# Question for the Women



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

I have seen a bunch of posts lately about "sensitive" men. The basic flavor tends to be I "want" a sensitive man, not a cold, aloof man. That makes sense to me, or at least I think it does. I do want to understand this area better though, so chime in as to how far off I am. 

I tend to see "sensitive" as having 2 completely separate dimensions. 
1. External sensitivity: This is about your sensitivity towards others. When you have a high degree of this, you are aware of how other people are feeling, reacting. You tend to be more tactful and certainly more supportive/sympathetic when they are having a tough time. 

2. Internal sensitivity: This defines how easily YOU are disturbed by external events. It is a measure of how defensive, upset, angry you get when someone criticizes you or life is going against you for one reason or other. 

IME - a lot of 1 is essential to a happy LTR. 2 - for a man - seems like a train wreck. 

What am I missing?


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

I think you are right on target.


----------



## LonelyNLost (Dec 11, 2010)

I want number 1. Number 2 would be a woman. And I don't think that really works well for me.  

I think sensitive to a lot of women just means more in tune with what we think and feel. Like to understand us and love us. To see things we do as sweet and not "get it". Basically, we want a woman's mind and soul in a man's body, lol.


----------



## JJG (Mar 9, 2011)

I think i am missing the point . . . 

Those statements are true of both men and women.


----------



## 4sure (Aug 8, 2010)

#2. for a woman - seems like a train wreck also. If men or women don't manage internal sensitivity he/she will be angry mad most of the time. Life never goes according to the plan that plays out in our minds. You better learn to adapt.


----------



## Syrum (Feb 22, 2011)

I think number 1 is important, having empathy for others is key. I do want an emotional connection with my man too.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

T,
Help me with this because the way I see it in the context of the broader conversations about alpha and beta goes like this. 

Pure beta: A man who is perfect on 1 and terrible on 2, listens to you and understands you, but is often so upset with their "own" issues that they don't offer much in the way of help. 

Pure alpha: A man who is perfect on 2, but very poor on 1. They are strong and stoic AND they fully expect you to be just like them. So they are not supportive and empathetic. 

Either of these "men" makes for a difficult partner. 

A man with a full dose of alpha AND beta is good at "1" and "2". 

I listen to a lot of comments about how "alpha" guys are jerks. I totally disagree. Guys who have little to no "beta" are jerks. 

I also hear many comments about how "beta" guys are wimps. I totally disagree. Guys who have little to no "alpha" are wimps. 

The "presence" of alpha is not bad. The "absence" of beta is. Just as the "presence" of beta is not bad, the "absence" of alpha is. 

The best example I have of this is: "when my W used to vent late at night "her" anxiety - caused "me" anxiety. My inappropriate response to that anxiety was not caused by the presence of beta, but the lack of alpha. So I would try to "solve" her problems to cure "my" anxiety. Selfish and very ineffective. 

Now the "alpha" in me recognizes this is "her" anxiety for "her" to solve. And I am there in the moment being supportive and offering a shoulder and an ear. But I am not trying to solve her problems or shut her up. So the "beta" in me is sensitive to her needs, while the alpha in me keeps me even keeled and calm/soothing.

She doesn't notice the alpha. Because like MANY alpha responses it is about "self" control or "restraint". 

The only time she perceives the "alpha" response if she begins to take her bad day out on me. 




Trenton said:


> I think you are right on target.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

And taking it out on you crosses a boundary.

And the presence of alpha is often necessary for firm boundary enforcement.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

MEM11363 said:


> T,
> Help me with this because the way I see it in the context of the broader conversations about alpha and beta goes like this.
> 
> Pure beta: A man who is perfect on 1 and terrible on 2, listens to you and understands you, but is often so upset with their "own" issues that they don't offer much in the way of help.
> ...


OK. I had this long post written and deleted it and wrote the quote above instead. 

I decided to agree with you because 2 in extreme will be a train wreck for anyone whereas 1 in extreme will benefit those around him as well as himself. The more we let go of internal the more connected we are to external. Most of our internal struggles are what cloud and lead to external struggles.

I didn't see it as Alpha/Beta at all. If you're defining it in those terms I believe we need to redefine it -or- I need to re-look at it in those terms and see if my thought pattern changes.


----------



## notaname (Feb 4, 2011)

Agree that these apply equally to men and women. Those whow struggle with #2 are gonna have a hard time in life and relationships regardless of sex/gender.

I think all humans need to feel understood to feel emotionally connected to other humans. That is where #1 becomes helpful.

We want someone who is sensitive to our needs, but not someone who will ignore their own needs (until resentment builds up and they start posting in the Men's Clubhouse and get told to man up). 

And, yeah, it actually has always bothered me that my husband cries more than me. But, it ain't no deal breaker.

People don't want robots either. If you lose a loved one cry for goodness sake or show your grief somehow....don't pretend not to be impacted by life's changes.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

T,
This is actually hard to convey clearly - help me as I struggle through it. Maybe Atholk will chime in. This is actually my (somewhat imperfect) interpretation of his genius. 

Here is what I am trying to say: 

Hypothetically: I have had a moderately bad day. I come home and immediately realize through my beta sensitivity that my W has had a much worse day. She proceeds to jump right into a long list of what went wrong. I am simultaneously alpha AND beta now. I am BOTH at the same time.

Alpha: First and foremost I assert complete emotional dominance of MYSELF. I force myself to relax and let go of my bad day which I remind myself in the overall scheme of things wasn't all that bad. I focus on HER and get out of my own head. 
Beta: I empathize, I present an open, listening body language. I don't interrupt her, but I project clearly using my facial expressions some support along the lines of "I cannot believe that so and so did THAT"

And here we get to the branch point, because she wants to send "so and so" an email. And now I slip into a more externally alpha mode and say. 
Me:
Words: "I will support you no matter what you do"
Body language: Hugely pained facial expression - like you have just before someone jumps off a building 
Words: "Its just that every time "I" have ever sent an email to someone when I was feeling justifiably angry, I regretted it the next day". 
Her: (Getting angry at me) So you think I am wrong?
Me: Not at all. I have just never met anyone who was nearly as effective when angry, as they are when they are calm. 

And I guess the point of this is, I don't see alpha/beta as "either one OR the other". At peak I am both and it is damn hard to tell where one trait starts and the other stops. They complement each other. 

At my worst - I am neither alpha nor beta. Instead I am lost in my own anxious response to the situation, and in being lost I am neither empathetic, nor helpful. 





Trenton said:


> OK. I had this long post written and deleted it and wrote the quote above instead.
> 
> I decided to agree with you because 2 in extreme will be a train wreck for anyone whereas 1 in extreme will benefit those around him as well as himself. The more we let go of internal the more connected we are to external. Most of our internal struggles are what cloud and lead to external struggles.
> 
> I didn't see it as Alpha/Beta at all. If you're defining it in those terms I believe we need to redefine it -or- I need to re-look at it in those terms and see if my thought pattern changes.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

In your scenario a few questions would come to mind, do you always override your own internal struggles to meet the needs of your wife's internal struggles? Is this because providing comfort and guidance to your wife reinforces your feelings of self worth (Alpha ego) and so you'd rather focus on helping her than you would moan about your day in competition against hers?

It very well might be that women, being more emotional creatures by default, have a greater need to have their internal struggles met with understanding, non judgmental guidance and support; whereas, men have a greater need to feel as if they are successfully the provider of this comfort and support and in providing this actually feel better themselves and their internal emotional struggles (Don't mind the long run on sentence).

In other words, both internal and external struggles exist for both but the way these struggles become settled for men and women is very different.

So my general question for you would be, in helping your wife did your own bad day seem less bad? -or- did a part of you resent that you had to speak about her day rather than yours? 

The other question would be, do you have an example where your internal emotional struggles superseded that of your wife and how did your wife respond to this?


----------



## okeydokie (Sep 10, 2008)

my head hurts


----------



## mentallydrained (Oct 7, 2010)

MEM11363 said:


> 2.. Internal sensitivity: This defines how easily YOU are disturbed by external events. It is a measure of how defensive, upset, angry you get when someone criticizes you or life is going against you for one reason or other.
> 
> IME - a lot of 1 is essential to a happy LTR. 2 - for a man - seems like a train wreck.
> 
> What am I missing?


Agree, this is a woman. I know...it's 110% me! Not to mention sensitive of putting a high regard on self as far as feeling need to make others like and accept me.


----------



## swedish (Mar 6, 2008)

JJG said:


> I think i am missing the point . . .
> 
> Those statements are true of both men and women.


:iagree:

And whether a man or a woman, being sensitive towards others is a positive, while whining woe is me all the time is not.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Trenton said:


> In your scenario a few questions would come to mind, do you always override your own internal struggles to meet the needs of your wife's internal struggles? Is this because providing comfort and guidance to your wife reinforces your feelings of self worth (Alpha ego) and so you'd rather focus on helping her than you would moan about your day in competition against hers?
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> I try to. I don't always succeed. When we both have bad days - and I handle it this way - we both feel good. When I handle it with irritation - it we both end up feeling bad.
> ...


If something REALLY bad happens with me - she is great. Or if she has a good day and I had a not so good day - she is great. If we both have bad days, I need to suck it up. Fine by me because my W is a happy person. And mostly she radiates this glow. And that WAY offsets the impatience/need for support. And most days she does not need support. She is not needy.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

MEM11363 said:


> I tend to see "sensitive" as having 2 completely separate dimensions.
> 1. External sensitivity: This is about your sensitivity towards others. When you have a high degree of this, you are aware of how other people are feeling, reacting. You tend to be more tactful and certainly more supportive/sympathetic when they are having a tough time.
> 
> 2. Internal sensitivity: This defines how easily YOU are disturbed by external events. It is a measure of how defensive, upset, angry you get when someone criticizes you or life is going against you for one reason or other.
> ...


I have never thought about dissecting a man's sensitivity in these ways, oh how VERY TRUE this is !! Same goes for women in these Alpha -beta respects too. 

Mem, I agree with your EVERY THOUGHT on this thread & how you are explaining this :iagree: I think I am seeing Alpha in a better light also. Too many things I have read has slaughtered the meanings, but I will get there. 

I want (and have) *#1* with my husband in abundance, and he virtually has none of *#2* (well unless we are in a heat of the moment fight -which makes sense) but virtually anything else slides off of him. He doesn't even like people much, so not much gets under his skin, he is the guy at work who calms the flames with other employees. 

I really dont think I could live with a man who has much of *#2*, I am not the type to walk on eggs shells watching every word I say - lest someone gets their feelings hurt & takes it internally, this would get very old after awhile, driving me mad. I may be tackful on these forums, but in my family who knows me well, we're all pretty boisterous with each other. No overly sensitives should survive in my house. 

Although I have one young son who seems too emotional for a BOY, he has *#1* (very sensitive to animals even), very helpful but also too much of *#2* : easily angered, gets defensive, has burst into tears & yelling if a sibling gets him upset, and guess what, unlike my other kids, he struggles to have many friends.  I am so hoping he grows out of this! Me & him clash all the time. He needs me to be more sensitive TO him and I need him to be more ALPHA. Hopefully it is just his age and not a sign of his future. 




Trenton said:


> It very well might be that women, being more emotional creatures by default, have a greater need to have their internal struggles met with understanding, non judgmental guidance and support; whereas, men have a greater need to feel as if they are successfully the provider of this comfort and support and in providing this actually feel better themselves and their internal emotional struggles


I would say my husband feels this way-always , very well explained here. When he has a really bad day (so rare) he does open up about it but even on days like that, he would ask me how my day was 1st, just the way he is. What do I do but play on TAM though, easy days.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

MEM11363 said:


> If something REALLY bad happens with me - she is great. Or if she has a good day and I had a not so good day - she is great. If we both have bad days, I need to suck it up. Fine by me because my W is a happy person. And mostly she radiates this glow. And that WAY offsets the impatience/need for support. And most days she does not need support. She is not needy.


Does she ever try to judge whether you "really" had a bad day?


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

So we can basically summarize (and actually agree?! Is that possible?!) that everyone struggles with internal and external emotions but it's more about how we interact and deal with both of these struggles that dictates whether or not they work for or against us in our relationships.


----------



## MarriedWifeInLove (May 28, 2010)

#1 is what I'm looking for.

#2 could be possible in certain situations. I want a man who will cry when his mother dies. I want a man who cries at the birth of a child. That type of internal sensitivity works for me - even if they are a man - it shows me that they can be "touched" enough by an event of great magnitude that they cannot HOLD those emotions in.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Trenton said:


> So we can basically summarize (and actually agree?! Is that possible?!) that everyone struggles with internal and external emotions but it's more about how we interact and deal with both of these struggles that dictates whether or not they work for or against us in our relationships.


Yes and no.

One may not struggle with either aspect of sensitivity unless or until your partner manifests issues with one of those manners of expression.

I think of #2 or internal sensitivity as 'expressive'. MEM is outlining the potential pitfalls of expressive sensitivity. But expressive sensitivity needn't be a negative. Although without question, I would state that 'expressive' sensitivity is what gets most Nice Guys in trouble. They want to help. They want to 'do for you' They want to outwardly 'express' that they love you ... ad nauseum, without thought or consequence, to their detriment.

I see #1 as 'Seeing and Sensing', #2 as 'Showing and Telling'.

It's a feedback loop. 

MEM's definition is an excellent and neutral expression of balancing alpha, beta, and ... dominance. This is the dominance over oneself to correctly adjust Sensing, and Showing, according to the circumstances warranted by your partner.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

You really believe that individuals can go through life without struggling with their internal and external emotions? Certainly our ability and choices to control, show, deny or express both is a constant learning curve in all aspects of our life.

I don't address the Alpha/Beta directly because I've come to the conclusion that I don't understand it in a way that I could offer helpful comments about it. I think of it as something that helps men in understanding male behavior in relationship to their spouses (as seen on TAM) but I am more of a cause/effect on a case by case basis while keeping the past/present/future in mind kind of person.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

Damn Deejo,

>>MEM's definition is an excellent and neutral expression of balancing alpha, beta, and ... dominance. This is the dominance over oneself to correctly adjust Sensing, and Showing, according to the circumstances warranted by your partner.<< 

I consider this undeniable truth.

I've lived it, acted it out, and experienced it from others.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

Trenton said:


> You really believe that individuals can go through life without struggling with their internal and external emotions? Certainly our ability and choices to control, show, deny or express both is a constant learning curve in all aspects of our life.
> 
> I don't address the Alpha/Beta directly because I've come to the conclusion that I don't understand it in a way that I could offer helpful comments about it. I think of it as something that helps men in understanding male behavior in relationship to their spouses (as seen on TAM) but I am more of a cause/effect on a case by case basis while keeping the past/present/future in mind kind of person.


Trenton,

My entire first marriage, I didn't think I was all that emotional.

What a joke.

Do we struggle with something if we don't realize we're struggling?

My first wife was "Mrs. Nice Guy"


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Ok, I am lost again!!!!! 

I was looking at *#2 *as "taking everything VERY personal " when half the time maybe it was not intended to be, about getting bent out of shape, but these last few posts seem to be talking about something else, making *#2* sound like a good thing -crying at funerals (of coarse we need such emotion!) , and being "expressive" (I LOVE EXPRESSIVE! )-- so now *#2 *is sounding good to me, not all bad like I originally read it. 

I consdier myself *"expressive*" but I do not take everything very personal, get defensive, and angry when someone criticizes me. I kinda have fun with that. I think we all do sometimes though. If I do , I talk back, but I rarely internalize this "sensitivity".

I was thinking on the lines of a fitness test, these men are being too sensitive to the things being said to them, and they are being drownded in this sensitivity -to hurt themselves & their relationships. 

That is not what MEM meant with his original post??? You guys are above my intelligence.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

SimplyAmorous said:


> Ok, I am lost again!!!!!
> 
> I was looking at *#2 *as "taking everything VERY personal " when half the time maybe it was not intended to be, about getting bent out of shape, but these last few posts seem to be talking about something else, making *#2* sound like a good thing -crying at funerals (of coarse we need such emotion!) , and being "expressive" (I LOVE EXPRESSIVE! )-- so now *#2 *is sounding good to me, not all bad like I originally read it.
> 
> ...


I think what MEM is describing is the _end result_ of too much #2 (Something about the way that sounds seems ironically fitting). I can't imagine that anyone would be terribly attracted to either gender that emotionally coped as he initially outlined. 

I think a man that does too much 'Showing and Telling' courts fitness tests. Whereas if he was on the ball with 'Sensing' he'd understand that he's dealing with a fitness test when it came along.

I do think that the internal versus external is a nice way to think of it, however.

Everybody confused?

Need to excuse myself for some #1.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Deejo - at least you didn't have to excuse yourself for a #2

I think what Mem described in his example was wonderful because it shows a dynamic where both partners' internal and external needs were being met by very different actions. 

Maybe Mem didn't, at the time, recognize that in giving up his bad day to comfort his wife he was actually meeting his internal emotional needs, but he still did. In comforting his wife's internal emotions in a way that brought her security and pleasure, he also felt better and so his internal emotional needs were also met and the mutual bad day melted away within the security of their relationship.

Am I being clear? I'm sure I should be able to summarize my thoughts in less wordy ways but I'm not very good at that so please try to read through all the muck and get the point for my sake.

That's what I wanted us all to agree upon. OK, silly thought to think that was possible!


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Oh, and I should add for the sake of further wordy clarity, I don't see #1 or #2 being bad or good. I see how we act based upon #1 & #2 being bad or good for a relationship.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

SimplyAmorous said:


> Ok, I am lost again!!!!!
> 
> I was looking at *#2 *as "taking everything VERY personal " when half the time maybe it was not intended to be, about getting bent out of shape, but these last few posts seem to be talking about something else, making *#2* sound like a good thing -crying at funerals (of coarse we need such emotion!) , and being "expressive" (I LOVE EXPRESSIVE! )-- so now *#2 *is sounding good to me, not all bad like I originally read it.
> 
> ...


Actually we're not.

We just want you to THINK we are.

(That's the key to passing cyber fitness tests!)


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Trenton said:


> Maybe Mem didn't, at the time, recognize that in giving up his bad day to comfort his wife he was actually meeting his internal emotional needs, but he still did. In comforting his wife's internal emotions in a way that brought her security and pleasure, he also felt better and so his internal emotional needs were also met and the mutual bad day melted away within the security of their relationship.


I understand and agree. And when it works, it's a beautiful thing.

My point in calling it a 'feedback loop' is that it goes off the rails if the dynamic fixates on only one partner getting to have a bad day, and the other partners day, be damned. And once that dynamic is in place, it usually only gets worse.




> Am I being clear? I'm sure I should be able to summarize my thoughts in less wordy ways but I'm not very good at that so please try to read through all the muck and get the point for my sake.
> 
> That's what I wanted us all to agree upon. OK, silly thought to think that was possible!


Yes.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

SA,
You used the magic phrase. Which is "walking on eggshells". So you got me thinking here. I won't speak for all women - only my W. This is my take on "her" and what she responds to. 

Fear: I am open with her regarding "fears" I have regarding the children. I have them. They are real and in the cases where I express them she understands and generally shares them or agrees they are valid. 

As for the fear, insecurity and anxiety I feel for "ME", those I conceal and manage as best I can. I openly acknowledge a fear of heights. When she wanted to sky dive I never mentioned it. I managed it completely during the event. And afterwards I laughingly told her that I would happily go again (which I would as it was a huge rush), and that I actually wasn't afraid during the free fall. But that when the instructor started to corkscrew us down by controlling the parachute I absolutely was afraid. And then I shrugged - when you "know" it is a phobia you don't let it run your life. 

Managing my "personal fears" is a huge, a giant plus in our marriage. 

Same with anger. The better I manage it, manage my temper the better the marriage. 

Seems like many men are afraid to have conflict with their wives and they bottle it up until they "explode". Classic passive/aggressive behavior. This really is unmanaged "fear" expressed as anger. 

She is ok with sadness when something bad happens. I don't hide that. 



SimplyAmorous said:


> I have never thought about dissecting a man's sensitivity in these ways, oh how VERY TRUE this is !! Same goes for women in these Alpha -beta respects too.
> 
> Mem, I agree with your EVERY THOUGHT on this thread & how you are explaining this :iagree: I think I am seeing Alpha in a better light also. Too many things I have read has slaughtered the meanings, but I will get there.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Actually not. 

However, when she "hurts my feelings", if I were to say "you hurt my feelings" she would find a way to let me know why my feelings should not be hurt. 

So I almost never say that. Instead I do that whole list of fit test stuff ranging from the mild "Next time "x" happens, I would prefer you do "y", all the way up to "that is not acceptable". 

For some reason that works perfectly. Talking about hurt feelings is a train wreck. Don't know why. I just accept it. 




Conrad said:


> Does she ever try to judge whether you "really" had a bad day?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

M22,
This really resonates. In my initial example in this thread I describe a situation where my W is angry at someone else and wants to send them an email right away. 

I am very aware that when I suggest gently that she NOT do so, she may get angry at me. In the moment I actually don't fear that. I accept it as an unfortunate potential side effect of me doing the right thing, which is trying to prevent her from doing something she will regret. And I am confident that when she calms down, whether or not I succeed in persuading her not to do something rash, she will be grateful that I tried. 




mommy22 said:


> MEM, my husband and I recently attended a conference that helped me understand why men bottle things up. I think the fear for many is the wife's reaction. The example used was: A woman's in a bad mood at home when her husband gets home. He comes in all excited that he got a promotion and tells her with great enthusiasm. Her response to it is "Did you bother to pick up the dry cleaning like I've asked you to do every day this week? What about the mild at the supermarket. I don't care about your promotion. Why can't you remember the things I ask you to do. I can't do it all, you know." The guy's natural reaction is to quit sharing, to shut down. Thankfully, my H told me I give him room to share and he doesn't feel that way about sharing things with me but I know my attitude can use improvement from time to time. So much of the time, these things are a breakdown in communication and often we don't even know how to put these things into words which makes it more difficult. A translator would be nice!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Deejo,
I like your terminology:
- Seeing and sensing 
- Showing and telling

I am going to risk being cynical here. I certain amount of "nice guy" behavior "presents" as wanting to reassure your partner with love and support. In reality, it is driven by insecurity and neediness. 

For instance when I constantly show you how much I love you it is because I want you to respond in kind. I recently had someone PM me that they say "ILY" but really mean "do you love me"? And THAT is a bad dynamic. 




Deejo said:


> Yes and no.
> 
> One may not struggle with either aspect of sensitivity unless or until your partner manifests issues with one of those manners of expression.
> 
> ...


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

mommy22 said:


> MEM, my husband and I recently attended a conference that helped me understand why men bottle things up. I think the fear for many is the wife's reaction. The example used was: A woman's in a bad mood at home when her husband gets home. He comes in all excited that he got a promotion and tells her with great enthusiasm. Her response to it is "Did you bother to pick up the dry cleaning like I've asked you to do every day this week? What about the mild at the supermarket. I don't care about your promotion. Why can't you remember the things I ask you to do. I can't do it all, you know." The guy's natural reaction is to quit sharing, to shut down. Thankfully, my H told me I give him room to share and he doesn't feel that way about sharing things with me but I know my attitude can use improvement from time to time. So much of the time, these things are a breakdown in communication and often we don't even know how to put these things into words which makes it more difficult. A translator would be nice!


This is one way I failed and am guilty. It's an easy thing for me to change. Interesting that you brought it up because it's an example of a woman's internal emotions being projected onto her husband unfairly. 

I remedied this by recognizing that 6pm - 9pm would be about my kids and husband whereas it used to be my most stressful time. I told myself that I could text my husband any complaints, requests or lovey dovey nonsense based upon my (newly coined, Thanks Mem) internal emotions during the day but would provide that safe haven regardless of external factors from 6pm - 9pm.

It has worked miracles and is easy, distracting and enjoyable for me. My kids love it because I'm in a good mood and they can come to me with their crappy days, good days, accomplishments/failures and my husband loves it because he can unwind from his good or crappy day too.

Like SA...how crappy can my day actually be without being completely indulgent? I browse the internet, deal with a low maintenance 5 year old and do household chores. It might be too boring for me but I realized this wasn't anyone in my household's fault either.

Yes. Changing how we deal with our internal and external emotions does change everything.

Tonight my husband flat out told me that he LOVES coming home now. What?! This is all it took?

I'm so confused as to how there's not a class for this stuff.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Deejo said:


> I understand and agree. And when it works, it's a beautiful thing.
> 
> My point in calling it a 'feedback loop' is that it goes off the rails if the dynamic fixates on only one partner getting to have a bad day, and the other partners day, be damned. And once that dynamic is in place, it usually only gets worse.
> 
> ...


That's where I was hesitant too because a part of me, and I asked Mem this directly, was worried that having to give up his bad day to comfort her bad day would take its toll. It seems that it doesn't though if the person who is consoling does so in a way that is helpful to the person being consoled. Which resonates with an equal partnership because one being consoled automatically, and quite by chance, consoles the other.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Deejo,
I think you also nailed the other piece of this which is too much selfless love "expressed". Even when all that love and support IS sincere and is not given based on the need to hear it back, it is a total lack of internal emotional dominance (self dominance), to express more love to someone than they are comfortable with. 

My W's natural thermostat is set at 70. Mine natural "internal thermostat" setting is closer to 80. But I "show and tell" a nice steady 70 degrees. 




Deejo said:


> Yes and no.
> 
> One may not struggle with either aspect of sensitivity unless or until your partner manifests issues with one of those manners of expression.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

T,
One thing I/we learned to do. Unless we are in the middle of a spat, whoever walks in the door gets greeted with a big smile, and a long full body hug. Sets a GREAT tone for the night. 

As for your self awareness Trenton, it is exceptional. 



Trenton said:


> This is one way I failed and am guilty. It's an easy thing for me to change. Interesting that you brought it up because it's an example of a woman's internal emotions being projected onto her husband unfairly.
> 
> I remedied this by recognizing that 6pm - 9pm would be about my kids and husband whereas it used to be my most stressful time. I told myself that I could text my husband any complaints, requests or lovey dovey nonsense based upon my (newly coined, Thanks Mem) internal emotions during the day but would provide that safe haven regardless of external factors from 6pm - 9pm.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

I am going to use Deejo's terms:
1. Seeing and sensing (which also includes all the good stuff you do for other people when you are highly aware of them)
2. Showing and telling (expressing how you feel)

WRT (2) there is tons of good stuff. You SHOULD be sad at a funeral and it should show. You should be happy at a birth and that should show. 

For the purpose of defining "internal sensitivity" in the way I meant it, I was thinking of it as a measure of how much negative energy someone emits. But the funny thing is when I think about what that means for me in my marriage it is really limited to 3 things:
- Managing my personal fears and how I express or conceal them. Unmanaged fear is weakness. 
- Managing anger (because raw anger tends to make me stupid and less effective, in a sense raw anger USUALLY shows a lack of self control and maturity. In a sense it is weakness. Controlled anger, well managed anger however is expressed as determination and focus. And that is real strength. 
- Managing love. Yes I did say that. I already mentioned thermostat management. It is important. Directly over loving your partner is selfish. It isn't fair to them. 

I personally struggle the most with the anger thing. 









SimplyAmorous said:


> Ok, I am lost again!!!!!
> 
> I was looking at *#2 *as "taking everything VERY personal " when half the time maybe it was not intended to be, about getting bent out of shape, but these last few posts seem to be talking about something else, making *#2* sound like a good thing -crying at funerals (of coarse we need such emotion!) , and being "expressive" (I LOVE EXPRESSIVE! )-- so now *#2 *is sounding good to me, not all bad like I originally read it.
> 
> ...


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

Trenton said:


> That's where I was hesitant too because a part of me, and I asked Mem this directly, was worried that having to give up his bad day to comfort her bad day would take its toll. It seems that it doesn't though if the person who is consoling does so in a way that is helpful to the person being consoled. Which resonates with an equal partnership because one being consoled automatically, and quite by chance, consoles the other.


This is the crux.

Giving up "his bad day" is a pleasure for your warrior!

It will never "take a toll", for it makes him feel "needed" without him having to act "needy".


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

MEM11363 said:


> Actually not.
> 
> However, when she "hurts my feelings", if I were to say "you hurt my feelings" she would find a way to let me know why my feelings should not be hurt.
> 
> ...


My experience is similar.

Somehow, it sets off some sort of reaction that leads nowhere good.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

That is actually a good thing. Somehow that is just not something a man should say unless you are dealing with a very extreme situation. 

When my W tells me I hurt her feelings. I feel bad. I definitely don't have the desire or thought to tell her she should "toughen up". I just say I am sorry. And I am.




mommy22 said:


> Guys, please keep talking. I'm learning a lot here.... Don't know that my husband has ever said, "You hurt my feelings". Hmmm...


----------



## Neil (Jan 5, 2011)

Trenton said:


> This is one way I failed and am guilty. It's an easy thing for me to change. Interesting that you brought it up because it's an example of a woman's internal emotions being projected onto her husband unfairly.
> 
> I remedied this by recognizing that 6pm - 9pm would be about my kids and husband whereas it used to be my most stressful time. I told myself that I could text my husband any complaints, requests or lovey dovey nonsense based upon my (newly coined, Thanks Mem) internal emotions during the day but would provide that safe haven regardless of external factors from 6pm - 9pm.
> 
> ...



I so wish my partner would read this adn understand it...

i used to hate going home from work knowing what I was going to walk into. (I can sense it sometimes too during my interactions with her during the day).

Today, she is being very upbeat and sent several positive texts for absolutely no reason at all, and now I am looking forward to going home.

It does work


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

In re-reading it, I think an interesting aspect of my example is that my normally indulgent and whiny internal emotions' needs are met by making myself available to my family. It's true that choosing to be consciously open to listening, caring and sharing with them completely changes how I feel emotionally.

In other words, I think that internal emotional struggles can be quieted by external emotional connections.


----------



## Neil (Jan 5, 2011)

Trenton said:


> In re-reading it, I think an interesting aspect of my example is that my normally indulgent and whiny internal emotions' needs are met by making myself available to my family. It's true that choosing to be consciously open to listening, caring and sharing with them completely changes how I feel emotionally.
> 
> In other words, I think that internal emotional struggles can be quieted by external emotional connections.


I can relate, 

when my partner gives positive vibes during the day, I go home more happy, and more intent on helping out and doing things around the house and "serving her needs".

If all I get during the day is negative stuff, I'm more inclined to think, why bother, even if I do, she won't appreciate it.

Both partners IMHO need to work on supressing their internal struggles and project more externally. (It does make things happier). However, I am not adverse to listening and helping with her internal struggles, I think it needs to work both ways, and its vital that communication and understanding exists, otherwise each person comes across as a whiny mardy ass fart


----------



## woodstock (Feb 21, 2011)

I think what it really comes down to for me, is that I want a man who will trust me enough to allow himself to be a little vulnerable. I want enough trust that he will be comfortable enough to show his emotions as well as being able to see mine and respond with compassion.

I don't want an uber sensitive, I kinda like the marlboro man thing, but behind closed doors I want him to be able to give me ALL of him, even what's deep down. I want the chance to show him the compassion I want to recieve and that is very difficult when you cannot read any emotion beyond happy and mad.


----------



## Trenton (Aug 25, 2010)

Neil said:


> I can relate,
> 
> when my partner gives positive vibes during the day, I go home more happy, and more intent on helping out and doing things around the house and "serving her needs".
> 
> ...


Yes, agreed.

Whiny mardy ass fart, eh? :rofl:


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

I tend to not 'emote' at home with the wife. She'll just get pissed off that it's not about her. She's not interested. She wants me to listen to her complain and rally to her support and wish death upon her enemies. At the same time I have to be very sensitive to her wildly oscillating mood swings and how the time of day bears upon that. For instance it's never a good idea to talk to her after 7 or 8pm. Early morning is ok.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

mommy22 said:


> Another example was a woman buying a marriage book and highlighting the sections and then suggesting to her husband they read it together. He groans thinking, "I'm not good enough for her the way I am so she buys these stupid books to try to fix me." ..... She meant no ill will at all but he felt like the gesture made him a failure in her eyes when nothing could've been further from the truth.


 I have bought "No More Mr Nice Guy", "Hold on to your Nuts" & others to enhance our sex life. My husband doesn’t get upset about it, he lets me read stuff to him, he admits where he has missed it, I admit my blunders. He understands we can all improve in some areas, he is open to learning, doesn’t take it in a bad way. I am sure THANKFUL for this, cause otherwise that would be like dealing with a BRICK WALL = the death of communication. 



MEM11363 said:


> As for the fear, insecurity and anxiety I feel for "ME", those I conceal and manage as best I can. I openly acknowledge a fear of heights. When she wanted to sky dive I never mentioned it. I managed it completely during the event. And afterwards I laughingly told her that I would happily go again (which I would as it was a huge rush), and that I actually wasn't afraid during the free fall. But that when the instructor started to corkscrew us down by controlling the parachute I absolutely was afraid. And then I shrugged - when you "know" it is a phobia you don't let it run your life.


Ok , so what if it wasn't a huge rush & you didn't want to do it again? Then you would have been in a pickle . So what you are saying here is - you pretty much faked it at the beginning, concealed ALL of your fears & feel all men should do this in ALL situations? Personally, as a woman, I see nothing wrong with a guy admitting a little fear (especially something like THAT!) -BUT here is what I would want to see after he was openly honest about it -- a "little engine that could" attitude , saying something like "I am scared sh**less but da gone it , I am GOING TO DO THIS!" FOR ME, this would be = or even superior from a man who HID a part of himself from me, because he feared I would think lowly of him. I simply would not want that. 

A similar example - me & husband in our teens went to Cedar Point with friends, he doesn't like heights either, hates Roller Coasters (so also a fear). I LOVE them. He didn't care if I saw him as a Wus- he still didn’t' like the things & he wasn't going to hide this fact. I played it up a little, called him chicken a few times, but I got him on a Coaster! I told him "just do it once & I'll leave you alone". 

Now if he would have HID that from me, acted like this BIG MAN who had no fear, guess what, I would have dragged his a** on coasters ALL day long, because that is what I like! So 
he would have been dishonest with himself, TOO loving to me & basically miserable (and come on Mem, I know you are against that in any man!). Unlike you & the sky diving, he still didn't like them after he rode it. He did it FOR ME & I accept the fact "this is not his thing". But I don’t see it as a weakness. Just more a preference. 

These situations are not the best of examples though. I know what you are trying to get at, and of coarse we want our men to show LESS FEAR than us women (most especially in Hard times) as they ARE our Protectors & take pride in being such, they need to ACT the part. They shouldn't come off as babies who still need coddling & reassurance. Us wives don't want to play Mom, we want someone to lean on. 




Conrad said:


> Giving up "his bad day" is a pleasure for your warrior!
> 
> It will never "take a toll", for it makes him feel "needed" without him having to act "needy".


I don't see that anyone has to give up their bad day at all. There are plenty of hours in the evening. Even if the wife had one & he listened, soothed, he is feeling good he was a comfort, no reason he can't then share his day, after all he will be more calm now. And if she is a good wife, she would be asking! 



MEM11363 said:


> - Managing my personal fears and how I express or conceal them. Unmanaged fear is weakness.
> - Managing anger (because raw anger tends to make me stupid and less effective, in a sense raw anger USUALLY shows a lack of self control and maturity. In a sense it is weakness. Controlled anger, well managed anger however is expressed as determination and focus. And that is real strength.


 My husband manages anger VERY WELL. Seeing him loose it, so rare, more with the kids. He is very tame compared to most men here. IN all the years at his current job, ONE TIME he got really upset for someone riding him -being a jerk (this guy annoys everybody) & he hauled off gave him the finger & told him to turn it up - and those guys still laugh like he** about it (they loved telling me) because it was such a RARE occurrence to come from him. Much management there. As for me, hmmmmm total opposite. Yep that would be mine too but I do it more with the kids - than him. 



MEM11363 said:


> - Managing love. Yes I did say that. I already mentioned thermostat management. It is important. Directly over loving your partner is selfish. It isn't fair to them.
> I personally struggle the most with the anger thing.


I don't understand the "SELFISH" part, not being FAIR to them ? I would see it more as Unselfish, kinda like those who are all into the "Unconditional love" at any cost- no matter how you are treated, more self -defeating - when you "over-love". 



MEM11363 said:


> Deejo,
> I think you also nailed the other piece of this which is too much selfless love "expressed". Even when all that love and support IS sincere and is not given based on the need to hear it back, it is a total lack of internal emotional dominance (self dominance), to express more love to someone than they are comfortable with.


 Maybe this is what you mean, only giving what the other is *comfortable* with. Ok, in my marriage, we are comfortable with the Heights. You said something about a thermostat -hers at 70, yours at 80, but you keep yours a little lower at 70. Dangling the carrot just a little. I am not sure what these degrees means exactly but I am probably "comfortable" at near 100% -If I think I understand. 

So again, I still PREFER the sensitive open (behind closed doors with me ) "vulnerable" type man. 




Neil said:


> when my partner gives positive vibes during the day, I go home more happy, and more intent on helping out and doing things around the house and "serving her needs".
> 
> If all I get during the day is negative stuff, I'm more inclined to think, why bother, even if I do, she won't appreciate it.
> 
> Both partners IMHO need to work on supressing their internal struggles and project more externally. (It does make things happier). However, I am not adverse to listening and helping with her internal struggles, I think it needs to work both ways, and its vital that communication and understanding exists, otherwise each person comes across as a whiny mardy ass fart


:iagree: I am more "positive" than I used to be ( I am convinced I needed layed more often back then & didn't know it!) - I really mean this. 

My husband could relate to this post at one time. He told me many times on his way home from work, he would be thinking about holding me, wanting to make love, he would get through the door & MY attitude , ranting about the kids, my family, something needed fixed, whatever it was on these days, dampered his mood, sucked all that loving feeling out of him. I recall a few times him saying "I should have just stayed at work". I sabatoged myself , brought him down with me & severed that connection that led to more touching & affection. 



Trenton said:


> I remedied this by recognizing that 6pm - 9pm would be about my kids and husband whereas it used to be my most stressful time. ....It has worked miracles and is easy, distracting and enjoyable for me. My kids love it because I'm in a good mood and they can come to me with their crappy days, good days, accomplishments/failures and my husband loves it because he can unwind from his good or crappy day too.


Wonderful ! Something so small but So very constructive! Appears you & his solution. No more crushed macaroni in his pockets!


----------



## Mom6547 (Jul 13, 2010)

MEM11363 said:


> I have seen a bunch of posts lately about "sensitive" men. The basic flavor tends to be I "want" a sensitive man, not a cold, aloof man. That makes sense to me, or at least I think it does. I do want to understand this area better though, so chime in as to how far off I am.
> 
> I tend to see "sensitive" as having 2 completely separate dimensions.
> 1. External sensitivity: This is about your sensitivity towards others. When you have a high degree of this, you are aware of how other people are feeling, reacting. You tend to be more tactful and certainly more supportive/sympathetic when they are having a tough time.
> ...


Well two things, both kind of minor. You seem to be saying that the opposite of sensitive is cold and aloof. I don't think so. The opposite of sensitive is jerk.

Also #2, internal sensitivity, could also be called self esteem. I think low self esteem and lack of confidence opens the door to MANY weird motivations that open the door to damage in *any* relationship whether it is male of female who is lacking in confidence. The more you need someone else to soothe your self esteem, and the more defensive you are to criticism, the more difficult it is to solve real problems with real problem solving skills.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Even if I greatly disliked it because I was afraidI would keep doing it until I got used to it, or she got bored. That would be true for any "phobia" I have. Not going to make it her problem unless it is something she wants to do daily. 

As for "faking it" - this is my view. She knows I have a mild/moderate fear of heights. She has never seen me decline any activity because of it. She asked me to skydive and I said sure. I actually was not afraid until the "corkscrew bit". When I landed I told her that - and made fun of myself for it and we both laughed. I tend to prefer to tell her about stuff that scares me "after the fact". So she is inside my head, at my pace. I am not much into telling her I am scared before hand. I don't want the "mommy comfort thing". Perfectly fine with my partner and I having a laugh at my expense afterwards though. 

Roller coasters sometimes give me motion sickness. I don't go on them anymore. Just don't like them. 

It seems totally selfish to "emotionally crowd" your partner with too much love. You are doing what YOU want, not what THEY want. I grasp that this seems like a game. I don't think of it that way. If my W wants me to "express" more love she asks me to. And sometimes she does ask. 

When asked a direct question by her about anything I don't lie. I may decline to answer. But I don't lie. But I am never going to say "each and every little thing that pops into my head". Seems kind of self indulgent. 




SimplyAmorous said:


> I have bought "No More Mr Nice Guy", "Hold on to your Nuts" & others to enhance our sex life. My husband doesn’t get upset about it, he lets me read stuff to him, he admits where he has missed it, I admit my blunders. He understands we can all improve in some areas, he is open to learning, doesn’t take it in a bad way. I am sure THANKFUL for this, cause otherwise that would be like dealing with a BRICK WALL = the death of communication.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## lime (Jul 3, 2010)

Interesting thread! I don't really have much constructive to add, but it has been informative. My SO and I both get super stressed and have lots of bad days--full-time school, each of us now has 2 part-time jobs, and we are paying all our own bills. 

It's very, VERY easy to get into selfish mode, or even just zone-out mode when we get home. When we're successful at overcoming bad days, it's not because one of us nurtures the other one--it's because we both just say **** it, have a drink, go do something outside, play cards, or even freeload off of the samples at Costco. Maybe it's avoidant behavior, but it works well. It's kind of like pulling yourself up by your bootstraps and saying, "Well that sucked. Let's go have fun!" We've kind of figured out that being coddled encourages sulkiness--we're both guilty of it! I don't know how it works for other people, but even if I'm really cranky, just getting outside and doing something will make me feel better--even if I'm convinced it won't at the time.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

MEM11363 said:


> It seems totally selfish to "emotionally crowd" your partner with too much love. You are doing what YOU want, not what THEY want. I grasp that this seems like a game. I don't think of it that way.


I accually agree with what you are saying *IF *you are emotionally crowding your spouse -and especially if you are aware they are *not *comfortable with it. I think that is & always will be WISE advice for every marraige. 

But it IS possible for some of us to enjoy being lavished on freely without restraint and also be very comforable with it. Me & mine feel this way. My husband loves the attention, I didn't always give him so much in our past -so he is REVELING in it now. Us being more so IN THIS WAY, has only enhanced our connection (sexually, emotionally & communcatively). 




MEM11363 said:


> If my W wants me to "express" more love she asks me to. And sometimes she does ask.



See, for me, I would not like this "ASKING" part. I think that would "deflate" me more than "uplift" me. I don't want to ask for love, it should be freely expressed. If not, I may question it. I know my husband feels the same as I. There is something I find very beautiful about the man I married freely giving, expressing, being what he feels before me, sharing anything & everything at his whim. It is something I personally appreciate very much. 



MEM11363 said:


> When asked a direct question by her about anything I don't lie. I may decline to answer.


I also wouldn't like this. It would bother me as a wife. I have never declined to answer anything my husband has ever asked me nor has he ever declined to answer anything I have asked him. He is a true sport. If that makes us self indulgent somehow (probably me more so cause he is not as much of a talker) then I guess that is your judgement on MY types. 

What I am learning from much of my reading here is further proving what I kinda already know strongly - I LOVE & very much appreciate the sensitive nice men and I married the perfect type of man for who I am. As clearly others would find me "too much" and not appreciate me.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Thinking about this a little more - I think what MEM would call "*Self-indulgent*" as far as being open, I would call "*Transparency*" -even Vulnerability with your spouse. I think of this video Trenton shared here Brene Brown: The power of vulnerability | Video on TED.com

I looked up *Self-Indulgent *- this kind of definition/behavior is related to doing things that come back to hurt you, indulging in addictions where you are striving for happiness but never acheiving it, falling on your face then looking for the next "high". 

This would never near describe the type of communication styles we have with each other. 

Now, If I carelessly indulged every negative emotion, whining, wallowing in all the ills of life, shared every critical thought & cared nothing of reining THESE in -to spare him (like MEM's original #2), this would reac pathetic havor on any relationship, it would be a roller coaster of doom & gloom & such people likely would need depression meds & their spouses would WANT to divorce them! These things are so not happening. 

....But to openly share ALL of your joys, everything good that wells up inside of you, even if Mushy, if you feel like a little kid in a candy store- you want to share that - this is the way I am, I do not hide my enthusiasm -from him. He wouldnt want me too! To feel free to share your dreams, how much you love, how high, how deep & how wide, and being able to laugh at our weaknesses. 

This is "transparency" to me, ALL GOOD. I would want my man to have a decent measure of this .


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

MEM,

>>It seems totally selfish to "emotionally crowd" your partner with too much love. You are doing what YOU want, not what THEY want. I grasp that this seems like a game. I don't think of it that way. If my W wants me to "express" more love she asks me to. And sometimes she does ask.<<

Hammer - meet nail.


----------



## greenpearl (Sep 3, 2010)

First please don't confuse love and spoiling! 

Human need love, there is no such thing like over love. My love bank can hold a lot of love, it is deep! I think my husband's love bank is deep too, I can never fill it up! I can only keep on putting more love in it! 

Women who are mature and who have religious background have high restriction for themselves, they have strong sense of responsibility, they have high moral standards! (This is for SA!)

Men can't spoil their women and let their women always have their own way, but you should always love her as much as you love yourself!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

SA,
You are your H are in a great place. Being able to be completely free and open with your partner is a beautiful thing. You don't have to even think about that as you and your "H" are both comfortable with a very high thermostat setting. 

My comment was that it is self indulgent to express more love to your partner "than they are comfortable with". I stand by that. 

Overheating a "cooler" partner is simply a bad idea. It causes them to withdraw. It begins the downward spiral. 




SimplyAmorous said:


> Thinking about this a little more - I think what MEM would call "*Self-indulgent*" as far as being open, I would call "*Transparency*" -even Vulnerability with your spouse. I think of this video Trenton shared here Brene Brown: The power of vulnerability | Video on TED.com
> 
> I looked up *Self-Indulgent *- this kind of definition/behavior is related to doing things that come back to hurt you, indulging in addictions where you are striving for happiness but never acheiving it, falling on your face then looking for the next "high".
> 
> ...


----------



## greenpearl (Sep 3, 2010)

MEM11363 said:


> My comment was that it is self indulgent to express more love to your partner "than they are comfortable with". I stand by that.


That is called clingy and smothering! 

Please don't use difficult words to make this looks difficult to understand! 

There is no such thing like more love, less love, love is always good.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

MEM11363 said:


> SA,
> You are your H are in a great place. Being able to be completely free and open with your partner is a beautiful thing. You don't have to even think about that as you and your "H" are both comfortable with a very high thermostat setting.
> 
> My comment was that it is self indulgent to express more love to your partner "than they are comfortable with". I stand by that.
> ...



Mem - I appreciate this coming from you - as I was feeling a little trampled on. Then Conrad jumps in with the "hammer meets nail" comment. All I thought to myself was - I would like to kick both of you!  But hey, we are all different & it's OK. Not many men would probably put up with me, I would break their thermostat. So I am with the right guy! His is set HIGH, mine is set HIGH, It's all gooooood. 

I agreed EXACTLY with what you say here about the Thermostat in a previous post - probably why the "self indulgent" comment coming afterwards appeared directed at ME.
Pleasant to hear it was not intended that way, just my reading it as such. 



> I accually agree with what you are saying IF you are emotionally crowding your spouse -and especially if you are aware they are not comfortable with it.* I think that is & always will be WISE advice for every marraige. *
> 
> But it IS possible for some of us to enjoy being lavished on freely without restraint and also be very comforable with it. Me & mine feel this way. My husband loves the attention, I didn't always give him so much in our past -so he is REVELING in it now. Us being more so IN THIS WAY, has only enhanced our connection (sexually, emotionally & communcatively).


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

SA,
Sorry I was ambiguous in the earlier post. It was not directed at you at all. It is directed at people with 'mismatched' thermostats. Clearly you don't have that situation. 




SimplyAmorous said:


> Mem - I appreciate this coming from you - as I was feeling a little trampled on. Then Conrad jumps in with the "hammer meets nail" comment. All I thought to myself was - I would like to kick both of you!  But hey, we are all different & it's OK. Not many men would probably put up with me, I would break their thermostat. So I am with the right guy! His is set HIGH, mine is set HIGH, It's all gooooood.
> 
> I agreed EXACTLY with what you say here about the Thermostat in a previous post - probably why the "self indulgent" comment coming afterwards appeared directed at ME.
> Pleasant to hear it was not intended that way, just my reading it as such.


----------



## Conrad (Aug 6, 2010)

MEM11363 said:


> T,
> This is actually hard to convey clearly - help me as I struggle through it. Maybe Atholk will chime in. This is actually my (somewhat imperfect) interpretation of his genius.
> 
> Here is what I am trying to say:
> ...


That last line really hits home.


----------

