[OffRoad]

I liked what RCR wrote, prefer to have a Dr tell me "Not looking good, here are the options I have for you, but you are welcome to find your own options", and have my own understanding of waiting, vs standing. I'm not waiting for H to come out of the tunnel or reconciliation or anything really.  I've got one tiny lifetime, most likely 3/4 lived,  to squeeze in everything that needs to be done. Putting anything on hold would be silly, unless I needed to for my own healing. So waiting is not an option for me.

Standing can mean different things to different people. For some it means they will be there for their MLCer, no matter what. For some it means they'd take their spouse back, no matter what. For some it means they will be open to taking their spouse back. For some it means they will not have another romantic interest in their life except their MLC spouse. As long as that stand, whatever it is, does not stop the stander from living their life, great and groovy.

What I got out of RCRS post was that if being a stander stops you from living your life as fully as you would have desired if MLC hadn't occurred, you might want to rethink your process for standing. Also that while the MLCER needs time, thinking that enough time will lead to reconciliation leads to false hope, that if you can just hang on for 7,10,15 years, the MLCER will come back. You can't believe them back, you can't hope them back, you can't wait them back. You would have to meet them somewhere forward, if there is to be any recconnection at all.

I'd much rather have had someone say "we have x number of members. Of those members, y number have had reconciliations. A number were at 1-2 years, B number were at 3-4 years, C number were at 5-6 years. Your odds are Z %. "  But I like facts. Hope kept me living with a verbally abusive man for a year and a half, for what is ignoring me but verbal abuse? How was that in my best interest? I can tell you for a fact, I didn't start really healing until he was gone.

It would appear we all need different things to get us through. Thank goodness there are enough perspectives on this board that most of us can find some that resonate with us.

[nah]

We do not know what has happened in the lives of the many who have stop updating.

Quote from RCR: Odds go down with time.

For a while, it seemed the purple icons were being given to people whose MLCers were reconnecting in the 3-3.5 yearks mark. But now we have members with purple icons whose times frames are longer than that.

Quote from RCR: Odds go down with time.

We also have members that still do not have purple but whose spouses are getting closer to them. And some are past the 5 years mark.

Quote from RCR: Odds go down with time.

If I am not mistaken, a while ago, RCR had written that most reconciliations happened in the 3-3.5 years mark. That was one of the issues that was debated when this blog post was being prepated by RCR and not all mods/mentors agree with it.

Why was this not stated??

What experience tells me is that, yes, the more times goes by the less likely reconciliation will be, but not because the MLCer is not returning, the reason, for me, is the LBS, that often has moved on.

Why was this not stated?


For me the others two things are that divorce and not standing do not equal lack of reconnection or reconciliation, or the MLCer wanting to. The former real life MLCers I know were divorced, their spouses did not stand, but the MLCers still wanted back.

Why was this not stated?


The more this goes on the more likely the crisis may end (but for those MLCers who remain in MLC forever, but for me those are the exception). But that does not mean a reconciliation is more likely.

Quote from RCR: Odds go down with time.  So you mean due to the choice of the LBS??

MLC takes a lot of time. During that time MLCers do many horrible things and some keep adding insult to injury for years on end, making it much harder for the whole situation to end in reconciliation. Also, the more time goes by, the more the chances the LBS stops standing, moves on, finds someone else.

Quote from RCR: Odds go down with time. Due to the LBS???


Of course people may reconcilie at any point. They may even reconcile if both MLCer and LBS had remaried, and, of course, divorce the people they had married.

Anjae... I'm not trying to pick on you, I know this is an article from RCR.  It seems to me, and maybe I'm mistaken, that this was a group discussion including the moderators.  Including several new ones who are freshly divorced and no longer standing.  Is that the real reason for the change?  In my opinion, this is a change.  I remember being a "Newbie" like it was yesterday.  If I was told on this site that "odds went down with time" in addition to  "time is a gift", I would have focused on my MLCer instead of myself b/c AT THE TIME, nothing was more important to me than HIM.  If I thought the clock was against me instead of my friend, I would have done everything that was wrong to get back my man instead of focusing on myself.  I focused on myself b/c of advise from this site... which was my main lifesaver at the worse time in my life.

In my opinion this new information, which seems to me, not based on fact is going to lead Newbies down a different path.

Is this Hero Spouse or a softer version of the Chump Lady? 

[nah]

I'd much rather have had someone say "we have x number of members. Of those members, y number have had reconciliations. A number were at 1-2 years, B number were at 3-4 years, C number were at 5-6 years. Your odds are Z %. "  But I like facts.

Me too.

[Onward]

Is this Hero Spouse or a softer version of the Chump Lady?

LOL! I wondered almost exactly the same thing earlier today! 

[Anjae]

Nah, RCR wrote the blog post, not I. I am merely telling you either how things are done in the board, like the purple icons for reconnections or reconciliations, or my opinion on matters regarding the blog post.

When RCR posted here she left clear that not all mods had the same view on that blog post (or parts of the blog post). I was one of those.

Yes, at times, blog posts are presented by RCR to mods/mentors previously and discussed. As with everything, some people agree (or agree with parts), other disagree (or disagree with parts). We provide our opinions, point to things each of us find of concern, of interest or that should be explored, but, in the end, they are RCR blog posts and she writes what she thinks she should.

I agree it is a change. That was one of the points I find of concern.

Another of my opinions was that when HS is 10, 15, 20 years we may know more and have more facts/more precise facts. May, because like now, most likely many members will stop posting, leaving us with the same problem we have now: not knowing how things turned out for them.

I can also say that I was concerned that the blog post would put a dent on hope. And when I think of hope, I think of Viktor Frank, that has been previoulsy mentioned on this thread and his hope kept him alive in the camps agains all odds (in the camps it is not a supposition is is fact, most people died, or to be precise, were murdered). It is true it was his hope and his way of cope. And that, when he was freed, his family had died. But it was hope that kept him alive.

I have also seen how hope, or lack thereof, can play a big part in illness/recovery. I have seen it with my aunt and my grandmother, as well as with others. And I have seen what happens when people lose hope and give up. I am not saying that hope is going to save everyone who has it, it will not. Some patients have hopeful and they die, but hope and a positive spirit do help. 

But, again, that is not my blog post. I cannot tell you why RCR wrote the way she did. You would have to ask RCR that.

To my knowledge, no, HS is not a softer version of The Chump Lady. And I hope if never becomes so. In my opinion, one Chump Lady is more than enough.

The we have X number of members things would be a fallacy. We have no idea what happened to many members. Many come by at BD and soon dissapear. It would not make sense to include them. Nor all the ones who have dropped off the radar.

We could not go, "we have 4000 members, 4 reconciled at year 5, 7 at year 3 ". We do not have info, or enough info, on most members that allows us to it like that.

MLC lasts a long time. Most members do not stick around long enough for us to know more/enough about them.

Maybe we could do something with the regulars (but which regulars, the current ones? The ones from 5 years ago, many of whom are no longer around?). Or the current and previous mods (providing we know what is going on with previous mods and in some cases we do not).

HS is not a site for stats, it is a site for support. Each of us have its own vision of MLC and how things are when it comes to reconciliations and returning MLCers. Those opinions come from our experiences, board and real life ones. Not everyone reads the board/the same info the same way. That is true for HS or for any other thing.

[lawprofessor]

To my knowledge there is only 1 "newly" divorced mod/mentor.  The newest is still married and standing if I remember correctly. 

[Phoenix]

It seems to me, and maybe I'm mistaken, that this was a group discussion including the moderators.  Including several new ones who are freshly divorced and no longer standing.  Is that the real reason for the change? 

There may be a misperception developing that needs clarification. RCR wrote a blog post without input from the moderators. She then posted it to us after the fact. There was sharing of thoughts, but the blog was not significantly changed before posting. I may be misunderstanding, but any speculation that the moderators are a clandestine group, working in tandem to influence RCR or the direction of the board behind the scenes is not accurate. We volunteer our time to be of support to LBSs who request a mentor and we do our best to bring them through the early days as people helped us. Others of us devote significant time to the technological/administrative tasks that keep the board going. We are as diverse as the board in general and reflect the same varying thoughts and experiences. Yes, some of us are now divorced whether by personal choice, or because our spouse gave us no choice, as in my case, but that doesn't mean we don't support standing or standers, or that a divorced LBS can't still be standing, or an LBS who is still married can't have chosen not to stand any longer.

I believe RCR said she would be along after Halloween to comment/answer questions.

Phoenix

[Songanddance]

But rarely is a longer term stander who still expresses love for their spouse, who is in communication with their spouse, and hasn't found a new relationship, ever actively encouraged in their work, or acknowledged as a success.

Hi Onward
On a personal level I disagree here. I am 3.5 years in - still married and still standing. My MLCer is a stay at home high replayer with OW. My H refuses to leave and never has; he is a CB of the highest order.  He has also spent a huge amount of his money but he has always maintained his contribution to the bills.
I have never ever been criticised for being a long term stander - on the contrary the number of positive and supportive and (dare I say it) compliments I have received for standing and staying married has been tremendous.  Yes I have received reality checks from people like Stayed and another very long timer who reads but rarely posts except to challenge me on something. However I saw those comments as concern and also food for thought as I grow.
Therefore I have always ensured to post where I can on similar LBS threads so that they can see that it can be done and that growth and healing is very very possible. 

I have seen some bitter and angry posts recommending divorce and "kick them to the curb" comments but when you take the time to look behind the comments you see a very hurt and frightened LBS.  That's what we mods and mentors try to establish.

Onward I am so sorry that you feel that this board is not as supportive as you originally thought.

RCR wrote a blog post without input from the moderators. She then posted it to us after the fact. There was sharing of thoughts, but the blog was not significantly changed before posting. I may be misunderstanding, but any speculation that the moderators are a clandestine group, working in tandem to influence RCR or the direction of the board behind the scenes is not accurate. We volunteer our time to be of support to LBSs who request a mentor and we do our best to bring them through the early days as people helped us. Others of us devote significant time to the technological/administrative tasks that keep the board going. We are as diverse as the board in general and reflect the same varying thoughts and experiences. Yes, some of us are now divorced whether by personal choice, or because our spouse gave us no choice, as in my case, but that doesn't mean we don't support standing or standers, or that a divorced LBS can't still be standing, or an LBS who is still married can't have chosen not to stand any longer.

To echo the comments - this post was discussed by the mod team and the viewpoints were very diverse. This is RCR's site and with great respect to all, if she believes that this blog post was necessary to include then there was a reason for it.  This board has grown so much since I joined in May 2013 so the stats and attitudes increase with it.

This discussion has been most interesting and I would love to see an inclusion of the statistics

[Loyal]

This is a very eye opening post and the more I think about what Rollercoaster wrote the more sense it makes and gives all of us, especially the long term Standers like myself, a lot of food for thought.

[Trustandlove]

I am sure I am not going to be as eloquent as many others, but I will try.

First of all about the idea that the board isn't as supportive of standing as it used to be.  I've been here since it's inception and of course it has changed.  But what used to feel different is that it was the only board that actively supported standing. 

Never did it give any guarantees -- ever.  But the tag line that is at the top of the forum (and which I thought should be on the home page) states:

"Dealing with MLC and infidelity when you don't want a divorce".  And in one of her descriptive articles she says that she doesn't offer any guarantees, but that she can "throw you a lifeline". 

Never did standing not include protecting finances.  Never did standing not include boundaries.  Quite the opposite.

Nevertheless, I, too, feel that there are very many who equate standing with "sitting around waiting".  I, too, have had supportive comments regarding my stand, but equally many saying "why are you standing when he is clearly gone?" 

Standing isn't easy, I come here for support when it feels difficult.  That is what I always thought this forum was about. 

I was already a few years into this mess when I found RCR and HS; yes, I do wish it had been around earlier because I might have avoided some mistakes.  But it also confirmed to me that my gut instinct to stand (even if I didn't know what it was called) was right. 

RCR's own experience is receding into the background for her, that is normal and natural, and even to be desired.  What most of us wouldn't give to have that be the distant past!  Situations that I know of in real life are the same.  One LBS that I know, now long reconciled, said to me a few years ago that she couldn't walk this with me any more.  She was right.  She, too, now looks at MLC messes and just gets tired, isn't as supportive of standing as she once was. 

Not that she thinks it's wrong -- absolutely the opposite -- but she just can't relive it again. 

Before my H descended into crisis I had no idea that I would stand if that happened to me -- actually, I thought I would run a mile.  But when it did happen it was an instant knowledge that standing for my marriage and family was right.  And that doesn't mean it is easy. 

OK.  Now next.

I think I get her idea that she wants to say that this isn't a "save your marriage" programme.  I think many come here thinking that if we just do x, reconciliation will follow.  So from that point of view I can understand what she wrote.

Nevertheless, I, too, found it discouraging. 

Hope is important.  I have had many situations in my life that absolutely seemed hopeless, that have turned out well.  But if I hadn't "stood" for my beliefs and principles, that wouldn't have happened. 

I have kids with special needs where I was told many years ago that my approach was wrong.  I proved them wrong.  I come from a nation which was occupied for many years.  Most of the world thought that standing for our beliefs was misguided.  We were right.