of compatibility. By level I do not mean more or less compatible. I mean how deep the compatibility goes. For example, I would consider both people in joying tennis or both people in joy and classic rock or both people in joying Mexican food to be the shallow type of compatibility. The deep compatibility is something I have started calling core compatibility. It has more to do with the inner workings and drives of a person and less to do with how much school they have had or what type of movies they like. I believe that in order to sustain the type of kimustry that bonds people, whether it be sexual or non sexual, there must be core compatibility. I will talk more on this later when I am not using talk to text.


----------



## Deejo

I think whenever we make the quintessentially human effort to take behavioral patterns, along with emotional states and categorize or put them in a box, it's going to get dicey. I also keep in mind that the author is a relatively young, and recently married guy.

The referenced article was actually written back in 2014 ... prior to his marriage.

I don't believe that either compatibility or chemistry are static. Both are subject to erosion, if not actively tended to, as well as growth in some cases, over the course of a LTR. I'd argue that on the chemistry side, which I'll simply qualify as making the bedroom a playground, it appears far more common, and far easier for women to transition the outstanding balance in the chemistry account, over to compatibility ... and generally those funds don't transfer back over to chemistry.

I do believe that the article does a decent job of summarizing scenarios many of us have been in ... such as the sexually electrifying relationship where you can't get enough of one another, yet outside of the bedroom, you stand a snowball's chance in hell of making it long term.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

Deejo said:


> I think whenever we make the quintessentially human effort to take behavioral patterns, along with emotional states and categorize or put them in a box, it's going to get dicey. I also keep in mind that the author is a relatively young, and recently married guy.
> 
> The referenced article was actually written back in 2014 ... prior to his marriage.
> 
> I don't believe that either compatibility or chemistry are static. Both are subject to erosion, if not actively tended to, as well as growth in some cases, over the course of a LTR. I'd argue that on the chemistry side, which I'll simply qualify as making the bedroom a playground, it appears far more common, and far easier for women to transition the outstanding balance in the chemistry account, over to compatibility ... *and generally those funds don't transfer back over to chemistry.*
> 
> I do believe that the article does a decent job of summarizing scenarios many of us have been in ... such as the sexually electrifying relationship where you can't get enough of one another, yet outside of the bedroom, you stand a snowball's chance in hell of making it long term.


IME, that would seem to be the case.

This is the one I have a hard time wrapping my head around. If I can't stand someone outside the bedroom, I'm not going into the bedroom with them in the first place. I'm sure if I forced myself to, the sex would be anything but satisfying.


----------



## personofinterest

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> IME, that would seem to be the case.
> 
> This is the one I have a hard time wrapping my head around. *If I can't stand someone outside the bedroom, I'm not going into the bedroom with them in the first place. * I'm sure if I forced myself to, the sex would be anything but satisfying.


I would be willing to bet you are not an "impulsive sexer" lol. Neither am I. I think the bolded happens more with people who shed the clothes before they even know more about the person than "oooo he's hooooot." Then after the get dressed and start actually talking, it's like, "Gross! WTF is THIS?"

I could be wrong though.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Deejo said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think whenever we make the quintessentially human effort to take behavioral patterns, along with emotional states and categorize or put them in a box, it's going to get dicey. I also keep in mind that the author is a relatively young, and recently married guy.
> 
> The referenced article was actually written back in 2014 ... prior to his marriage.
> 
> I don't believe that either compatibility or chemistry are static. Both are subject to erosion, if not actively tended to, as well as growth in some cases, over the course of a LTR. I'd argue that on the chemistry side, which I'll simply qualify as making the bedroom a playground, it appears far more common, and far easier for women to transition the outstanding balance in the chemistry account, over to compatibility ... *and generally those funds don't transfer back over to chemistry.*
> 
> I do believe that the article does a decent job of summarizing scenarios many of us have been in ... such as the sexually electrifying relationship where you can't get enough of one another, yet outside of the bedroom, you stand a snowball's chance in hell of making it long term.
> 
> 
> 
> IME, that would seem to be the case.
> 
> This is the one I have a hard time wrapping my head around. If I can't stand someone outside the bedroom, I'm not going into the bedroom with them in the first place. I'm sure if I forced myself to, the sex would be anything but satisfying.
Click to expand...

Right but there is a middle category. Where there is fondness and respect and amazing chemistry. Yet that pairing still may not have a snowballs chance as Deejo put it. There may be fundamental differences between them that would make a LTR fail. Yet the sex could be off the charts. 

I don’t think he just meant chemistry with someone you can’t stand outside the bedroom.


----------



## Deejo

MEM2020 said:


> A lot of folks describe how the staircase of stability was inversely related to their sex life:
> - got engaged - sex life decreased
> - got married - decreases more
> - had first kid - became sexless
> - had last kid - sex stopped totally


Needless to say, my wife and I discuss this stuff frequently. She has alluded that she has become the go-to person for 2 of her friends whose marriages are greatly struggling. The circumstances are unfamiliar to no one here.

Both LTR's, marriages in excess of 10 years. In one case after having their first child, they moved into the house of their dreams ... and the wife can't stomach the idea of having sex with her husband. In the other, they live in an affluent community. Husband has been a software executive ... who just recently was laid off. They have a set of twins the same age as our youngest. Mom is a helicopter mom ... kids hyper-excel at anything they do. Mom has no sexual attraction for dad. Even less so, given her anxiety level that her husband is currently unemployed. 

I can say unequivocally, that if I were to lose my job, my spouse would go into panic mode ... and knowing her, as I do, I wouldn't even think about approaching her for sex until I had a job offer in-hand. Is it supposed to work that way? No it is not. In life is that the way it plays out? Yes, it absolutely is.

In both cases above, these aren't unattentive, mail it in, dads. They are great with their kids. One is very active in a band. The other is the kind of guy you meet and can easily strike up a conversation with. Both are thin and fit, between 38 and 41. 

I've known these couples for the last 5 years. It's rough watching them come undone. In one case I was brutally reminded of my own past with my ex, as we were over the couples house and the husband could not stop calling out his wife for anything she did or said. If his behavior was anything like mine, what he was saying or doing was only the slightest hint of the frustration he has seething under the surface. This behavior was not evident 2 years ago.


----------



## Rocky Mountain Yeti

personofinterest said:


> I would be willing to bet you are not an "impulsive sexer" lol. Neither am I. I think the bolded happens more with people who shed the clothes before they even know more about the person than "oooo he's hooooot." Then after the get dressed and start actually talking, it's like, "Gross! WTF is THIS?"
> 
> I could be wrong though.


I think you're right in that this is folks who get down before they get to know each other (not my modus operandi). Knowing that, I almost reserved my comment. But then I thought about it more; I hear tales of people who still hook up with the hated even after they realize they hate them, so the initial ignorance of nonsexual incompatibility has passed... and they're still doing it. I find that rather baffling. But then I could never even do the FWB thing, let alone and EWB (Enemy with benefits)!


----------



## MEM2020

Deejo,

This is where Mark Manson is completely 100% right. For instance anger is just a different way to express neediness. And women generally recognize neediness in all its different forms. It’s one of their super powers. 

Anger isn’t indifference. Indifference is - I’m not attending this social thing where we pretend to be a happy family. And uh - don’t tell anyone that I had to work as I will be letting at least two of the attendees know that I’m not coming - because you’ve decided that sex is fully optional in marriage. And you’ve checked the ‘opt out’ box. So I’ve done the same - in that I’m opting out of socializing with my wife.

With the punch line being to the two people I’m going to call: If my wife was not attending, I would gladly be coming over with the kids - because I like our friends. 

And fwiw - if these guys think the path forward is for the wives to grit their teeth and bear it - they are insane. 

The only goal of that is to start making choices that show that the husbands are ok with the wives leaving them. It’s one thing to say: I’m ok with you leaving me. Entirely different to publicly humiliate a wife who is very competitive and absolutely fixated on social optics. The latter is a clear demonstration that you ARE ok with her leaving you. 

The only reason this is my area of specialization is because I’m with someone I’m not capable of leaving. So I needed to develop a coping mechanism for all the endless varieties of mischief that she got into over the years. 

And the goal of all this is to rebalance the power dynamic in the marriage. Because most sexual aversion is rooted in a loss of respect. And there is zero chance of repairing that - without - showing a clear and convincing indifference to the wife’s priorities.

All that said - none of this will work - if the guys are unfixably bad in bed or unfixably bad out of bed. 

They should both move out of the bedrooms and leave behind a note on their pillows: Please write down what you will miss about me when I’m gone....

This is a version of: Why do you stay married to me





Deejo said:


> Needless to say, my wife and I discuss this stuff frequently. She has alluded that she has become the go-to person for 2 of her friends whose marriages are greatly struggling. The circumstances are unfamiliar to no one here.
> 
> Both LTR's, marriages in excess of 10 years. In one case after having their first child, they moved into the house of their dreams ... and the wife can't stomach the idea of having sex with her husband. In the other, they live in an affluent community. Husband has been a software executive ... who just recently was laid off. They have a set of twins the same age as our youngest. Mom is a helicopter mom ... kids hyper-excel at anything they do. Mom has no sexual attraction for dad. Even less so, given her anxiety level that her husband is currently unemployed.
> 
> I can say unequivocally, that if I were to lose my job, my spouse would go into panic mode ... and knowing her, as I do, I wouldn't even think about approaching her for sex until I had a job offer in-hand. Is it supposed to work that way? No it is not. In life is that the way it plays out? Yes, it absolutely is.
> 
> In both cases above, these aren't unattentive, mail it in, dads. They are great with their kids. One is very active in a band. The other is the kind of guy you meet and can easily strike up a conversation with. Both are thin and fit, between 38 and 41.
> 
> I've known these couples for the last 5 years. It's rough watching them come undone. In one case I was brutally reminded of my own past with my ex, as we were over the couples house and the husband could not stop calling out his wife for anything she did or said. If his behavior was anything like mine, what he was saying or doing was only the slightest hint of the frustration he has seething under the surface. This behavior was not evident 2 years ago.


----------



## 269370

Good article.

This bit:

“High levels of chemistry with major incompatibilities is bad news. Really bad news. These relationships usually begin quickly and passionately, exploding like a flaming geyser, which then extinguishes just as quickly as it began.”

Is interesting because it highlights the challenge of having to bring your gut instinct in alignment with rational thought when picking a partner. Usually, one is good at one or the other (picking someone using your gut or your brain) but not always together...
Some people are unable to pick any other way than with your gut and often that’s why it never works and they jump from one relationship to another, making the same mistakes.

Though if I’m really honest, I did pick my wife mostly using instincts (maybe 80% instinct, 20% logic). And the reason it works (so far) is because she is not stubborn and is adaptable. 
I, on the other hand, would probably be on my own by now with anyone else. I am stubborn and annoying as ****. 




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> Interesting article.
> 
> 
> 
> One problem. According to the definition of chemistry as given, my wife and I have excellent chemistry. So I wondered where the sexual mismatch comes in, because it sure didn't fit the definition of compatibility. So, sure enough, the article then says chemistry is reflected in the bedroom, which is how I would have guessed before reading the definition of chemistry.
> 
> 
> 
> So even though we fit the preliminary definition of chemistry, we also fit the bedroom definition of having little chemistry.
> 
> 
> 
> I think this construct needs to be laid over the HD/LD construct as I suspect there are many possible permutations beyond the simple four square chemistry/compatibility matrix presented.



Don’t forget that it’s not always the same perception from both sides: one person may find that they score on all points with the other person, while the other person may find that they only score on some points (within the same partnership). That’s not a criticism, just an observation of what can happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Deejo

Rocky Mountain Yeti said:


> IME, that would seem to be the case.
> 
> This is the one I have a hard time wrapping my head around. If I can't stand someone outside the bedroom, I'm not going into the bedroom with them in the first place. I'm sure if I forced myself to, the sex would be anything but satisfying.


Well, I'll explain the circumstances in my case. I'll also qualify that when I was dating, I adopted a viewpoint of simply letting any dating experience, 'Be what it is'. I wasn't looking for a mate, or even an exclusive LTR. I was open to just rolling with whatever the relationship was to be.

It was never a matter of 'we couldn't stand one another' it was just 'stuff'. The first for me was about 2 years into dating. We fell in love, lust, whatever you want to call it within about 8 weeks. Hands down, I have never had more fun, excitement, and sex with another woman in my life. We literally broke her bed. Mattress frame crashing to the floor break. Suffice to say, she had issues. At about 3 months in, she started actively sabotaging the relationship. Nothing cruel, or callous, but she didn't believed she deserved someone like me. She had an abusive, womanizing (he actively cheated through his entire marriage) alcoholic father. He broke her collar bone with a blow when she was 14. She had a hard time coping with the fact that my ex-wife would ALWAYS be in the picture in terms of interaction because I had kids. She was terrified of the prospects of parenting my kids ... whom she adored. So ... one day she came over and tearfully explained how it would never work and that she had to go. I didn't interrupt or try to talk her out of it. She kissed me. I asked if she wanted to make love, and her answer was, "Please .." We made love she got dressed. We said goodbye and she drove away.

If I had it to do all over again. I would. It was crazy, passionate, joyful, exciting and tragic. All rolled into just over 6 months. 

The second was with a 48 year old woman who had had a hysterectomy after her kids, and yet somehow had the libido of an 19 year old male. She had been separated for months, and her husband moved out. Appears hubby was very LD. I knew all of this going in, as she was the sister of a close friend. I have no issues identifying that this was effectively an affair. And once again ... it was off the hook. I believe she was looking to cram all of the experiences she WANTED to have had, into a whirlwind romance. We went on lots of dates. Had tons of fun ... and a lot of very wild, uninhibited sex. I never had any expectations given her circumstances that she and I would last long term. I was a rebound, I knew it, and I was fine with that. I was fully aware of the lay of the land going in. Well, almost ...

When we started, she was talking divorce decree, and what her life looked like after divorce. She talked about her failed marriage a lot. This is bound to get snickers or eye rolls, but it was also very clear to me, that she loved her husband, but the man simply couldn't meet her emotional or sexual needs. At about the 100 day mark she informed me that her husband had moved back home. She wanted to continue our relationship. Without anger or judgement, I declined. I told her that I did believe that she and her husband loved each other ... but it seemed like they just couldn't make it work. Hoped they could figure it out. And in no way did I want to be in the middle of that. That was about six years ago. They are still together. I haven't spoken or corresponded with her since.

My point with both of those stories is that I would put them in the category of 'dumpster fire relationships' but the flames were really, really, cool colors. Neither was physically or emotionally abusive or damaging. I can honestly say that I am very glad that I had both experiences. 

My relationship with my spouse is also fun, exciting, and we certainly had our sexually off the hook moments prior to age and hormones creeping up on both of us. The nature of my relationship with my wife could not be more different than the 'all chemistry and no compatibility' relationships I highlighted above. To her, I am bonded and ridiculously committed. There is no, "Lets see where this goes." I know where I want it to go, and where I intend to keep it.


----------



## MEM2020

Deej,

Your story is proof that self respect isn’t a game or a bluff or an attempt to change the other persons choices. 

I have never ever ever gotten a good result from getting VISIBLY angry at M2. Never. Not once. Kind of the opposite. It’s neca she perceives anger as weakness. 

I have had consistently excellent results from:
- providing a fully thought out assessment of a situation I dislike 
- playfully bantering with her in a manner that mimics her craziness 
- shaking my head ruefully while saying - I know you claim to dislike being spanked, but that outcome is certain if you continue 
- radiating disapproval at her




Deejo said:


> Well, I'll explain the circumstances in my case. I'll also qualify that when I was dating, I adopted a viewpoint of simply letting any dating experience, 'Be what it is'. I wasn't looking for a mate, or even an exclusive LTR. I was open to just rolling with whatever the relationship was to be.
> 
> It was never a matter of 'we couldn't stand one another' it was just 'stuff'. The first for me was about 2 years into dating. We fell in love, lust, whatever you want to call it within about 8 weeks. Hands down, I have never had more fun, excitement, and sex with another woman in my life. We literally broke her bed. Mattress frame crashing to the floor break. Suffice to say, she had issues. At about 3 months in, she started actively sabotaging the relationship. Nothing cruel, or callous, but she didn't believed she deserved someone like me. She had an abusive, womanizing (he actively cheated through his entire marriage) alcoholic father. He broke her collar bone with a blow when she was 14. She had a hard time coping with the fact that my ex-wife would ALWAYS be in the picture in terms of interaction because I had kids. She was terrified of the prospects of parenting my kids ... whom she adored. So ... one day she came over and tearfully explained how it would never work and that she had to go. I didn't interrupt or try to talk her out of it. She kissed me. I asked if she wanted to make love, and her answer was, "Please .." We made love she got dressed. We said goodbye and she drove away.
> 
> If I had it to do all over again. I would. It was crazy, passionate, joyful, exciting and tragic. All rolled into just over 6 months.
> 
> The second was with a 48 year old woman who had had a hysterectomy after her kids, and yet somehow had the libido of an 19 year old male. She had been separated for months, and her husband moved out. Appears hubby was very LD. I knew all of this going in, as she was the sister of a close friend. I have no issues identifying that this was effectively an affair. And once again ... it was off the hook. I believe she was looking to cram all of the experiences she WANTED to have had, into a whirlwind romance. We went on lots of dates. Had tons of fun ... and a lot of very wild, uninhibited sex. I never had any expectations given her circumstances that she and I would last long term. I was a rebound, I knew it, and I was fine with that. I was fully aware of the lay of the land going in. Well, almost ...
> 
> When we started, she was talking divorce decree, and what her life looked like after divorce. She talked about her failed marriage a lot. This is bound to get snickers or eye rolls, but it was also very clear to me, that she loved her husband, but the man simply couldn't meet her emotional or sexual needs. At about the 100 day mark she informed me that her husband had moved back home. She wanted to continue our relationship. Without anger or judgement, I declined. I told her that I did believe that she and her husband loved each other ... but it seemed like they just couldn't make it work. Hoped they could figure it out. And in no way did I want to be in the middle of that. That was about six years ago. They are still together. I haven't spoken or corresponded with her since.
> 
> My point with both of those stories is that I would put them in the category of 'dumpster fire relationships' but the flames were really, really, cool colors. Neither was physically or emotionally abusive or damaging. I can honestly say that I am very glad that I had both experiences.
> 
> My relationship with my spouse is also fun, exciting, and we certainly had our sexually off the hook moments prior to age and hormones creeping up on both of us. The nature of my relationship with my wife could not be more different than the 'all chemistry and no compatibility' relationships I highlighted above. To her, I am bonded and ridiculously committed. There is no, "Lets see where this goes." I know where I want it to go, and where I intend to keep it.


----------



## farsidejunky

MEM2020 said:


> Deej,
> 
> 
> 
> Your story is proof that self respect isn’t a game or a bluff or an attempt to change the other persons choices.
> 
> 
> 
> I have never ever ever gotten a good result from getting VISIBLY angry at M2. Never. Not once. Kind of the opposite. It’s neca she perceives anger as weakness.
> 
> 
> 
> I have had consistently excellent results from:
> 
> - providing a fully thought out assessment of a situation I dislike
> 
> - playfully bantering with her in a manner that mimics her craziness
> 
> - shaking my head ruefully while saying - I know you claim to dislike being spanked, but that outcome is certain if you continue
> 
> - radiating disapproval at her


This.

There are the classic boundary statements that work so well, that Conrad and one other classic poster (lizard, gizzard, meh I'm getting old) were absolute masters at.

But ultimately, what made the difference in resetting the power balance in my marriage had everything to do with what you mentioned in one of your previous posts in being willing to see her leave if she continued on her (at the time) current trajectory. 

And the best way for me to do so (at your suggestion, Mem) was to remove myself from as many parts of her life as I could.

ETA: Zillard is the poster I was thinking of...lol...gizzard. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

MEM2020 said:


> Deej,
> 
> Your story is proof that self respect isn’t a game or a bluff or an attempt to change the other persons choices.
> 
> I have never ever ever gotten a good result from getting VISIBLY angry at M2. Never. Not once. Kind of the opposite. It’s neca she perceives anger as weakness.
> 
> I have had consistently excellent results from:
> - providing a fully thought out assessment of a situation I dislike
> - playfully bantering with her in a manner that mimics her craziness
> - shaking my head ruefully while saying - I know you claim to dislike being spanked, but that outcome is certain if you continue
> - radiating disapproval at her


Your way is more logical, and I agree with you. 

But as a rule with DW long talks are not the most productive and long talks can themselves generate challenges as she greatly much more likes to the point information and short discussions. 

Always has. It actually took me a while to be sure that was a constant, but it really is.

I actually tested this theory because I couldn't believe it at first, many years ago. 

Her general opinion is hey, make a decision, choose (whatever) and get on with it. Almost no matter what the topic. No waffling with her, God love her.

Not to say she doesn't decide a lot of things, that's not my point, she is an independent woman. And this suits me just fine.

I make it a point to never, ever, get truly angry, and mostly I've succeeded. And to never, ever, ever, ever be hostile towards her, which I've 100% succeeded, may it always be so. That will never happen. 

Now, she has made me jealous and I've done some things regarding others in our early days, but that's ok.

I'm not protective of her because she's weak, I'm protective of her because she's important, as the saying goes.

I picked her probably 80% chemistry, 10% logic, 10% something I'm sure I'm not thinking of.

Now, in my mind, she picked me because I was hot, smart, had a good career and future, and the Good Lord gave me doable parts in His plan for our financial success which I work hard at doing. But hey, I might be wrong, sometimes I am.

The facts seem to continue to bear out I'm hot and smart still 😎 but now old enough to know that can be gone in an instant, as life is fragile in reality, and that's not all any of us are by any means. The physical fades.

But our sex life is great, I do what I want mostly, and I try and help her do the same. We do stuff together mostly but I've always fostered her independent streak just as much as mine.

I'll likely die first (may it be in a hundred years!) but I feel better knowing she can take care of herself and has the means to if I'm gone from the earthly plain.

❤❤❤


----------



## MEM2020

Ragnar,

Long critical talks are a certain train wreck. You can say almost anything in less than 30 seconds - if you think it thru ahead. 




Ragnar Ragnasson said:


> Your way is more logical, and I agree with you.
> 
> But as a rule with DW long talks are not the most productive and long talks can themselves generate challenges as she greatly much more likes to the point information and short discussions.
> 
> Always has. It actually took me a while to be sure that was a constant, but it really is.
> 
> I actually tested this theory because I couldn't believe it at first, many years ago.
> 
> Her general opinion is hey, make a decision, choose (whatever) and get on with it. Almost no matter what the topic. No waffling with her, God love her.
> 
> Not to say she doesn't decide a lot of things, that's not my point, she is an independent woman. And this suits me just fine.
> 
> I make it a point to never, ever, get truly angry, and mostly I've succeeded. And to never, ever, ever, ever be hostile towards her, which I've 100% succeeded, may it always be so. That will never happen.
> 
> Now, she has made me jealous and I've done some things regarding others in our early days, but that's ok.
> 
> I'm not protective of her because she's weak, I'm protective of her because she's important, as the saying goes.
> 
> I picked her probably 80% chemistry, 10% logic, 10% something I'm sure I'm not thinking of.
> 
> Now, in my mind, she picked me because I was hot, smart, had a good career and future, and the Good Lord gave me doable parts in His plan for our financial success which I work hard at doing. But hey, I might be wrong, sometimes I am.
> 
> The facts seem to continue to bear out I'm hot and smart still 😎 but now old enough to know that can be gone in an instant, as life is fragile in reality, and that's not all any of us are by any means. The physical fades.
> 
> But our sex life is great, I do what I want mostly, and I try and help her do the same. We do stuff together mostly but I've always fostered her independent streak just as much as mine.
> 
> I'll likely die first (may it be in a hundred years!) but I feel better knowing she can take care of herself and has the means to if I'm gone from the earthly plain.
> 
> ❤❤❤


----------



## Ragnar Ragnasson

You've hit it on the head. 

99.9% of our critical discussions are like the book "The One Minute Manager", in 30 seconds or less.

🙂


----------



## farsidejunky

MEM2020 said:


> Ragnar,
> 
> 
> 
> Long critical talks are a certain train wreck. You can say almost anything in less than 30 seconds - if you think it thru ahead.


This.

I have it down to an art with F2. Any more than three back and forths in any conversation in which we don't agree is it. Past that, it becomes argumentative and unproductive.

Past the three is when she normally digs her heels in and puts on her competitive hat... completely subconsciously...at which time I shrug my shoulders and tell her she can do it without my assistance, as more often than not these conversations revolve around something that requires help from me to make happen...or at the very least, my approval and/or validation of the quality of her idea. Putting on her competitive (AKA *******) hat is my cue that our conversation is over. 

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## MEM2020

And what Far described so succinctly below - was how he taught me that my own dynamic was the same in this regard. 

We both can be like this - but - M2 admits that she can be dysfunctionally competitive. 

And once you hit that trigger in her - its pointless to continue. She would burn the house down, if it meant she could rule over the ashes....





farsidejunky said:


> This.
> 
> I have it down to an art with F2. Any more than three back and forths in any conversation in which we don't agree is it. Past that, it becomes argumentative and unproductive.
> 
> Past the three is when she normally digs her heels in and puts on her competitive hat... completely subconsciously...at which time I shrug my shoulders and tell her she can do it without my assistance, as more often than not these conversations revolve around something that requires help from me to make happen...or at the very least, my approval and/or validation of the quality of her idea. Putting on her competitive (AKA *******) hat is my cue that our conversation is over.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


----------



## Doug Dimmadome

Really enjoyed the read! 
The line, "A high degree of chemistry will mean intense, life-altering, heart-pounding sex that causes your mind to cosmically splatter itself on the walls of your consciousness. "
was figuratively insightful!


----------

