[Rollercoasterider]

I realize this is a locked thread. I started reading it today and think maybe it will be best if when I complete my reading and response I post it here and THEN go on to the next thread and respond there...to keep my responses with the thread I am responding to.

Please understand, I have only started my reading and mostly skimmed as I prepped the thread in Word for easier reading.

[Rollercoasterider]

I first want to give a HUGE Thank you to Phoenix for her great posts on this thread.You did a wonderful job ahead of me of saying many of the things I would have said.

I read and wrote as I read—mostly. Then I went back through and reordered the posts and responses into topics with those that did not fit into a topic at the top. So I am sorry if for the reordering—and now my responses are not in the order I wrote them, but since the posts did fit into a few topics, I thought it would be nice to put them together.

A few of us decided we needed a new category of "If'er" That is someone (like me) who is not in a hurry to pull any trigger because my focus is on MY healing and MY life.... I realized early into this party that I was not the real me anymore and that I needed to recover me. When that is done to my satisfaction, then I will see what life is going to bring me...(and now come the If's)
IF my MLC'er has done the work she needs to do, and
IF she is still interested in who I have discovered myself to be, and
IF I still find the person that she has become to be appealing, and
IF we are both still unattached and available, and
IF we both decide to re-establish a relationship,
THEN a reconciliation MAY be possible..... As RCR Said, there is NO guarantee that any of those IF's will happen and, even if they DO happen, there is no guarantee that everything will work out in the end.....

I like this, may I use it…don’t know when or where, but it is useful?

RCR herself, on this thread, said this topic was controversial on the moderator board.
And posted it anyway.

Spread controversy from the mod board…HA. It exists across the boards and this post was always going to be controversial everywhere; I wrote it with the full knowledge of that. As for posting a controversial topic…I am not going to refrain from posting something because it will be controversial! If you think I steer away from controversy and this is new for me, you don’t know me at all. I was considered a controversial poster at Divorcebusting and I created the discussion topic icon for discussions that might certainly be controversial. I do not promote ostriching the tough topics; I would prefer civil discussions about them, but sometimes those go off the rails and leave civility behind—we are human afterall. As for this discussion, so far I find it beautifully civil and just what I love.

And it sure as heck hasn't encouraged modelling the very thing she said was most important, which is agape love and loving them home.

This is one of your recurring accusations. When I post something with which you disagree or find discouraging you say I am not modelling my own work regarding The Unconditionals. You can certainly keep telling yourself that, but is it helping you and is it helping others? Sorry, it just feels like one of your go-to arguments and I think made with a sieve.
The reality about the odds has nothing to do with The Unconditionals.
Setting Boundaries does not go against The Unconditionals—and that was one of the topics in the post. Some people think Tough Love goes against the Unconditionals and I don’t doubt that the way some define and apply it that might be true, but love that is tough how I define and apply it is in perfect alignment with Jesus and The Unconditionals. That does not mean I am perfect and in my personal life I do get mad and mess up…DUH!

I am sure LP will come along and remind me that I was the first one to say 'just a minute', because I am a 'trouble maker' who RCR has had to "call out" before.

I’ve not seen you as a troublemaker ever. I do think that at times you rehash stuff rather than letting-go though.
I was a more Extreme Stander like you so I get it. I was a member at Jim Conway’s chat, but didn’t really fit in and I did not fit in at Rejoice Ministries either. I loved Jim’s chat and Jim was great, but some of the LBSs seemed toxically stuck and they were the leaders which meant they were the ones influencing the others and thus new people were being kept stuck. I was a troublemaker—to them! Well here at HS I welcome differences of opinion like you bring. Over there I was a trouble maker for things like supporting gay marriage—or simply not blasting homosexuality as being sinful. I was a troublemaker because I did not want to censor Neal Donal Walsch’s Conversation With God books—I love those books!
What can be concerning is when someone who is stuck/victim and/or in denial is a leader—as a moderator or not—and unintentionally influences others on the same path toward becoming stuck. I’m not saying that is you or not because I don’t know. I see you rehash things that might be better off to release and I also see you strong in what you want as a Stander. Maybe we all get to be a bit of both.

RCR rarely posts here. But she does appear when I express my views. Often shortly after you do.
Once is a coincidence.
Twice is a surprise.
A third time is definitely a pattern.

Or still a coincidence. My previous post on this thread was just to let everyone know I will read and post, but that I was at that time busy. I posted in one of the few moments I had available and paid little to know attention who had posted directly before me—I still don’t know now.

…the site has expanded to try and meet the needs of all people...regardless of whether it goes against the mission statement or what used to be the intent of this site.

Given that I wrote the Mission Statement and it is MY mission, I will state that this stuff people are perceiving as new does not go against the mission of the site. At least not the stuff of mine. I cannot speak for the opinions and posts of others and we try to moderate so that the mission is upheld by those giving support. To those who feel that I am going against my own mission, consider that you did not understand it and are viewing it through your personal filters. The message of this latest blog post is not new, what is new about it is the emphasis. In previous posts I leaned toward the softer approach and couching my words with additional statements of hope and other asides. I will discuss that more later, as there is a post later that may be ideal for such a response.

The awesome thing about controversy is that it causes people to think.

It is discouraging because it is a message people already receive on a day to day basis, and did not expect in a place where they thought they are understood differently.
It is discouraging because it doesn't acknowledge the commitment and energy many members of this board put into healing themselves, and standing against the very societal forces referenced in the post. Instead, it's adding that same societal message.
It is discouraging because it implies a quiet life is not a healing life.
It is discouraging because it singles out a particular group of people for no particular reason and with zero evidence.
And what is MORE discouraging is there is no apparent willingness to acknowledge that it is discouraging.

You don’t need me to acknowledge something is discouraging to you. It is not discouraging to all LBSs. Though I had not yet responded when you wrote that and I did acknowledge it is discouraging—the odds—in my response to NAH’s post.
As for implying a quiet life is not a healing life…given that my own Stand was a quiet sort that is silly, but more important it does not imply that because for it to do so I would have intended it that way; you are inferring that from the post and I cannot control your inference.

And it was discouraging and critical of those who are deemed standing for something other than themselves or 'waiting' -- the description of which has never been provided and the message of which seems you're doing it too long, you're probably doing it wrong. And if you're praying about it, you're delusional. Which is not so great.

You are putting in a lot of things that I did not say at all. The irony is that I was a long-term or extreme Stander and I would be that today as well. What I see are some of those from that place not Standing in ways that benefit them personally or their Stand.

I went back and read her articles on standing, where she absolutely encourages standing, while at the same time absolutely states that it isn't a guarantee. I think where some are worried is that it may appear, even if not at all intended, that she is moving from that position, which she may not at all be doing.

My position regarding Standing is as it was back when Chuck was in MLC and I was a Stander; I did not waiver then and my position has not now. Back then what I struggled with was the same stuff I struggle with now. Some of my earliest articles—such as MLC Takes Time referenced below—were written then and posted on my DB thread. My struggle was about how much of the reality to tell. I have always had hope of increasing the odds while accepting that I’m just one tiny candle in a hurricane of divorce culture. How do we deal with the fragile newbie—how much can they handle. This latest blog post has been in the works for a few months and in my first drafts where I was just brainstorming my words I said it was meant for the longer term standers or just not the newest LBSs. The thing about that is that I can’t censor it from one group and I have requests for posts geared toward people farther along.
My other struggle was the do as I say not as I do sort of thing. I could tell that there were LBSs out there who were not able to handle the situation in the same way I was—let’s face it I let him move in and out multiple times and I don’t regret it and yet I really don’t think that is going to be beneficial for the healing of most LBSs. As My3girls pointed out, I did not have children at the time. I took a lot of risks and I did calculate them—not literally, but I took action with my eyes wide open.

So today some of the struggle is how to give a message to one group without that message discouraging the other group and how to give a message to the other group without the one group feeling I’m selling them ocean front property in Kansas--what will they think when they realize they are really in Oz?

For what it's worth, I don't think RCR is seeing much on the forum at all. She herself has said she is very busy with several young children and cannot spend time here as she once did. Completely understandable.

Oh this is absolutely true and I even say it as a part of my Mentor-Moderator Duties post stickied at the mod board. I typically check in every day, but don’t read a lot. I check my PMs and look at the mod board to see what running discussions we are having as that is often where people bring up board issues—though mods also PM me about issues. The Mod Team is my Advisory Board and they are my ears by design. I wanted a team to mentor newbies and others who need it AND to help me not only with the technical board stuff, but with keeping up with the day-to-day life of the community. I am a much bigger presence than MWD at DB—I NEVER saw her come on the MLC board when I was there. She’s a busy lady and I did not think it was her duty; I thought it would have been an awesome bonus, but she has a staff for that. I’m not MWD and this board does need my presence more than DB needs MWD, but being a more constant presence is not realistic. In the beginning, I knew a day would come when I had to really step back and rely more on my team and that day came on October 7 2013 as I was holding Baby Blayze and answered the phone call where I was told there was a 10-day old little boy and his 16.5 month old sister in need of a home. My maternity leave got a huge extension!
I probably see more than you think, but yes, often what I see is where I am directed. It is what it is and right now I love…LOVE LOVE LOVE life with the most adorable adorables in the world. I wish I could be here more too, but when I do get to my office I have to spend some of it here and some if it on other HS work duties—like coaching and now I’m in coach training and my time here ends up being a ton of catch-up when there is something to look into.

SongAndDance is correct regarding my care with newbies—though just before the baby arrived in May I delegated the job of assigning mentors to OldPilot. Before that I would write a sometimes long, sometimes brief synopsis of each new poster as I made mentor assignments. I got behind on those too and sometimes a person had a lot of posts for me to read by the time I got to them…it was a big job for me and I am not keeping it up anymore and wish I were, but need to be realistic right now and accept my availability. To me that was important because it helped me keep my finger on the pulse of the newbies and I did continue it after OldPilot started making the assignments, but have not since maybe August.

Time

The inherent contradiction I see is in the role of time, and what is often written here about time.
MLC takes time. A spouse in MLC must work through the MLC before they return -- if they return at all.
Yet, the longer a couple is apart, the less likely a return.
If an LBS believes in the process of MLC, time must do its work.
Yet, an LBS who trusts the process is working against the odds.
There are perceptions that an LBS standing for a long time is waiting or stuck.
Yet, an LBS who hopes for reconciliation must be open to standing for a long time.
These are contradictions.

Standing itself goes against the odds. I was a Stander against the odds and I knew it. Some long-term Standers are stuck, some are not; some are waiting—not living until… some are living full lives.

Unfortunately many do have a generalized perception that the act of Standing or Standing beyond a set time—so long-term—means you are stuck or waiting rather than living a full life. Fewer people here have that perception, but Standers do become sensitive to it and see it where it may not be and some may then use it in arguments where they are avoiding what might be valid advice and observations—sometimes stated in a tough manner, but sometimes stated gently. So some who might be stuck use these arguments against others to enable themselves in remaining stuck—if you are against me, I don’t need to listen to what you are saying.

I figure learning about the MLC "process" is an ongoing effort and therefore a moving target as things are observed.
…
I can't find it now, but there was an article that stated "MLC takes Time. A LOT of time." Although I did find an article with that exact title, it doesn't read like I remember (or maybe it was edited?). In any case it gave an example if you are "18 months from BD, your spouse is in replay. If you are 3 years from BD your spouse is still likely in replay."
And then to find RR's recent blog post that suggest that the further distanced by time from BD the less likely a return is a contradiction to that earlier article I attempted to find.

The article is you are referring to is called MLC Takes Time
Your initial statement that the learning about the MLC process is a moving target is accurate, though most (if not all) of that blog post does not go against what I have said previously. It is just that my emphasis in that post is leaning the other way.
As for there being a contradiction regarding the message of time, it may seem so, but not really. You are talking about two distinct things, the MLCer and the LBS… you bring this up in a later post and my response there was better than what I had originally written here…

Some seem to think RCR has changed her "stance"; I don't see it that way. I forgot who said it, but I just see her as presenting her findings after x amount of time of observation.

You are correct, this is not a change in my stance it’s pretty much always been there. Sure, there are a few things that may be changing as I observe LBSs through time, but in general what I’ve said is stuff that can be found in my other posts; it’s just that I am emphasizing it more here and not including the typical reassurances with it and I have explained why above.
Something new is my wondering about Time. It’s a question I’ve been kicking around for a few months based on some discussions a few mentors and I were having—by PM I think. And then when I look back, maybe I’ve asked it before, but had thought of it differently.
In the past I’ve talked about MLC in a vacuum and wondered what an actual MLC timeline might be without negative external influences—so no traumatized, panicking, beg-n-pleading LBS and no emotionally blackmailing alienator? Can some of the things we do influence it negatively to be longer? Now I guess what the mentor discussion (it started months ago) has done is flip that. Here is what the mentor said followed by some of my comments.

I have a strong bias towards these people getting up on their feet as soon as is practically possible.

The bias comes from my belief that more of the spouses could possibly return in a shorter time frame or with more frequency if the LBS does those things. In effect doing those things may increase the odds a bit for those who desire that outcome. It is not a sure thing by any means and much other [stuff] has to happen as well. However that is one thing that the LBS is in control of when the rest of their world is out of control. As well it is one thing that builds self esteem in the LBS. In truth there is no downside.

Then others step in to tell us that everyone heals on their own timeline, healing takes time… Well, they are not wrong and yet I agree completely with you. This is where it can be so hard. They may be right, but if there is something we can do to help speed up their healing, then it will be better for them. Is there? Maybe for some, but some are more damaged and then there are people who just refuse to be pushed and we need to accept that. What can we do in a manner that will not feel pushy?
… We often look at this from a more negative point of view and consider that those who return will do so earlier and after 4 years the odds go down. Maybe we should change that view and instead consider that our reconciliation success stories are a function of the speed at which the LBS pulled themselves together.

She said it a lot better than I did. My blog post had two subtopics that were about this. The problem subtopic was Time where I framed it in that negative manner. That was the final line of that subtopic, but the main point I was making was geared toward those who really do think that MLCers go through MLC and when they come out they come home or want to come but the door is closed. Not all of you believe that—most of you don’t believe that, but there are some who do and it was not an uncommon idea when I was in the Conway Chat; some promoted it heavily and I feel that is misleading. They really did treat Time as a magic formula. Then I had the Healing subtopic. That was really where I wanted that mentor’s idea to come through. I am only one person and so merely an anecdote rather than a statistic, but my story does support what that mentor suggested.

If I read this I would have been distraught that the clock was ticking and I feel I would have become even more desperate, if that's even possible.

Yes, you are bringing up one f those things I struggle with—I recall even back at Divorcebusting before I started the forum having discussions about what I should say and not say because would something either enable the LBS to feel either guilt/blame or pressure?
So yes, an LBs might feel pressure and get panicky and another LBS might feel motivated to get their butt in gear and heal. I felt that I couldn’t ignore the latter’s need for motivating knowledge/opinion; maybe it will spur them on.

Now instead of learning to focus on ourselves, we feel pressured to hurry up and figure a way to get our spouse back.

What I want you to feel pressured to do—well motivated rather than pressured—is heal and take back your power…your MLCer coming forward (back is a regression) is something they have to do; it is not your job and their being influenced by you as a lighthouse is a byproduct, not the end all. But for many of you—it remained so for me—your Big Goal is about reconciliation rather than your own healing. It was this way for me because I was confident in my own healing. If your Big Goal is reconciliation, I want you to be motivated to focus on you—Mirror-Work, Self-Protection, Healing… because it is how you get to your Big Goal. Many of you eventually come to a place where you are Standing for you. For me it was always about my marriage, but thinking on why that was I think it’s because I had never not been Standing for me—I had not neglected my Self and was still not neglecting my Self. Helping you helps your MLCer and your marriage.

Odds/Statistics

My observation of the forum suggests that reconciliations at 3 – 5 years seem to be the most common.
So, no, the odds aren’t good.
But I’m not sure how reminding people -- who already know the odds aren’t good -- that the odds aren’t good could be anything but discouraging.
I’m sorry to blunt in making this point, but I can’t imagine telling a friend with a cancer diagnosis, “I don't want to discourage you. But, you know, the odds aren’t good.”

You may realize that the odds are not good and you may accept that, but it is not so with everyone. Clearly that message is not meant for you, but it is meant for others.
As for the cancer example, I’ve heard from others using it as an example toward the opposite—they would want their physician to be up front. It really comes down to some want to hear it and some don’t and regardless of what I do I’m not going to please everyone.

 

Understanding reality from the start, doesn't need to undermine a person's inner resolve or belief that the outcome of your desire is possible. There are many things in life, for which the odds are long, but exceptions still happen. That is a faith that each person must find and hold for herself or himself. It cannot be the responsibility of this forum or the messages here.

I've consistently done things in my life where the odds are stacked against me. The "data" doesn't matter if my internal belief is there. It's too much pressure/responsibility to put on the board or on articles or blog posts and, if too much of an LBS's faith and hope relies on such externals, they can too easily be shaken.

This was my attitude as a Stander. I was going to be the one in ten, one in one-hundred or one in a million. As a Stander, I was going to win the lottery regardless of what statistics said. I had no need for data to support my personal faith in a reconciliation for my situation, what it could have helped me with was to convince others about my Stand…but as it turned out, they saw what was playing out and believed in us from the evidence of my situation rather than any generalized evidence which would have certainly been worse.

I’ve only responded this one excerpt from Phoenix’ post, but the entire post is well worth re-reading as it really does explain why I feel the blog I posted is so important.

To be honest, I have no idea what the point of the blog post was.
The forum and the articles make it very clear there are no guarantees.

I’m pleased that you have found that message clear, unfortunately others have not—even when it is clear people in desperate circumstances often interpret things how they want them to be.
Here is what one moderator said on our discussion at the Mod Board: In some ways I feel that I was sold swamp land in Florida, when I first arrived here...but actually - I clung to the belief that most come through this and most return because it was what I wanted to believe and what I wanted for my life.
The point of the post was to emphasize that the odds are not high and then what we can do to help those odds as well as highlight some of the things people think are helpful, but are not.
Onward, you are a smart lady who does her homework and you catch on and know the reality and are like me in that you are Standing with that knowledge because I am assuming the odds are not what it is about for you. I wish others didn’t care about the odds either, or at least not to a big extent, but people do need to know and not everyone is like you, they need other messages and it is my job to give messages to them as well.

Rollercoasterider’s latest blog post:
Most reconciliations happen in the early years. That is not to say that they do not happen later, but the odds go down with time.

This is still bothering me. I was under the impression that there are not any reliable statistics...so where does this come from?? The single word "odds" tells me that this site is keeping track of returners and the length of time. Is this a fact or is it an opinion? Is there any evidence that backs up this statement? If so, please let us know.

It is an educated opinion.

1
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 prepared by RCR and not all mods/mentors agree with it.

Why was this not stated?

2
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?

3
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?

That last one was not stated because it is not mine—that is from Anjae herself. It is not an experience I have. As for the others, this is something that I went back-and-forth about. What I did was write the blog post and then showed the mods for feedback. I don’t think I’ve done that with any other post, but given that I knew this one was going to be more controversial, I felt I needed to show them for comments. We mostly worked on the opening—with maybe little or no edits to the subsections.
In the past I have often made a statement and then added a reassurance. Like this: Most MLC marriages will not make it to reconciliation, but many may be due to the LBS no longer wanting to reconcile. Or I make a statement about how my goal is to change the odds—and it is. A few of these made it into some revisions and then came back out because they watered down the bigger point I am trying to make about the long-shot odds. Hey, it’s not a message I like. I would love to tell you with truth that 80% of MLCers return or will want to or that 80% of MLC marriage reconcile, but that is not true and it is FAR from being true. Since people often give more attention to the pieces that fit what they want to hear I needed to take some of those reassurance out this time because I need their attention on the sad and harsh reality. And yes, I know that sad and harsh reality is discouraging. Stand with full knowledge of the odds for the general population and then make your own for you. In other words, you can determine whether the odds will influence you or not.

It is not most people, but some believe that most MLCers will return home even if they do very little—wait out the MLC since MLC takes Time. So I want to give them some things that might be able to increase their chances—and yet still not get them super high, but better than not doing Mirror-Work and not healing.
Some people believe most MLCers return because it was what their faith tells them—God heals and it will happen in God’s Time, but others believe it because they are told or they infer from what they are told/read. Creed is one thing, but being given misinformation that someone takes as fact is another and many take harmful actions or do not act in their best behalf based on that misinformation and it can get people stuck.

I think that RCR has had enough time to make a hypothesis ( whether it's correct or not is not the point ) based on the feedback that she has received here on the forum.
…
How could she not come to some of these conclusions? She has a "live lab" if you will to see how this "experiment" is going.

Thanks. It’s not really scientific, but it’s the best I’ve got right now and it is where I make my guesses.

I have to disagree Airmid. When my Brother was diagnosed with cancer two years ago, we didn't give 2 figs about the "odds". All we cared about was what can we do to try and fix this?

My Dad was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer last year in June or July and died on 21 May—the day we picked up the new baby from the hospital. I wanted to know the odds up front—so it does not seem a case where agreement/disagreement should hold sway in what is posted because some people want to know—as LBSs I find the men really want odds and use them to determine whether to Stand more than women do—and some people don’t want to know. As a Stander I didn’t care because my Stand and my MLCer were not going to be determined by external odds. We just can’t use what one person wants as a statistic about what everyone wants and how I should present the information because many want it this way and many others want the exact opposite.
Speaking with my dad’s BIL at the time of diagnosis I was talking to him about how pancreatic cancer is considered one that is especially aggressive and fast moving (due to it being found late as I understand it). His response was to reassure me by what seemed a dismissing of what I was saying. That was not what I wanted at all. I wanted an acknowledgement of the reality. Of course they were going to do what they could, but I didn’t want them to encourage me to believe something that wasn’t true either—no enabling denial! He was very gentle, but kept up his form of what he probably thought was kind reassurance and for me I found it bothersome and talked to other people instead of him.

So like cancer MLC does have hard statistics? or not?
On one hand the mentors say "odds go down with time" and "like pancreatic cancer there is a 5-6% survival rate (similar to divorce and remarriage)" but when we ask about statistics, Oh no there aren't any reliable statistics, focus on yourself, don't think about your odds or chances.
I'm confused.

No valid/scientific statistics. I’d love to have them, but I think Anjae may have posted some good explanations above as to why we don’t have them…so I won’t repeat.

On one hand the mentors say "odds go down with time" and "like pancreatic cancer there is a 5-6% survival rate (similar to divorce and remarriage)" but when we ask about statistics, Oh no there aren't any reliable statistics, focus on yourself, don't think about your odds or chances.
I am one of the mentors who would NOT agree with the above, there are others who don't either.
I don't know where this divorce and remarriage rate of 5-6% comes from. As we know, statistics can be slanted in many different ways, and there is no real "scientific measurement"being used to substantiate this type of statistic.
I would caution about throwing out statistics without stating the source of where they came from.

I have not found reliable statistics for remarriage rates—which are obviously different than reconciliation since not all people divorce before reconciling. MWD used to say 10% of divorced couples remarry each other and I asked her about it—a few years ago—and she told me she no longer uses that because she can’t find where she got it.
The 5-6% rate you mention is not even something I’ve heard pf before.
I just sent an email to my contact at Dr. Phil to find out if he can direct me to some of Dr. Phil’s sources—hopefully primary sources. Your issue with stats—slanting, source… is mine as well. This is one of the reasons I do not feel there are reliable statistics at this time and if there are, I have not found them yet. If anyone has found primary source data, please let me know—post, but also PM me to make sure I get it.

As well, I would not clump marriages whose partner are having a MLC in the same category of other marriages that end in divorce.

I think this is perhaps the biggest challenge and what is not out there. The MIDUS studies have data on MLC—not necessarily the stats we want, more like rate of MLC. The problem is how they define, who they interview and what questions they ask to make their MLC diagnosis—I think it may have been self-diagnosis based on a description or definition offered by the interviewer.

There are several people who have stated that they found the comments about the "odds being against them" and the "longer the timeframe the less likely will be a reconciliation" as being discouraging to them. There are also several positive things in RCR's blog and I don't think that the debate is about most of the blog...but those two phrases are the ones that some of us have difficulty as there is no proof to substantiate them.

But there is evidence, just not enough to make a definitive conclusion, but to many of us it is pretty significant evidence. An additional challenge is that we can’t make a stat from a maybe or what-if. So would an MLCer have returned had their spouse continued Standing? Some of those returns would not make it all the way to reconciliation, so are we taking data on a full reconciliation and at what point do we say a couple is really reconciled? I’ve thought about this a lot over the years and it can be overwhelming. A study would need to be very large and extensive to pass my validity test—as well as expensive.

I just wanted to add, and I hate saying it this way as it sounds as if I am criticizing, and I do not mean to be: I think RCR has done one HELL of a job here with everything she has done from the website to the forums, the articles, everything...
BUT...without the revelation of those two added statements, I find the articles a little bit misleading. Maybe it’s just where I am in all this, but it’s just how I feel.

Well thank you and I totally get the misleading feeling. I have talked about the odds before, but usually as an aside to reassurance or an aside with reassurance and I think for many the reassurances sort of make them blind to the asides or warnings. I wanted to offer some balance because I agree it can be misleading. People are making serious life changing decisions based on what they read here.

Unsupported

The people who talk about loving their spouses unconditionally, and behaving in ways that love them home, are scoffed at. So they go quiet on the forum, or leave.

Unfortunately this is also true of those who stop Standing and take a more Tough approach. I just shake my head because this year I have regularly seen both sides making the same claims and complaints against each other. Not supported, afraid to post because of being bullied…

There are a few brave people who are willing to write how they feel about what they observe and their opinions are as valuable as the ones who see things differently.

The ones who see things differently are no less brave and feel just as criticized and unsupported.


This feeling unsupported issue drives me crazy! Not because I don’t believe it, but because it is coming from both sides of the issue and sometimes one side doesn’t even see that they are doing the same thing to the other they are accusing the other of doing…that sentence feels confusing. This is a problem among the moderators as well and personally I sometimes feel like Gumby and wonder how far a person can be stretched before breaking. Often I do agree more with one side than the other, but I tend to be the sort of person who likes to here both sides and give both sides a good listen before passing judgment—and just that can be annoying to some people. I try to stay neutral—at least before my research leads me to a conclusion.

Hope
I have an entire chapter on Hope in my manuscript—and at the main site. Here is an excerpt:

Hope is within you. You create it. It’s neither belief in nor prediction of an outcome. The level of one’s hope may not match the probability of success or failure; it’s not about the odds. Hope isn’t faith, which is linked to confidence in an outcome—even in the absence of evidence. You can hope for something while believing the probability is unlikely.
What are you doing with hope? Are you allowing it to point toward solutions, or are you allowing it to enable you to remain passive with the idea that it will solve the problem for you? What are you doing because you hope? Are you clinging to hope, enabling yourself to wait without mirror-work and growth? Or is hope something you keep as a small but significant flame while you go on with your life?

A month ago I tweeted this: Hope is the tiny space between your feet and the ground of despair. It points the way for you to rescue your Self.

Regarding Viktor Frankl and hope. I’ve read his book too and I did not ever get the idea that his hope gave him a false impression of reality. He saw that most people died and knew that there were things that he could do to help and that there were things he could not do.
Years ago I read a YA novel by Jane Yolen. It was fiction about a woman who survived the gas chamber; the book was set years later when she was a grandmother. Jane added a note at the end to say that NO ONE was known to have survived the gas chambers. So millions entered and not a single person survived—not that is known anyway. So not 99.9999999%, but a precise 100%. What would Viktor Frankl have felt had it gotten that far for him? My thought about him is that he had a great sense of peace that was part of his hope and he would have accepted his death with dignity. Regrets…YES. Anger…well yeah, sadness, fear… yes. But would his hope have died once the showers were turned on? What hope? What enabled his hope? Faith? Maybe I’m wrong since I’m just guessing. Some Covenant Keepers Stand with hope for a reconciliation and some—fewer—no longer believe that will happen and Stand because even without that belief, they believe in remaining true to their marriage vows. They still live in the beauty of their faith as did Viktor Frankl.


new thread: http://mlcforum.theherosspouse.com/index.php?topic=8369.0

add above link OP