[Rollercoasterider]

ARGH, this barely fits in a single post—so long post ahead!

When H came back home last year, I spent a long, long time watching for god only knows what signs, expecting him to pack up and leave any day. I actually prepared myself for that, as I'd been told this was just a touch and go, it was much too soon, it was, basically, "hopeless". So I watched and watched.

This is a common danger. You had expectations and though in general the people here are great at warning against expectations there is at the same time a covert/unintentional undertone that incites expectation. This is part of the tightrope balancing act we do. I have seen so many LBSs crushed by what they feel is a 2nd Bomb Drop after their spouse came home only to leave again and I have seen others who were not crushed by the same experience because they learned that premature returns are common to infidelity and so even if they did not expect it, they were emotionally prepared for it; they were grateful for the warning/knowledge.
So that brings me to a dilemma that used to send me into analysis paralysis. If Chuck comes home and I know that there is a possibility it’s not really over and he may run again am I by that knowledge having an expectation? Am I then approaching the situation Acting As If? Basically am I manifesting the negative by believing it can happen—not that it will, but simply that it can? Is it better to have no warnings at all? Most people around here don’t seem to think so and if that truly is the case I would rather err on the side of upsetting the few who would rather not have the warnings than those who are appreciative—since I don’t know who those people are ahead of time.

Looking back, I do question the rigidity of some advice given here at times, and the sometimes harsh way with which it is being delivered. "Sorry honey but this is going to take a decade to solve". It's not that black and white. Nobody knows for sure how long a midlife crisis takes.Actually, my friend's therapist who believes in MLC and is treating both my friend and her MLC H, rolled her eyes when she heard how long we believe MLC takes here.

Well you quoted some timeline that we certainly don’t use here as an example and we offer a range rather than a set time. MLC averages 2-7 years. Chuck's was ~3.5 years from Bomb Drop to the end of the affair. Therapists are just like the rest of us—many are skeptical about MLC and so I don’t consider eye-rolling as anything credible. Maybe the therapist knows a lot about MLC, but without any other information about that therapist's opinion I am only left with assumptions and frankly I wonder how her idea/definition differs from mine.

I wish there were more reconciliation stories coming out of this forum, I'd like to know what worked in those stories, but I think I know why there are so few. People are terrified of calling themselves "reconciled", former LBSers are terrified that if they do, the other shoe will drop, they will be jinxed somehow. Perhaps many who are in "reconnection stage" are actually anxiously awaiting the other shoe to drop. How can a person live like that? How many years do you have to be together again in order to be deemed "reconciled" anyway? Who wants to live life like that? I sure don't.

Yup. I was like that. Though I did not then and do not now call it fear. I did not want to manifest the negative with expectations that it was not over and I did not want to have expectations that it was and set myself up for a fall either. It was one day at a time without a label. Chuck cam e home so many times and I approached each return as something that could and might work. It was soon clear with all other than the 2007 return that things were not over and yet I still had hopes that he would not leave and we could work through the rest of his MLC with him at home. But I was not going to march out claiming we'd fixed or solved or healed it or whatever until I felt more solid about it. He came and left too many times for me to rush into the Reconciling/Reconciled label. The Reconnecting label is meant to be used sooner. I personally felt there was too much arrogance in claiming Reconciled without giving the time for us to recover together and that may be because he left again so many times and because I had that instilled to me over at DB not to claim it too quickly—and I agree with that by the way.

What I meant AnneJ, is that I don't think it's very conducive to greet newcomers this way: "this is going to take a long time, it's not your fault, and therapy doesn't help".

That was three parts:

• Time
• Fault
• Therapy

Time may be one of those really hard ones to determine through data collection because we need to be doing the collection from cases that are either through or that have gone on so long that they are probably stuck—or we would revise our timeline if everyone were still in it after say 10 or 15 years. And my MLC Survey at least is not set up that way.
As for fault, huh? Do you think we should start telling LBSs it is their fault? Basically, why is that not conducive—and why do so many feel that it is? It is not saying that the LBS has no responsibility in the marital problems and that they were a perfect spouse. Mirror-Work goes both ways.
Therapy does help. We recommend it here for the LBSs and I for one have not said that therapy will not help an MLCer, I have said that marriage counseling does not help when a person is in MLC—at least in the Escape & Avoid period or when there is an active affair in place. And that did not originate here; it's common for counselors to say that. And as with most things, there are exceptions.
I do have concerns with MLCers and therapy though. But I've said before that those are based on my own fears. I know that many therapists may be divorce counselors masquerading as marriage counselors or individual counselors and that in our culture there is this idea that we deserve happiness even when it is at the expense of others and that maybe a therapist will take that stance. In addition there is that loss of control that we have when the therapist hears the MLCer's side without hearing our side as well.
When I hear that a Stander is in counseling with their MLCer believe me my heart soars and there are a few here who have been in regular counseling for long periods. I feel the same excitement about MLCers in therapy, but I've hear the horror stories of counselors encouraging the MLCer to leave the marriage and so I admit to not so much outright skepticism, but wariness.

Many of us spent years and years walking on egg shells before BD, which if the crisis lasts say 4-6 years easily can add up to a decade or almost.

And many did not; for many it was a complete shock; we knew nothing before the moment of Bomb Drop.

So it's not our fault that our spouses are in the claws of MLC, but the question is can we prolong it by not moving forwards ourselves? Can we cut down the MLC process by moving on, learning something from this, changing, getting over our anger and fear? If the answer to this question is "yes" then that must also mean that we actually CAN do something, no?

I've written on this quite a bit—it began with a coaching session I had with Jim Conway a few months after Bomb Drop. Jim said that accepting the process can shorten it and denying it can elongate it. I have a slightly different idea about that.
Resistance by the left behind spouse elongate the process; acceptance doesn't really shorten it, but it distills it to what it should be by eliminating resistance.

Why slam one method over another?You believe this, I believe that. Can't we all just agree that we may try different approaches and report back? Wouldn't you be interested in hearing what worked for someone? I know I sure would.

Yes, why? You have said that the guidelines here are too rigid and complained about how people are told or warned about the MLC time range, success of benefits of therapy for an MLCer. But why slam that method over another? Especially when one of my main tenets is to do what works and what works today may be the opposite of what may work tomorrow and what works may one may fail for another. That's why I have not written a specific series of steps we all need to follow to get to reconciliation. I'm thinking of getting something general out there, but people like specifics and so I the generalities may be too general for the minds of those looking for a magic cure.

I'll say it again, earlier on, I wrote about the harsh way with which some comments are delivered. A prime example would be this:

They should be in therapy. Both are willing. If he's in MLC, that may not last. See comments above about MLCers and marriage counseling.

Is that really a prime example? I'm not saying that it is not an example, but it is it prime? You seem to be saying that it is obvious that his comment is harsh, but obvious to whom? I did not read it that way. I'm not saying it is or isn’t harsh; I'm in a different place and so I read things differently and knowing that some may take it harshly I can try and look at how that may be, but not seeing it as harsh it would not have crossed my mind that it is harsh. Which part was harsh, the first, second or all? I thought of the last part where he said to see comments above simply as one of those things we do when we don’t want to repeat what we or someone else said, but wondered if that was what was thought of as harsh—and if that is the part, why? Is it harsh because you are inferring that he is saying it is obvious. Sometimes I do feel this DUH coming on when someone who has been around a while asks something (in a challenging manner) that has been said over and over. Sorry. So is that what was thought to be harsh? Sorry, I don’t know. I think sometimes the problem is that text has no tone and so we misinterpret things much easier since we do not have body language or tone to cue us. But being specific about why that comment is thought to be harsh can help us understand how to be less harsh. But pointing it out as obvious often means the specifics are removed.

If it's the first part that is harsh, how so? Is it they should in the first sentence? Or maybe the warning that it may not last and why is that warning harsh? It could easily be made harsh by revising  be made harsh by revising may to will. But he left it open.

I'll say it again, although I have a feeling it won't be heard: MAYBE, just MAYBE there are solutions that work in SOME cases. And MAYBE just MAYBE we should pass on this information to others before dismissing it altogether?

This is extremely condescending. Sorry for being dense, but why do you think people here are so close-minded? Or are you simply thinking that because they do not seem as open as you would like to what you are saying—though they may be open to many other alternatives which are not part of what you are saying.
If you feel that people are being dismissive of you I can tell you that many here are feeling the same of you and so maybe it is both.
I find people here to be rather open-minded and interested in hearing about what is working for different LBSs. That does not mean they won’t approach a situation with some degree of skepticism and always agree. Doubt can be healthy. What we learn as the spouses of MLCers is that sometimes the person who is doing the accusing is projecting.

I'm not talking about what we as LBSers do for ourselves, like turn to meditation, practice our faith etc. I'm talking about POSSIBLE solutions to shorten or help our MLCer move out out of MLC sooner rather than later. I'm talking about something that we often consider "impossible", because I don't think it is.

Huh? Meditation and faith practice were what I did as a solution. Yeah, sure, they also had the function of being my own Mirror-Work, that's why many of us say that the things you need to do for yourselves are what you need to do as a Stander for your marriage. But for me I was really doing all that because I was a Stander and I was going to have a reconciled marriage. The solutions are in what you need to do for your Self as well as what you need to do regarding the Standing Actions part.
I wrote the mainsite/manuscript in three parts because I feel those three were solutions—at least in my situation.

• MLC and Infidelity knowledge.
• Mirror-Work
• Interacting with my MLCer

The knowledge helped me with understanding and thereby helped my compassion and empathy. Working in my Self helped me to detach so that I was not stuck in a hormonal stress response and interacting with my MLCer may be the more obvious one because I got to be with him, communicate, argue, diffuse, observe, and show him my changes as well as adjust to his. We got to work together too. But for that solution I needed the other solutions; they work together.

I am going to go out on a limb here by challenging "validation". Let's look at what RCR writes about it:

Though you cannot fix your MLCer, you are not incapable of providing help--by accepting and validating his choices. I'm sorry you feel...life is hopelessyou do not love meI was an awful wifeyou deserve betteryou are not worthythis new person is your soul mateyou are never coming homeyou hate me...By not validating, your MLCer feels you are not listening or taking him seriously; to dismiss his feelings is to also be dismissive of him--and that is insulting.

This is how I (before I even came to this site, and before I had even heard of MLC the way we talk about it here) responded to my H for a very long time, many years actually. It wasn't until I STOPPED validating/accepting his feelings that I noticed a change in him. Saying "I'm sorry you feel I was an awful wife" (for instance, which I am sure I did or some echo of it) is actually a LIE coming from me, either a lie or a form of sarcasm, as I don't at all feel sorry that my H believes I was an awful wife. I feel it's a bunch of crap. It wasn't until I stopped this, stopped what my H perceived as sarcasm, stopped validating, stopped "accepting" how he feels, stopped babying him, stopped also "paving the way", that I noticed a change.

Sorry, but this is sorta funny because I haven’t found the challenge to what I say or do in it. What I see is an assumption based on a piece of advice that works at times and that I have said is more important in the beginning than later. That means I don’t think it is a tool that is static! I did not validate like that in the later years of the crisis and I have stated directly that there are times for not validating and being more direct about disagreeing. I'm sorry you feel that way is for beginners—not just newbies, but for those who have not been using it. Do something different and if it's not different for someone, then maybe it's part of the problem.
And as far as you stopping Paving the Way, Um no just because you used a different tool or building materials does not mean you stopped Paving it, it means you don’t get the metaphor. You spouse is home and you are through the crisis which means you are Paving the Way still because that's part of being married and present and attentive in your marriage as well as it is part of getting there.

If you take my words as though I apply them to every situation at every moment you will certainly find a lot to challenge because they are not meant that way.

Though it wasn't my intention, I did hand H a "deadline", an ultimatum of sorts, because I needed to leave the country. Without him, I couldn't afford to stay with my son in the US. I didn't say: "If you don't come back, I will have to relocate." I said: "I need to move, we can figure out a way for you and S to keep in touch and visit." That's when H realized he couldn't behave like a teenager anymore. I know, I know, in MANY of the situations here it doesn't work that way. But in mine it did, and so I say there might be other cases in which it MAY work as well.

Of course it might work—to me that is one of those DUH sort of things. Given your living situation it sounds like a completely sound move to have taken. That does not mean I would not have watched with wonder and worry, though probably not skepticism. And that is what you are going to see from the concerned people here offering advice. They know that something like that led to different results with someone else and because of that they feel obligated to let you know—especially if they have witnessed those actions leading to the alternative results more than those you realized. It's not about being doom bringers or strict guidelines where; it's about helping and offering a person a broader view because many start with a narrow view. Most seem to appreciate it and so I personally don’t think it would be right to go around withholding because of the few that will not appreciate it.

I'm beginning to think I cannot make myself clear at all.

• I am not saying that every MLCer can be helped. I am saying some MAY be helped.
• I am not saying love can cure mental illness.

What I AM saying is this: There ARE ways to help SOME MLCers come out quicker from their tunnels. And I feel that that's something pretty much deemed impossible here.

Why do you think you have not made yourself clear—because the people have not posted with words you think they should in response to your words?


I was talking to my mom about some stuff regarding the adoption process—specifically the emotional challenge of being placed with foster children and having them removed rather than getting to adopt them. She was being my gripe-sounding board. I have not yet had the experience of having children placed in my care and then removed and so I don’t know what that is like from an experiential standpoint; I have not yet been in the choir. But I do know—from an intellectual perspective—that such a thing will be emotionally wrenching to put it lightly. DUH The way I put it was that just because I'm not in the choir I can recognize a choir robe when I see it. But the social workers and those foster parents who have been through it understandably feel that they have to emphasize that this can be hard and emotionally wrenching; they want to prepare me with their warnings. I get it and many don’t know that we've been hearing this for 2+ years from a lot of people. Frankly, I'm tired of hearing it because I know and I will not progress my knowledge to the experiential sort until and unless it happens to me. But a lot of those people think I'm not getting it—I heard that recently from a man who thought he was being light and jokey about it at a foster parent dinner. But to me it was condescending: I know what a choir robe looks like—DUH.
People think I'm not getting their point. How do they know what I'm getting? How do they know what I already knew before they made their point? What do they know about what I have learned?

Evas, now apply that question to you. On a few posts in this thread you have complained that people are not getting your point. I am assuming that you are coming to this conclusion based on their responses to the point you are attempting to make. Just for a moment consider that they get your point perfectly. If that is the case what does that say about your assumption and how you are handling their counter points? Condescending? Disrespectfully? Maybe the person not getting it is you? Or maybe everyone is getting the point and you all are just not in agreement. If you don’t like or get their answer, why does that mean they don’t get your point?

I read the responses and I think you made good points and they made good points in responses that to me seemed to have a full understanding of your point. So what does that mean, maybe that you all understand and yet still have different perspectives?
Does my saying this make a person think that I'm not getting it? Basically people are feeling dismissed and condescended to because it feels to them like there is a built in excuse: if their comments do not seem in-line with your point as you see it, then they can be dismissed because they don’t understand. If you think you are not being heard consider that people are hearing and even understanding you without a problem, but they may not share your perspective or agree with you, sometimes maybe there understanding is deeper and clearer than yours.

To me it seems that at least part of your point is that other things are possible. And to that I get this big HUH and DUH and why is she preaching to the choir feeling. Which then leads me to assume that you don’t understand that we already know that—deeply. I have worked to set things up with that at its core—not some aside, but core and so if it were some aside, maybe I'd get why you feel the need to make the point.


Now, having said that I do understand that there are a lot of people on here and some are more rigid than others. Another DUH I guess. I do not like to use absolute modifiers, but here goes, there is a good chance that we will always have to be adjusting our balancing back-and-forth with our assumptions when we get a newbie and our warnings. I think this was part of the other thread started by Thundarr. Since this is a site geared toward MLC situation there's bound to be an assumption of MLC when a person arrives and that assumption means certain warnings will be offered. But the situation may not be MLC and so those warnings will not pan out for some. Those assumptions may even hinder such a non-MLC situation where the betraying spouse ends the affair and does the work to heal. What if the betrayed spouse Acts As If it is MLC and pushes a betraying spouse away and possibly back to an alienator and maybe even into an MLC—maybe the affair was a teetering near the edge of a possible MLC situation.
If this site were for general infidelity and MLC just fit a few, then that might not be a regular issue, but it is geared toward MLC and so it's likely to always be something we need to keep in our self-awareness.

I find it very difficult to validate lies.

Validation is one of the most misunderstood things around here. To validate is to acknowledge that something is a truth; given that it's not only difficult but impossible to validate a lie which is the opposite of a truth.
Validate feelings. I validated Chuck's feelings while directly disagreeing with his actions.
A few years into his crisis I was not using validation so much, but there was a situation for which I wrote a script and read it when we spoke on the phone. It was about stuff I had figured out he felt and that I felt his feelings were unfair—though still real. And so I apologized for not having been the bread winner he had thought I would be and for not having gone to med school and then I followed it with a comma-but about how that wasn't really fair to me that he had those expectations and held me to them years later.

He was in tears on the other end. What I was doing was letting him know that I was finally understanding some of what had him upset and why or how he felt let down. That it was unfair was also important to communicate, but he still needed to feel that I acknowledged and understood his feelings behind it. The I'm sorry you feel that way comments in that conversation were part of a tool I was using to make a point about the unfairness and to simultaneously show him that I hear him or got his side as well.

Chuck felt I put work first and him second. And when it came to my writing he was correct. But when it came to the official 9-5 job he was incorrect and I think he did know that. On a few occasions he went camping without me because I couldn’t get the time off. In those first months after Bomb Drop he tearfully brought up how he went camping alone as though that was evidence of my neglect. He felt neglected and he was right, but he was transferring the reason to my paid job, something he would have blamed me for losing if I had lost it because I skipped out and went camping with him. In those days he would have really gone off the deep-end about that and he'd have considered that alone a divorceable offense. Double Bind.

I firmly believe I would have been able to PREVENT his full-blown MLC with OW, Monster, and moving out and all the other things that happened last year. And this is where this site comes in: A newbie arrives and gives us his or her story and right away we give the SAME advice to EVERYONE. Right away we PRESUME that there's NO WAY the LBSer can do ANYTHING to shorten her partner's MLC. It's the rigidity of that advice that makes me wonder.

That sounds pretty presumptive. Sorry, joke! It's not what I do and though I admit that I do not read the day-to-day threads I don’t see this everything receiving the same advice thing that you see. Some things are going to be the same—the generalities. So if you read one of my articles, it's a static thing and so other than occasional revisions it stays the same. A person reading it a week after Bomb Drop will read the same thing that as when they re-read it 3 years later. It's meant to be general information. When I coach an individual it is a lot different—with me sometimes contradicting something I might have said as a generality. OldPilot has his general welcome post. It's a generality and I think people know that. It is not tailored. Same goes for my welcome PM. And in the beginning advice may be less tailored because we are not familiar enough with a situation. I just started the ask me a question series with the contact form and I'm getting a lot of questions that want specific answers to their situations. I can't give those in that format. Some give me back history and I maybe I could glean something from that, but the purpose of the form is to address the generalities—which means I need to answer the general question and point out to the questioner that it is a generality and not an answer that may be specific for their situation. That sort of thing is for individual advice or coaching.

I absolutely believe that you could have prevented it as well. I don't have a prediction on (were we to go back in time without our future knowledge) as to whether you would prevent it or not, but I have no doubt in the possibility and the greater your understanding and acceptance, the greater the odds.
DontGiveUp pasted a quote I have said about preventing. That has been revised in my manuscript. Here is what it says now—with some emphasis on the revisions:

There’s no preventing once it has started; there’s impatience and the inability to accept the process. Regardless of what’s healthiest, best, or of what you want, an in-process midlife crisis can’t be prevented, thought it can be prolonged by an unaccepting spouse. Acceptance can ease it, but once it’s begun, the crisis must continue to completion; it’s a journey to go through, not get over.

The but once it's begun was in the original, but the additional changes made that so it didn’t seem to contradict. I just went back and re-checked that passage. Should I then point out that there is a possibility of prevention before entering MLC? A good idea maybe, but I've been told to reduce the word count, not increase it! And that would not be a single additional sentence, but a whole other aside that may take a few paragraphs or pages.
Saying that once started it cannot be stopped does sounds pretty absolute. There are probably exceptions and of course in those I will wonder if it was a case of a midlife transition that was not quite a full crisis. But I've also and seen/heard of so many situations where it was the case that there was a mild sort of start-up years before or maybe not really mild and an MLCer was yanked out and then years later there was full blown MLC—and maybe the yanking (stopping rather than preventing) made this later MLC worse. This is why I think that preventing is different than stopping. I can prevent Cancer with certain lifestyle habits, but once I've got it I cannot unring that bell. I might be able to have it cured, but in most cases there are things I have to go through—the miracle shrinking and disappearing tumor has been observed, but it's an outlier in the data—and yeah, we should not ignore those outliers because maybe our cure is in them, but we also need to be attentive to those not outlying.

Can a mid-life DGU,You fail to see my point. You quote from RCR, and the views accepted and believed here - but I say let's look at OTHER ideas and thoughts.crisis be prevented? A quick google led me to a study by Joel R. Sneed of the Dept of Psychiatry at Columbia Uni. According to him it is possible. I also found "10 Things You Can Do to Prevent a Mid-Life Crisis". I have not read it in-depth, I just googled it now, to show you and everyone else that there are other ideas and thoughts out there. And what if it can help someone here? Wouldn't that be great?Instead of repeating the advice here, which we all can access and which has been helpful to a lot of people (including me), I say let's do more by branching out and looking at alternatives AS WELL. Again, let's not be so rigid.

People are going to highlight the things they feel are most helpful. Poor DontGiveUp takes a lot of flack for highlighting the things I have said. But that is what he finds helpful—and to use his word,credible and if he finds it credible, he thinks it might help others as well and so he passes it on—and I thank him for that. Criticizing him for doing it seems inappropriate. I've said before that I do not want to be anyone's guru.MLC & Experts There are forums where posting links to outside sources will get you banned; we encourage them here.


As for that google search and article. Sorry, but it kinda made me laugh. It's another one of those DUH and preaching to the choir sort of things. I see those articles all the time.

And then when others referred to you using the Google search or documents in their counterstatements you said this:

Did you read what I wrote earlier: I said a quick google led me to these two articles, among many. I am not saying to take either one of them as gospel (again let us not be overly rigid here now, OK?), but I said to be open for the possibility that curbing or preventing a MLC may be possible. In every case? No.

Really? So you are allowed to bring up something, but others are not allowed to then use it in their counter-responses? Yes, you said you did a quick search and I took it to mean you did not study the info in detail—and I think the others are smart enough to have picked up on that as well—you were clear. But why gripe when someone else goes in and takes the time to read what you referenced and use that in their response? I have not seen the others being rigid at all, but I do think there may be a greater likelihood for rigidity when people feel dismissed and I get the feeling that both sides may feel that way here.

The consistencies I've noticed across the board for reconnections, no matter what the contact type or energy level of the MLCer are:

• The LBS becomes confident in themselves
• The LBS sheds any codependent tendencies
• The LBS finds strength in their intuition
• The LBS finds the strength to speak freely in their own power to the MLCer, unaffected by any potential outcome

There is no technique, tactic, or formula more potent than strength and honesty.

I don’t really have a comment, I just found this such a great list that I want to save it. Awesome! Although since you included intuition in the list—loved that by the way—I think I will add to your final statement: There is no technique, tactic, or formula more potent than strength, self-trust and honesty.

Many times the articles even pose questions for thought rather than proclaim any answers. But sometimes, like Evas says, the advice given by others may use the information as if it is an absolute.

Thank you so much for noticing both these things. I have tried very hard to leave things open and as I said above we are probably always going to need to be self-aware of our general assumptions since this site is geared toward MLC situations even though not everyone here has an MLC situation. I think we are all going to be guilty of absolute at times. Evas, for instance you are making some excellent points and yet I find myself wondering—in my twisted analysis paralysis, so just laugh at me—if you are being absolute regarding people be absolute! Told you I was twisted. I'm not saying you are or anything but at least to me since it feels like choir preaching and so maybe you don’t know that we are actually of the same mindset—we not being just you and me but all of us.

And basically I get that sometimes there is going feel like there is rigidity. But it's the nature of a forum like this and some acceptance is necessary because it's such a back-and-forth balancing act between Unconditionalers and Tough Lovers or those who think people are too encouraging of divorce—we hear that one every few months. But the thing is this is a site where a lot of people are going to wind up divorced in the end and we need to be here for them in their needs. That means that someone who is a Strict Stander may not like what we have to say and so suddenly we are accused of being pro-divorce and a few are feeling uncomfortable. It's the challenge of this balance thing.

I think it is also clear that RCR did different things at different stages. She did pave the way but she also let loose with the truth darts and put the fear of loss into him later. Some things may not be effective at different stages which is why we might think some things don't work. Few of us have the ability to know exactly what is best to do when. It is a lot of trial and error. I think that is allowed for on this site as some of the advice has been if something isn't working try the opposite. I don't think Evas did things radically different from the advice on here so much as she tweaked it to fit her situation.

Paving the Way is a metaphorical term and so sometimes it's hard to explain. But Truth Darts and putting the fear of loss were also part of Paving the Way. If what I was doing was in benefit of my Stand—the literal Stand for my marriage and not just my Stand for Self and my journey—then it was Paving the Way. Now I guess if something had harmed my Stand—and we made it through in spite of that, that thing would not qualify as Paving the Way.
It was a constant trial and error. I even wrote a post once about it being like a laboratory experiment.

But I do hear what Evas is saying. I find myself not responding favorably to what could be attempts at re-connection because all advice tells me that it can't be that as it is too soon.

Stillkicking, to me it sounds like these may be touch and goes rather than true reconnection attempts. Hindsight is 20/20 and this seems to be true with MLC as well. I think we often don't realize that they are truly reconnecting until we see consistent, positive movement forward for an extended period of time (i.e. months) and we look back and realize that any changes seem to have "stuck".

You know, I wonder if there is a big misunderstanding of Reconnection—which is understandable given that it's just part of a spectrum. To me the way you guys are talking about it, I sense that you are having the idea that it is far along the spectrum toward reconciliation—perhaps using the terms almost interchangeably. That is not how I see it. Those new purple icons have a light and dark designation. The light is meant for Reconnecting and the Dark for Reconciliation/Rebuilding and it's a touch thing to figure sometimes because of the subjectivity. But to me the idea with the light purple is to show that there can be back-and-forths, that Reconnection is an advanced Touch-n-Go and so an MLCer may leave again. I've even said that if an MLCer is a Clinging Boomerang it may all feel like Reconnection—versus Touch-n-Go. Chuck was so attached and connected and not wanting out that I do think his moved home were Reconnections and what I wanted shown in them—when I was posting at DB during the crisis—was that things were still rocky and that he might still go away. I wanted to show the ups and downs and that even with that soap opera a couple could make it through together. So that means the light purples is not meant for a situation where an MLCer smiled nicely and asked how you are doing with concern after months of Monster—a brief moment doesn’t mean light purple! But I certainly see it for those Clinging Boomerang moves home. It's actually confusing and so I've probably confused the matter further.

Is it ever too soon for a Reconnection? No. What it may be too soon for (as a generalization) is for that Reconnection to stick and progress directly to Reconciliation.

"Reconnection" was a poor choice of words as I didn't mean it as it relates to the stages. I just meant he could be reaching out in a way and I was ignoring him.

Perhaps it was a poor choice in the context of misunderstanding the term, and yet perfect given an understanding of it. I don’t know. But sometimes a Touch-n-Go and a Reconnection are identical other than in time—so an action may be a Touch-n-Go early in the crisis (or in a particular phase of context) and it may be a Reconnection later. See? Confusing stuff huh?

First of all, it takes a lot more than the quote from DGU to upset me! I smiled when I read it because it was in a way so predictable, of course since the H is in MLC it "may" not work...What I am saying, and I wish instead of nitpicking you'd see my overall point here, is that LET US TRY TO BE A BIT OPEN! Is that so difficult? Or is it dangerous because it upsets some order or something?

This is one of those comments where at least to me you are complaining about us not getting it, putting in a dig at DGU and preaching to the choir again and yet you think you are the only person in the choir.

I see this sort of dig at DGU regularly and it hurts me and not because he is the one referencing me, but the reason I don't speak out about it is because I think people will think that—oh, I'm just coming to DGU's defense because he's some sort of RCR disciple. I think he's a bright guy who gets that there are maybes and he has no problem thinking for himself. Some have said that he seems to pull out quotes that don’t fit as a response to the discussion and yet when I've read what he's referenced I felt it was a great fit—so what that could mean is that we aren’t always going to understand the thread of each other's thoughts, but that does not mean the thoughts lack a thread. Me for instance, I go on and on and ramble and I write out of order and some of the things I was saying might even get cut out and I don’t realize it and so maybe I was making sense in my head and yet I fail to include everything and so people read what I say and kind of go HUH? I don’t know if that happens, but I do worry about it is a jump around while writing a single post the length of a novel.

I don't know how to put it for you to understand - but maybe you do, but you just insist that I am dead wrong?

See, to me that is condescending because there is a base assumption of misunderstanding and if the responses don’t match up or prove understanding to you then it seems you conclude they disagree or don’t understand. I think I am getting –to use Mamma Bear's word—thinky.

I don't know What matters to me, is that we pass on alternative ideas to people who come here and are, often, desperate. A story where something generally thought of as impossible here has become possible - would that be so harmful to present? There's a lack of reconnection/reconciliation stories here. Don't you wonder why? I am not going to be afraid to post what worked for ME. I am also not going to be afraid to post what did NOT work for ME. In the hopes that others will too, and that it will in the long run be helpful.

I guess what seems confusing to me is why you seem to think this is somehow a novel idea. I spent ages on DB getting in arguments because I did things differently, they worked and I passed them on. And when I say argument, I mean they became more than nice debate—some people got downright nasty with me—in part because a lot of people liked what I had to say and some felt, I don’t know challenged or upset that someone who wasn't and OldTimer could have a clear view for advice. [Sigh] but I think what that might mean—going back to what I've said above—is that it is in part the nature of this sort of forum. We are always going to need that self-awareness to correct ourselves as we lean one way and then the other in our attempts to balance on the tightrope.

Perhaps you're right, perhaps there is a discussion that it is possible to help the MLCer exit the tunnel faster and I have missed it. I know only that this is part of what greeted me, and most people, when I got here: "You can not do anything to control this trip." And versions of it.

Oh I am totally with you on your frustration. I heard it so much and I was sick of it from the beginning. It is why I wrote Influence: Making a Difference.

RCR thinks that the MLCer has to live the crisis to the end and nothing can be done.

If I thought that this site wouldn’t exist.

I’m even one who has different view from what is (or was) standard in the board. I do not think MLC is just a FOO/development/identity thing, I think there are other things at stake. That goes “against” RCR basic ideas, yet, she was open enough to allow me to express my views and I often talk about in on threads, even newbies ones....I’m sorry if you are perceiving me as closed. That is an irony since I’ve always thought MLC can be mitigated and have had many heated discussions with other board members because of it. I have a scientific mind.

Me too. My undergrad was not the social sciences, I majored in Biology and am about 6 credits away from a full Chemistry major. MY background is the hard sciences and I am not against MLC being chemical, hormonal, physiological... I just think that all of those factor in and I think we are too quick to pathologize disorders to the level of disease. I'm ADD or ADHD or whatever it is now. Is that some sort of disease that needs controlling or fixing or is it me? Is it one of those things that evolution tucked in to me as an advantage to a society—if we were all caffeine on speed (without really being on either) that would not be an evolutionary advantage, but it could be that there are some of us who are that way because we all play different roles. Is a shaman a madman who should be medicated for schizophrenia or is the way some cultures handle it better? I'm not saying schizophrenia should not be considered a disease, I'm saying that different cultures see it differently and because of that it may even manifest differently.

The amazing this when she and I hooked up, was that I felt there was a lightness about her (NotGivingUP), she didn't take this whole MLC business so seriously, which was unbelievable to me as I at times was feeling near suicidal. She believed there was a way out, she believed, and she had access to a therapist who believed too.

Well, I think I took MLC very seriously, but not because Chuck was in it and I was going to analyze it. I have found it interesting, fascinating in fact. It just turned out to be a subject that caught me and I have wanted to learn more and pass it on. But people thought I was spending too much on it—not my personal circle, my Mom understood the way I work, but those at the board thought I was just spending too much focus in it and not enough on my Self-focus. I felt guilty because I would advise people to do as I say and not as I do. If it interests you, then great, but just because I immersed myself does not and did not mean I thought the others needed to be doing that as well. If that were the case then I wouldn’t need to write all this stuff, I'd think you guys should figure it out without me writing about it.
And yet for some this over-focus I part of the process. They need to figure out that it's not healthy and not going to serve them, but they need to figure it out experientially—just like I won't ever know what it is like to have a foster child who I hope to adopt taken away unless it happens. Until an adoption is final I will see that choir robe hanging in the closet and it will be a reminder, but I hope I won’t have to wear it.

I was also told that there was a lightness to me—the term used was serenity. Ironically the same people told me I was focusing too much on MLC!

I don’t think one has to be reconnecting for years and years first. In fact I was thinking of posting about RCR blog post where she talks about one year apart if the MLCer have lived with OW. For me that is up to each LBS. To what we are comfortable with.

Of course it is. My point and warning is that I had left it up to me on all those other returns and had resisted the longer period away and each time he had kept up the affair which helped keep him in MLC. And that recommendation has a big IF. IF you are someone who was absolutely insistent on Standing and getting your marriage back then this is an important thing to do and not doing it may—just may—keep you in the come-and-go cycle. If your spouse lived with the alienator for a week or a month and then came home after only having left once, there may not be a cycle and a coming home may be a return that works. But after 7 previous returns I knew doing the same thing over again was not going to magically yield a different result. It’s also the most valid with a Clinging Boomerang.

And I know for sure his MLC didn’t started at BD, so I don’t think it’s fair to say that 2-7 years counts from the BD, which I’m almost 100% sure that I’ve read here on forum.

Time is one of those funny and subjective things. I recommend that a person start counting at Bomb Drop and yet, yes, the crisis does start on average 12-36 months before Bomb Drop. HUH? Confusing! Yeah, I know. And I don’t have an explanation for it. In some cases a person may not recognize Bomb Drop or there may not be a clear Bomb Drop, but where it is clear there often comes a distinct change in the energy of the situation. The MLCer's changes become overt and this tends to initiate the urge to abandon—Escape & Avoid. From that point it is 2-3 years before most MLCers will start to turn around. That does not mean most will start in that time or that most will not; I simply mean that those who turn around and come home and stay before that are outliers.

And maybe—oh fingers crossed—that time is really less but most people start out denying the process which elongates it to what now seems to be the average. Maybe—how cool would this be—the first point of typical return is supposed to be 6 to 18 months for a pure crisis-pure being they are left alone and there is no resistance. Or maybe they are left alone with a perfect balance of connection and interactions and no resistance.

The time seems to be more of a Replay/Escape & Avoid thing and once through that it could be seconds or years and anywhere in between. It may have to do with the amount of time between trigger and Bomb Drop or it may not—I just don’t know.

Evas,
[By the way, I wrote most of this comment before most of the other stuff that is above it.]
On the front page of my main site there is place I say this: I have not discovered a magic pill or a lost system from ancient times that will cure your problems. Have you discovered some magic cure to MLC? Or could the other people on this site have done the same things as you and had different results? You've answered this already and I don’t think you think that at all. But some newbies might take it that way—just as they take me that way. They think we are the solution and if they start applying the tools right now their spouse will be home next week or change their mind (and keep it changed) about leaving home. And sure, anything is possible, but if their situation is MLC—IF—is that probable? Not according to the anecdotal evidence here at the forum.
I have said many times that life is about balance. Right now there are two topic threads running based on the same initial post by Thundarr. Some are saying that we show too much hope around here, so much that we are giving false hope. Others are saying the opposite. So basically no matter what we do—even if we are in the middle—we are going to be criticized by some and praised by others. To me that means we need to do what we feel is best and right rather than trying to do the impossible and please everyone or even just one group. We need to listen to all voices and then each make our own determination about what is best.

Me, I think it is important that we respect the people here—that they can figure things out—like the fact that there are no guarantees. I also believe that we have a responsibility to offer warnings of possibilities regarding MLC. That means we inform them of the standard timeline. It means we tell that that most MLCers have an affair—so far according to The Hero's Spouse MLC Survey. As of now the survey results show that sexual infidelity is known or suspected in 82.7% of cases when the MLCer is male and 58.3% when the MLCer is female. Clearly that shows that 17.3% of male MLCers may not have a sexual affair; so there is no guarantee that there will be sexual infidelity and we should not march around saying that such a thing is certain. But to me 82.7% is a kind of significant majority and many people feel that the warning or information helps to prepare them as well as helps them with Acceptance of the Process.

I feel it would be far more useful to tell people the truth, what their spouse is going through is most likely permanent, the person they knew is gone and they need to consider their marriage over. They need to be told any chance of reconciliation is exceedingly slim if it is a case of MLC and their best hope is to carry on as if this is their new reality.

That quote is from the other thread with the same initiating post. He makes a good point. Is it most likely to be permanent? What is it referring to in that? The new MLC alien or Monster—that they will be in crisis for the rest of their life or is he referring to the new situation of separation and eventual divorce or something else?
Since MLC is not a pathological disease—at least not recognized as such—we don't have official statistics on entering without exiting. So what about the other possibility, that he's talking about the relationship being ended as permanent—no reconciliation. Truth: I agree right now. Sorry guys and I hate hate hate to say it, but given the laws and culture of divorce you are in an uphill march against city hall and society in general. The thing about that is that it's changeable and that is my goal. That's right! I want to change the world. I want world peace, I want to fight city hall and I want to change spots on leopards. I like tall orders. The divorce rate was once low and then it got high and though still high (my opinion) it has gone down. It is a construct of culture, whereas if it were my goal to increase the percentage of green-eyed humans from 2% to 50% I would be up against biology in addition to cultural mating patterns. Frankly, I think I've got a better chance of changing the divorce rate and this site is my contribution to that goal.

[evas]

RCR,
Yes, that was a long I am not even going to try to answer it all. It is far too long, and it doesn't serve a purpose. But what it DOES show, is how misunderstood we can be through the written word. You've misunderstood much of what I had written, and I have misunderstood much of what I have read here. Or we interpret things differently. I will just take a few examples where I feel that you read me wrong.

Well you quoted some timeline that we certainly don’t use here as an example and we offer a range rather than a set time.
On my thread I offer my timeline. I had a first BD in March or April 2009, after at least two years of egg-shell walking. No OW at the time, but H did move in and out, lived with colleagues, relatives, park benches. It was after the second BD last year in February that he left and moved in with OW. You tell me from where I should start counting.

But I was not going to march out claiming we'd fixed or solved or healed it or whatever until I felt more solid about it.
I have not marched out to claim anything other than my H is back and our life together is good. He may of course pack his bags and leave tomorrow, who knows? But when I write good, I write that comparing to what our life has been like more or less since 2009. I didn't just suddenly "march" out, I've written fairly regular follow-ups. In those I have also mentioned that the one with the main problems now, seems to be me: I feel very run down, and tired.

The Reconnecting label is meant to be used sooner. I personally felt there was too much arrogance in claiming Reconciled without giving the time for us to recover together and that may be because he left again so many times and because I had that instilled to me over at DB not to claim it too quickly—and I agree with that by the way.
But for me part of recovering means also that I have to have faith in my H. It's part of the forgiveness. I don't claim anything, because anything can happen. Like I said before, all I can claim is that H came by (sooner than later) and things are great. I cannot foresee the future, neither can anyone else.

As for fault, huh? Do you think we should start telling LBSs it is their fault?
But of course not! But I can say that following BD1 for me, long before I knew what MLC was, I felt a STRONG sensation that this is NOT my fault and THEREFORE I am NOT the one who should change. I think I also write in this thread, that life isn't fair, and it is also not fair that the LBSer must do some changes if the M with his or her MLCer will ever work in the future. These changes, as you and I both agree on, are also vital for the LBSer who choses not to Stand. I met another LBSer who feels very resistant to change since "my husband's MLC is not my fault"

In addition there is that loss of control that we have when the therapist hears the MLCer's side without hearing our side as well.
My H actually went to a therapist, he began a few months after BD1, and the therapist once called me and for some bizarre reason told me that H was extremely depressed (no news), that he felt I was a good woman and person, and that he felt "something was wrong with his head". This therapist passed him on to another, who diagnosed him with ADD and gave him drugs. That therapist also requested to see me, which was fine with H, and we went together for a few times, I can't say it did much, but it kept things under control and H stayed at home. Then he discontinued therapy because we could no longer afford our insurance.

Is that really a prime example?
Yes, I felt it was. Again, to me it was harsh. But then again, some of what I wrote seemed harsh to you.

Sometimes I do feel this DUH coming on when someone who has been around a while asks something (in a challenging manner) that has been said over and over.
Yes, certain things are repeated over and over, that may not make them any more true.

I'll say it again, although I have a feeling it won't be heard: MAYBE, just MAYBE there are solutions that work in SOME cases. And MAYBE just MAYBE we should pass on this information to others before dismissing it altogether?
This is extremely condescending. Sorry for being dense, but why do you think people here are so close-minded?

I don't mean to be condescending at all!! If I am not allowed to post here challenging what I read, then what can be gained? What if there are nuggets of information elsewhere that we haven't found (you, me or anyone)? Don't we want to bring that back? If people get aggressive or defensive at that thought, then yes, I would call that close-minded. If they on the other hand had said, like Thundarr: "Where is the Like button? This is what I wanted to happen!" I deem that open-minded. I am sorry but I cannot participate on all threads, I doubt anyone can, but the ones I have followed I do have to say sound more of the same. And just to be PERFECTLY clear, much of the advice has been extremely helpful to me.

I am sorry if this angers or upsets you, RCR. I am from a small country in Europe where we are brought up to always question authority, and perhaps I am being disrespectful. I didn't and don't mean that. Perhaps I am also lost in translation. English is not my first language, and these are emotional things we write about.

"Though it wasn't my intention, I did hand H a "deadline"."Of course it might work—to me that is one of those DUH sort of things. Given your living situation it sounds like a completely sound move to have taken. That does not mean I would not have watched with wonder and worry, though probably not skepticism.

I don't think we can go with DUH things here. What's DUH to you may not be so obviously DUH to me. Again, I can watch with wonder and worry for a long time, and what good is that going to do me? Seriously?

Why do you think you have not made yourself clear—because the people have not posted with words you think they should in response to your words? But some did! I wrote that because what I got back was that the things I mentioned hadn't worked in someone's situation.

You know, I wonder if there is a big misunderstanding of Reconnection—which is understandable given that it's just part of a spectrum. Well, at least I am not the only one misunderstanding things here.

Validation is one of the most misunderstood things around here. To validate is to acknowledge that something is a truth; given that it's not only difficult but impossible to validate a lie which is the opposite of a truth. Yes, I see now that I have misunderstood a great many things here.

What I am saying, and I wish instead of nitpicking you'd see my overall point here, is that LET US TRY TO BE A BIT OPEN! This and much of what I wrote was not aimed at DGU at all, he exited the discussion, but at AnneJ.

I absolutely believe that you could have prevented it as well. I am so sorry RCR, but this was something that I felt I learnt only via NGUOU's therapist and to me it was an eye-opener. I wish I could say that I had read it here.

See, to me that is condescending because there is a base assumption of misunderstanding and if the responses don’t match up or prove understanding to you then it seems you conclude they disagree or don’t understand. I think I am getting –to use Mamma Bear's word—thinky. You never thought that people might be afraid of challenging the things written on this website?

Have you discovered some magic cure to MLC? In this thread I actually write: "I am not a doctor, I cannot perform miracles." After AnneJ asked me for something that could help ALL MLCers. It's not that I have ANY answers, RCR, but I am saying let's be open enough for us to be able to share what did/didn't work or information we have found elsewhere without being punished. Like I wrote before, this is a bumpy road for all of us, whether we are at the beginning of the crisis, in the middle or the end. I am sorry if I came across as condescending. But the advice I received from my friend's therapist made such a HUGE difference in my life in so many ways, and I wanted to share that.

I guess what seems confusing to me is why you seem to think this is somehow a novel idea. I spent ages on DB getting in arguments because I did things differently, they worked and I passed them on. And when I say argument, I mean they became more than nice debate—some people got downright nasty with me. Oh dear, it's not novel. But that therapy works in MLC is not something you read very often on this site, RCR.

I want to change the world. I want world peace, I want to fight city hall and I want to change spots on leopards. So do I, RCR. And I'd say most of us here do! 

Never did I mean to sound condescending in any of my posts. I could easily read a condescending tone in your several "DUHs" here, but I am choosing not to. I am choosing to believe that the reason you responded is because of what you stated in the beginning here: That you think it's a great discussion that needs highlighting.

[Rollercoasterider]

I don't have too much time and so let's see if I can be brief...HA!
I did not think you had any intention of condescension at all. MY DUHs are one of my common phrases--I also like to use variations on the phase about not giving  rat's a$$ sometimes and I'm not meaning rudeness, it's just a phrase I like and I find fun--I'm kind of weird that way. As for my DUHs they were in particular about feeling like you didn't know you were preaching to the choir and let's face it, we all get tired of being told what we know as though we don't know it.
Yeah, I know it is uncommon to hear that therapy is might sometimes work in MLC. Part of my point is that sometimes stuff gets spread and yet it's not really from what I say or believe. I do say that the marriage counseling probably (notice that probably is not an absolute) won't work when there is an ongoing affair. Bill Doherty is doing some new work with Leaning in and Leaning Out spouses in therapy--though he is careful to no label it marriage counseling, but still it doesn't seem like individual therapy either.

Frankly this is sort of discussion is the type of thing I love--though sigh, I dread it too because it can take time and energy. So I'm having fun! I do worry that people are afraid to challenge things I say. I don't want that sort of world--no fun. I grow by being challenged. That being said, it's also nice to have validation as well. But angers and upsets me...hee hee, certainly not.

Oh, the prime example of harshness. I have no say regarding whether it was harsh or not because that is an opinion. I ask if it was prime because in saying that I inferred that you meant it was obvious which it was not to me and if it's  not to me, maybe it's not to others. Now if the comment had been in caps and said something like HEY LADY (I'm going to go off caps cause it's annoying now) are you some sort of idiot? Can't you read--go look above; it's already been stated. And then to add insult there were a bunch of emoticons with angry and yet weirdly cute faces, well I'd think that was something that would be prime because it would to me be obvious that the person was meaning to be harsh and insulting!

I also don't think you were marching out to claim busted--I was making a general statement and not trying to imply you were doing that.

As for commenting about openness to AnneJ, she is probably one of the most open people here--and that is why it seemed that at times you may not be getting it rather than the other way around. I think she agrees with you more than you may be realizing if your comment was to her.

I organized this forum with this sort of discussion in mind when I created the topic icons.
But I do need to say this and I feel sad about it. This discussion is alive in the PM world as well and it is bothering people. Yes many agree with you, but I've also had messages saying they are concerned that what you are posting--sorry, but the references have been to you and not this thread in general--may scare or mislead newcomers. From what I have learned over the years, people appreciate the warnings we give--we just need to highlight that we are offering possibilities and not absolutes. People appreciate that we tell them this may take a long time--though hopefully not 10 years. They appreciate the preparation for infidelity. We need to be sensitive to their needs and responsible for how we interpret things.

Whew. Chuck is calling me so that means I should force myself to stop--bout time! Oh, but I will say that I think authority is made to be questioned.

[evas]

This discussion is alive in the PM world as well and it is bothering people. Yes many agree with you, but I've also had messages saying they are concerned that what you are posting--sorry, but the references have been to you and not this thread in general--may scare or mislead newcomers.

Please, RCR, remove my comments. And please feel free to remove my entire profile from the forum as well. If I could do it, I'd do it myself. I do not want anyone to be bothered by my comments. That was not my intention.


 

[hopeandfaith]

Wow, what a great thread! -  and I haven't read the first 6 pages of it yet.  I will make sure I go back and do so because this is REALLY interesting.  Thanks to all involved.  Evas, I don't think I have read any of your threads yet but I am interested in what you have to say.  I hope you will still be around so that if I have any questions or comments, I can post them on your thread.

[kikki]

Hi Evas
I really hope you do not delete your profile or your comments.  This has been a really interesting thread, with lots of different angles.

Sometimes things can become lost in translation, and we know that you did not mean any offence, and nor did anyone else.

I too am looking forward to hearing more from you and DGUOU on your threads.

[Anjae]

I second Kikki, Evas.

It is ADHD now, RCR. It keeps confusing me because I'm used to ADD.

[OldPilot]

I second Kikki, Evas.

It is ADHD now, RCR. It keeps confusing me because I'm used to ADD.

They are more or less the same. thing.
Alrhough strictly speaking there is some minor difference,  Hyperactivity I believe.,

[Anjae]

I think that is it, OP. Somehow now I keep coming across study material that only seems to have ADHD. it is like ADD has disappeared...

[OldPilot]

I think that is it, OP. Somehow now I keep coming across study material that only seems to have ADHD. it is like ADD has disappeared...

No it has not disappeared,, my son is just ADD and he is 25.
But their is a movement here to classify more people as ADHD.

Unfortunately the person I used to know that had the most knowledge about this I no longer get to speak to.
You can guess who that is.