Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 10 guests, and 36 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
 Trending Topics(Posts)
1.How to deconstruct a marriage.0
2.I am Sick, I am Sad, and I am needing some support.0
3.SIHW is back and Dealing with issues....0
4.looking for some support0
5.Social Networking Sites and Infidelity0
6.Signs of Infidelity0
7.The Difference Between Cheating and Infidelity?0
8.Not really sure how to survive0
9.The Five Big Lies That Keep You From Changing0
10.Pregnant and getting put out of the house by my husband0
*By replies in last 2 weeks.
In The Media(Posts)
Woman urges NC lawmakers to end child marriage: For her it was a ‘life sentence’3
COVID-19 and the Increased Likelihood of Affairs3
Does anyone remember this story?3
Validation to find-win-win slutions2
Things men want3
These Are The Signs You're Dating A Narcissist3
Girlfriend's 'controlling' list of 22 rules for boyfriend goes viral: 'She sounds crazy'9
What Divorced Men Wish They Had Done Differently In Their Marriages7
Alienation of Affection / Criminal Conversation9
Would you pay your ex a 'break-up fee'? - BBC3
more >>
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316586
10/01/13 07:26 PM
10/01/13 07:26 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
Hold,

Quote:
This has been a wonderful discussion. Just wonderful.


LOL....I'm trying to figure out if this is sarcastic or not. I just don't know.

Quote:
FWIW, few males are more doormatish than I,


There are been a few men who have doggedly remained in their marriages in the face of poor odds and even abuse from their wives.

Quote:
and even I see the disparity in treatment of hardline advice to BHs vs advice to be more accomodating.


Okay...but I'm going to push back just a little. Is it disparity in the advice? Or disparity in the delivery?

This is the challenge! The problem is that the hard delivery of the advice for hardliners is critical to giving the advice. So they get stuck all the time. It is a desire on anyone's part to limit advice, but as a board we have an obligation to apply TOS across the board. The "softer" approach is less likely to break TOS...and yes, that gives the hardliners a bit of a disadvantage. So how do we fix that? Is it possible?

Quote:
Also, I think there is a justification for giving hardline advice to the typical BH who shows up here. Usually it is the correct advice. razz wink


I agree with this statement. I also believe there are exceptions and that one size does not fit all (one of the core values we used to build this place). So cookie-cutter advice for BH's (or anyone else) isn't the answer.

Quote:
Here is why I think so. We do not get many "too strong" BHs. That is, we do not get many BHs showing up here saying "I treated her like crap, I took advantage of her, she treated me like gold, and only after years of neglect did she cheat on me with the nice guy who respected her more than I did." In that case, I don't think you would see many posters, not even MyRev, suggest "go straight to Plan D".


I agree...which is what I was talking about in my last paragraph. But even if we have a "whimp" show up...if the hardline crosses the boundary between advice and insult, we have to apply TOS consistently. Just because it's a MAN talking smack, doesn't mean he's going to get a pass because the advice is "right". We can't operate that way.

Quote:
On the other hand, in most cases where a BH shows up here, the basic story is "I was too nice, I kissed her butt, she has no respect for me, she treated me like crap and I took it, and then cheated on me with a player." In the latter case, many of us feel that pretty much the only chance the BH has to recover his marriage is to go hardline. ASAP. Not only does that prevent her from cake eating (and hence shorten the life expentancy of the A), but it is addressing one of the core problems in their marriage. Her lack of respect for him. His lack of strong masculine energy.


Yep...I won't argue with this at all.

Quote:
And timing matters. If the goal is to appear stronger than she expected, much more impact from a quick "I do not share my wife with other men" than to wait a long time until he finally and reluctantly says "I just can't tolerate this any longer".


Okay...but what is "quick"? Isn't that subjective? When someone has been married for 25 years...a couple of weeks to get their head on straight ought to be quick enough. If for a short time they want to try a few last ditch efforts to turn things around...shouldn't that be their choice?

Marriage problems are like cancer....they can all kill you, but no matter what kind of cancer you've got, or how low the odds for survival...somebody has recovered from it. People have hope and it's a powerful thing. I hate to see anyone acting on false hope, but I also hate to see all hope destroyed as well. My hope is that we can give people the best information we can....and let them decide what treatment they want to follow.

Quote:
Finally, as MyRev pointed out, the fact that it also moves the "line of scrimmage" on child custody is another bonus which is hugely gender specific. And where timing matters. A female can wait to file for D and still be confident she will get at least 50% custody of the kids. The longer the BH waits, the more likely he will get stuck with "every other weekend" notwithstanding that his wife was the WS. Not gender neutral in the least.


This is HUGE huge. Yes...it's one of the big reasons I think that there we need a man cave, but if you read my response to myrev...you see the challenges about making something like that work. We're going to have to get creative, and if that's going to happen then, it's going to take help from both sides.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: MyRevelation] #316587
10/01/13 07:34 PM
10/01/13 07:34 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
Quote:
Star* ... in the past few days, I've made a genuine effort to answer your questions and engage in a conversation. However, in just one post, you have summarily dismissed the premise of what I've posted, and it appears to me due to a complete misreading of my intent.


Well hell and damnation! How can you say I've dismissed what you've posted?

Quote:
With your example about your perceptions concerning L&S's thread, it is CLEAR we speak completely different languages, and you don't understand how men communicate with each other. In addition, L&S was soooo dysfunctional that the whole forum, women and men, were giving him the same advice, but apparently mine was the one that was "too much".


It wasn't YOUR post that was too much...that's what you're missing. It was your post that got the notification. The mods didn't think it was too much....someone notified that post and you were given a "warning" (slap on the wrist).

Why are you so sensitive about this? Maybe I don't understand how men talk to each other (being a female and all that)....but I'm hanging in here trying to "get" it. You don't understand me either if all you got out of that post is what you've written here. So we're even.

Are you going to take your ball and go home?


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316591
10/01/13 07:56 PM
10/01/13 07:56 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
"What hurts the most...is getting so close"

You know, a lot of this ground has been covered before. Many times. What was new...was we were talking about it...and I really thought we were making some progress!

I thought that a real discussion was on the board that showed a willingness to acknowledge the differences (not deny them), respect the differences, celebrate the differences and come up with a way to honor different perspectives.

Why can't we do that?


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316592
10/01/13 07:57 PM
10/01/13 07:57 PM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,381
TX
CajunRose Offline
Member
CajunRose  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,381
TX
I agree with hold's statement "and even I see the disparity in treatment of hardline advice to BHs vs advice to be more accomodating."

I think there was a great deal of baiting of posters and of advice. Many of the "softer" posters were good at baiting or responding to baiting within the confines of the TOS. Many of the "harder" posters were not so good at staying within the TOS when they responded to the frustration.

To many of us watching, the penalties seemed MUCH harsher for the hardline posters (I think of 2 in particular) than the softer posters (2-3 in particular). It felt like a witch hunt.

I've had this problem in other online communities too - that one side can drive off another side and still stay within the TOS so they don't get penalized for it. The only thing I've seen that works is a) banning those who are causing the "nice" problems (which is against the goals of this site) or b) everyone gets mad and leaves.

In this case, I think most of those posters on both sides have stopped posting much.


Current spouse: Night. D10, D9, S7

About me

You can't direct the wind, but you can adjust your sails.

http://www.divorcedmomfinances.com
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316595
10/01/13 08:03 PM
10/01/13 08:03 PM
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,593
MyRevelation Offline
Member
MyRevelation  Offline
Member
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,593
Originally Posted By: star*fish
Are you going to take your ball and go home?


Just to be clear ... it's your ball and your rules ... always has been. I just got reminded of that.

... and to be honest, it is better for me to step away from this discussion right now, as I'm very pissed at myself for spending this amount of time and emotional energy on this thread.

Re: MA Core values [Re: CajunRose] #316599
10/01/13 08:23 PM
10/01/13 08:23 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
Quote:
I think there was a great deal of baiting of posters and of advice. Many of the "softer" posters were good at baiting or responding to baiting within the confines of the TOS. Many of the "harder" posters were not so good at staying within the TOS when they responded to the frustration.

To many of us watching, the penalties seemed MUCH harsher for the hardline posters (I think of 2 in particular) than the softer posters (2-3 in particular). It felt like a witch hunt.

I've had this problem in other online communities too - that one side can drive off another side and still stay within the TOS so they don't get penalized for it. The only thing I've seen that works is a) banning those who are causing the "nice" problems (which is against the goals of this site) or b) everyone gets mad and leaves.

In this case, I think most of those posters on both sides have stopped posting much.


Thanks for your comments CR....I really appreciate your perspective.

I think that by far, most of the problems on forums is the work of very few people. Most forums just ban trouble makers no matter which side they fall on. Having come from MB...the "banning" thing wasn't the way we wanted to go. Might have been a mistake. And yes, maybe the "baiters" can more easily work the system...still there has to BE a system for this to work at all. We've worked hard to find the best balance...and it's super hard.

I would like to say however, that the very few posters who really got the harshest penalties, had pushed the limits of what would be acceptable on any forum. It wasn't simply their hardline advice on the board or just TOS violations. There was much more that wasn't visible on the board. At some point, we have to respect ourselves enough to say....enough! We don't just have a responsibility to our posters...as a board we have a responsibility to the forum as a whole. Everyone else can look at the board and how it affects themselves, or their small group. We don't have that luxury.

And it's really important to remember that most people on this forum NEVER go to PB....never.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316600
10/01/13 08:29 PM
10/01/13 08:29 PM
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 7,052
holdingontoit Offline
Global Moderator
holdingontoit  Offline
Global Moderator
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 7,052
Nope, was not meant sarcastically. I love this place, and I have very much enjoyed this thread. Not just you andf MyRev. Mark, Ace, LadyGrey. Everything (apologies to those not mentioned by name).

Star, I am all in favor of giving people a choice of when and how to implement various steps in their recovery. And I agree that hard-liners should not violate TOS. Nevertheless, there is a fine line between (i) how men tend to encourage other men to take action and (ii) abuse. That is to say, humiliation is a time-tested male device for motivating other men to get off their butt and get moving. And I can see how some might say "humiliation is abusive and won't be tolerated. The ends don't justify the means." I get it. And yet.

Part of me thinks that the board and the mods aren't doing these "too soft" men (and I include myself in that group) any favors by protecting them from hardliners. It is like Mommy running to protect her son from a bully. In the long run, that is not so great for the kid. Unlike the school yard (where maybe the bully can do real lasting physical harm to the kid), when a BH shows up here, how much more damage can we do to the guy's ego than what his wife has already done? She had sex with another man! Does anyone really think that a guy is going to recover form that, but not from MyRev calling him a wimp?

OK, I can understand if a BH states that he wants to reconcile, and is not ready for hardline advice, and does not appreciate the tone being expressed toward him, then the mods should clearly step in to muzzle anyone who doesn't cut it out. Because we want the BH to feel respected here. Even if some of us disagree with his choice in behavior. But to step in and muzzle a hardliner before the BH complains is, to me, being too politically correct and nanny-statish.

I guess much of this difference of opinion stems from our respective views of risk - reward. To me, the downside harm of allowing a BH to get "excessively bashed" is minimal. His wife just cut his balls off. Compared to that, anything we do to hurt hs feelings is hardly gong to register. Whereas the downside risk from his not implementing hard line soon enough is huge. He risks recovery working, and he risks losing custody of his kids. To me, that argues in favor of drawing the line pretty far toward "shaking the guy out of his comfort zone".

To me, the same analysis applies on the upside a well. What is the best result of muzzling the hard liners? The guy is spared some embarrassment and hurt feelings. Like I said, his wife just cut his balls off. How much better do you think he feels when we prevent MyRev from "piling on". Whereas, if MyRev's "bashing" actually works to get the guy to "man up", the potential upside is enormous. Again, the risk / reward is so unbalanced it argues in favor of tilting the balance a long way toward allowing "straight talk" instead of requiring the hardliners to water down their message.

Yes, we can verbalize arguments on both sides. That does not mean the weight of the arguments on both sides is anything close to equal.

I also think this is another area of gender differences. I can imagine that woman place a high priority on safety. Mrs. Hold has stressed this in our MC discussions. Many women are going to shut down and not be open to taking in advice if they don't feel they are in a "safe" environment. If I raise my voice at all, Mrs. Hold gets anxious and tunes me out. All she hears is the tone.

In my experience, guys are different. We raise our voice toward other guys, and they keep listening. We tend not to flee toward safety. And if a guy is "too soft", his reflex to flee toward safety is exactly the WRONG reaction if he wants to recover his marriage. He isn't going to save his marriage by creating a zone of safety. He is going to save his marriage by showing his wife that he can tolerate conflict and emerge stronger. She wants to see that he will be her champion and keep her safe from the outside world. If he can't defend himself from her, how can she trust him to defend her from other people? We do more to help him by giving him experience tolerating conflict than we do by creating a safe haven in which he can lick his wounds.

At some point, the "too soft" guy has to stand up to his wife and say "enough is enough". He might as well practice that here first. If the mods "protect" the BH from the hard
liners, the BH is not forced to find his voice to defend himself. Hard to see how that benefits him.


Solutions? There are none. There are decisions.
Re: MA Core values [Re: holdingontoit] #316603
10/01/13 08:48 PM
10/01/13 08:48 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
2long Offline
member
2long  Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
Originally Posted By: holdingontoit
We do not get many "too strong" BHs. That is, we do not get many BHs showing up here saying "I treated her like crap, I took advantage of her, she treated me like gold, and only after years of neglect did she cheat on me with the nice guy who respected her more than I did." In that case, I don't think you would see many posters, not even MyRev, suggest "go straight to Plan D".


I won't speak for MyRev, but I *have* given plan D advice in more than one si2ation described exactly as you state with this example. Not here (I don't think), but on loveshack (before they booted me for something I said 2 a proud OW) and on survivinginfidelity. And the reason is, because I don't believe the si2ation as it's described, even by the BH himself. It's not that it might not be partially or even entirely true, but the BH isn't a "reliable witness" in their own si2ation, and the WW is definitely not trustworthy.

The affair must end before recovery can start. And I believe it has a much better chance of starting if the BH (but any BS) stands firm that they won't tolerate infidelity in their marriage, and that if the WS wants 2 recover, they'd better take responsibility for their own behavior sooner rather than later.

Becoming a doormat does nobody any good. Taking responsibility for one's choices and lot in life and standing firm for what you believe in - BS or WS - always does everybody good.

-ol' 2long

Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316604
10/01/13 08:52 PM
10/01/13 08:52 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,007
The Farm
Jayne241 Offline
Member
Jayne241  Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,007
The Farm
Originally Posted By: holdingontoit


FWIW, few males are more doormatish than I, and even I see the disparity in treatment of hardline advice to BHs vs advice to be more accomodating.


FWIW, I'm female, I usually give "Plan A"-type advice especially if the poster wants to try to save their marriage, but like hold says, "even I see the disparity in treatment of hardline advice to BHs vs advice to be more accomodating."

star*, I can see a lot of your points. But this:

Originally Posted By: star*fish

We've knocked around ideas for a hardline forum. I had visions of something like the TD where there's a minimum of moderation (or moderation by men), but I've had trouble selling it. The reason is because the hardline advice often deteriorates to personal attacks so quickly, and that's a big issue. "Manly" often gets confused with insulting. Also, because we're a marriage advocacy site and the hardline advice is almost always divorce-centric..it poses a problem for our mission. I wonder if we did a similar posting rule...like the 25 posts to get into the TD...so that at least a short time was reserved for the possibility that a marriage can be saved...if that would help.

The other problem that arose was that some of y'all felt as though if we had a separate board for the hardline advice...one that a poster would enter voluntarily, that it would be too limiting and give you guys even less freedom to post. It was viewed as some kind of trickery to "contain" you all somewhere...though it was no such thing. Y'all didn't want to be restricted to one corner of the forum, and so we tried the next best thing.

We compromised with the "enough is enough" forum....which didn't work as hoped. You guys wanted the freedom to post the hardline advice there, without challenge and little moderation, but you still wanted the freedom to challenge other advice all over the board. It's the whole "cake and eat it too" problem. We have wracked our brains trying to find a way to honor the male voices, but unfortunately, there's been so much hostility towards the forum...it's hard to stay motivated. We have the impression that y'all would rather criticize than work together.


I tried sending some BHs to the Enough is Enough forum because I thought it was supposed to be a place where men could give hardline advice in stronger language. I thought it was supposed to be what you describe above. Presumably if a poster went to that forum, they were seeking "stronger, harsher" (for lack of a better word) advice. But it became clear that the EiE forum would be moderated just the same as any other forum.

Plus, the two comments I bolded above contradict each other. On one hand you say the "hardliners" (for lack of a better word) were wrong when they thought the formation of a separate hardline forum would restrict their freedom to post elsewhere. But then you go on to say that after the EiE forum was formed, they wrongly "still wanted the freedom to challenge other advice all over the board."

I don't see why someone posting on the EiE forum should give up their right to post elsewhere, on whatever they want, as long as they stayed within the TOS for that forum.

The EiE forum has become just a "philosophical discussion" forum to discuss the pros and cons of "hardline" advice. It is certainly not limited to posters who agree with hardline advice. It might as well be merged with the Peer Counseling forum or at least be put in the Creative Discussions section.


Originally Posted By: star*fish
Quote:
Star* ... in the past few days, I've made a genuine effort to answer your questions and engage in a conversation. However, in just one post, you have summarily dismissed the premise of what I've posted, and it appears to me due to a complete misreading of my intent.


Well hell and damnation! How can you say I've dismissed what you've posted?


I can see why he might say that. In reading your reply, I got the impression that every point he made was being countered, parried, not accepted as a valid viewpoint with a goal of seeking a solution. As a wife, if my H parried every complaint I mentioned that way, I would feel very minimized, unheard, frustrated. I would react by shutting down, not continuing to try to engage.


42.
Re: MA Core values [Re: CajunRose] #316605
10/01/13 08:59 PM
10/01/13 08:59 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,007
The Farm
Jayne241 Offline
Member
Jayne241  Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,007
The Farm
Originally Posted By: CajunRose
I agree with hold's statement "and even I see the disparity in treatment of hardline advice to BHs vs advice to be more accomodating."

I think there was a great deal of baiting of posters and of advice. Many of the "softer" posters were good at baiting or responding to baiting within the confines of the TOS. Many of the "harder" posters were not so good at staying within the TOS when they responded to the frustration.

To many of us watching, the penalties seemed MUCH harsher for the hardline posters (I think of 2 in particular) than the softer posters (2-3 in particular). It felt like a witch hunt.

I've had this problem in other online communities too - that one side can drive off another side and still stay within the TOS so they don't get penalized for it. The only thing I've seen that works is a) banning those who are causing the "nice" problems (which is against the goals of this site) or b) everyone gets mad and leaves.

In this case, I think most of those posters on both sides have stopped posting much.


ITA.

<CR, is one of us a sock puppet for the other??? Because I always seem to agree with everything you say!>

<PTB: That was a joke.>


42.
Re: MA Core values [Re: holdingontoit] #316608
10/01/13 09:21 PM
10/01/13 09:21 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
Hold,

Quote:
Star, I am all in favor of giving people a choice of when and how to implement various steps in their recovery. And I agree that hard-liners should not violate TOS. Nevertheless, there is a fine line between (i) how men tend to encourage other men to take action and (ii) abuse. That is to say, humiliation is a time-tested male device for motivating other men to get off their butt and get moving. And I can see how some might say "humiliation is abusive and won't be tolerated. The ends don't justify the means." I get it. And yet.

Part of me thinks that the board and the mods aren't doing these "too soft" men (and I include myself in that group) any favors by protecting them from hardliners. It is like Mommy running to protect her son from a bully. In the long run, that is not so great for the kid. Unlike the school yard (where maybe the bully can do real lasting physical harm to the kid), when a BH shows up here, how much more damage can we do to the guy's ego than what his wife has already done? She had sex with another man! Does anyone really think that a guy is going to recover form that, but not from MyRev calling him a wimp?


I completely get this and agree. I thought we had at least established that I understood the need for hardline advice. But I'll repeat myself again...I agree with the need for gender specific advice. I'm a little worried about taking it as far as "humiliation" but I do agree that tearing down (like in the Marines) is an enduring strategy in male circles.

Quote:
OK, I can understand if a BH states that he wants to reconcile, and is not ready for hardline advice, and does not appreciate the tone being expressed toward him, then the mods should clearly step in to muzzle anyone who doesn't cut it out. Because we want the BH to feel safe here. And to feel that his feelings are being respected. Even if some of us disagree with his choice in behavior. But to step in and muzzle a hardliner before the BH complains is, to me, being too politically correct and nanny-statish.


OK...but that's exactly what happened on L&S's thread. He consistently asked for different advice. I brought it up as an example of how we need to find the right balance and how to decide when a line is crossed, but myrev took it personally...even though he told me to look at his flags. I thought it was a good example of how a new poster was run off when we was pushed too hard too soon.

Quote:
I guess much of this difference of opinion stems from our respective views of risk - reward. To me, the downside harm of allowing a BH to get "excessively bashed" is minimal. His wife just cut his balls off. Compared to that, anything we do to hurt hs feelings is hardly gong to register. Whereas the downside risk from his not implementing hard line soon enough is huge. He risks recovery working, and he risks losing custody of his kids. To me, that argues in favor of drawing the line pretty far toward "shaking the guy out of his comfort zone".


It's hard to know when "excessively bashed" will have a good outcome or not. It can also be seen as "kicking somebody when they're down". Maybe a guy who just got his balls cut off isn't ready to be bashed right after that. But seems to me...he's the one who has the right to decide that. If he's says outright..."stop it"...then I think we have to respect that too.

Quote:
To me, the same analysis applies on the upside a well. What is the best result of muzzling the hard liners? The guy is spared some embarrassment and hurt feelings. Like I said, his wife just cut his balls off. How much better do you think he feels when we prevent MyRev from "piling on". Whereas, if MyRev's "bashing" actually works to get the guy to "man up", the potential upside is enormous. Again, the risk / reward is so unbalanced it argues in favor of tilting the balance a long way toward allowing "straight talk" instead of requiring the hardliners to water down their message.


Muzzling? Y'all lose me when you use that kind of exaggeration. There is more freedom on this forum....even to bash the forum...then I've seen on any other established marriage forum.

Besides...you guys continue to forget that we are a 501(c) We really REALLY have rules about what we can allow or not! Read it yourself.

Straight talk does not have to equal bashing...but that's not the problem anyway. The problem is coming up with a solution that gives the hardliners the freedom to bash away with minimum moderation....when they don't want to be limited from bashing all over the forum. We can make room for that perspective, but it would need to be in a place that was designed with special rules...and that's been rejected.

Quote:
Yes, we can verbalize arguments on both sides. That does not mean the weight of the arguments on both sides is anything close to equal.

I also think this is another area of gender differences. I can imagine that woman place a high priority on safety. Mrs. Hold has stressed this in our MC discussions. Many women are going to shut down and not be open to taking in advice if they don't feel they are in a "safe" environment. If I raise my voice at all, Mrs. Hold gets anxious and tunes me out. All she hears is the tone.


I concede that women are probably far more interested in safety than men, but I've seen a fair share of men who've come here and asked folks to "back off".

Quote:
In my experience, guys are different. We raise our voice toward other guys, and they keep listening. We tend not to flee toward safety. And if a guy is "too soft", his reflex to flee toward safety is exactly the WRONG reaction if he wants to recover his marriage. He isn't going to save his marriage by creating a zone of safety. He is going to save his marriage by showing his wife that he can tolerate conflict and emerge stronger. She wants to see that he will be her champion and keep her safe from the outside world. If he can't defend himself from her, how can she trust him to defend her from other people? We do more to help him by giving him experience tolerating conflict than we do by creating a safe haven in which he can lick his wounds.


Again....I get it. The challenge is to implement something that works for everyone....men and women...soft and hard....safe and in your face. And not only implement something, but something that can be defined well enough to have structure and rules that can be enforced...and still maintain our 501(c) status.

I understand the need....but not the means. What isn't going to happen is that "bashing for a good cause" is going to be allowed all over the board, because then we'll have another rebellion on our hands, and we'll risk our non-profit status as an "educational" site.

I was willing to erect a "man cave"....but the "roaring" would have had to be done there and not all over the board. Hardline advice within TOS would still be allowed on the open board, but not strategies like bashing, badgering, humiliation or emasculation for instance. Those would be limited to a place where folks were warned before entering...like the TD. That way, if some posters are not receptive or ready...they have the ability to choose a higher level of moderation.

But that wasn't enough. If you have another idea...I'm open to hearing it.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316613
10/01/13 09:35 PM
10/01/13 09:35 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
jayne,

You've misunderstood. The original idea for a hardline forum WAS so that harsher advice could be given with looser moderation standards. Not NO standards (because we are a 501(c)...just like the TD still has some standards...but certainly looser to accommodate the strong male perspective.

But the hardliners decided that if we designed a specific place, that they would somehow lose their freedom to post that advice elsewhere. The only thing that would have been different elsewhere was the moderation standards, but it was seen as a way to "contain" the advice, and not well recieved.

When that idea fell through...the EE forum went up instead. It was kept in the general forum and therefore had the same moderation standards. So the hardline advice could be given, but not with the freedom from moderation that was desired.

In a place where we loosen moderation, a poster has to agree to enter...like we do for TD. There can't be so called "good bashing" board-wide because it would violate our non-profit guidelines.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316617
10/01/13 10:00 PM
10/01/13 10:00 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
jayne,

Quote:
I can see why he might say that. In reading your reply, I got the impression that every point he made was being countered, parried, not accepted as a valid viewpoint with a goal of seeking a solution. As a wife, if my H parried every complaint I mentioned that way, I would feel very minimized, unheard, frustrated. I would react by shutting down, not continuing to try to engage.


Hmmmm....but this is someone who is advocating a very "in your face" style. Comparatively, I thought I was very respectful. I did address every point...because I honestly thought they were all important. I wanted him to know I was really paying attention. I validated his perspective many times along with presenting a different perspective.

I doubt that myrev is that fragile...he would consider it wimpy, but if he is...that would would be counter to the very argument he is making. He wants guys to challenge other guys who come here...in the strongest way possible, and yet you're suggesting that this very civil discussion would wound him and make him "shut down". I do believe he's frustrated, and I'm sorry about that, but he can hardly fight for a hardline if he wants kid gloves.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316620
10/01/13 10:53 PM
10/01/13 10:53 PM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
2long Offline
member
2long  Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
Originally Posted By: star*fish

OK...but that's exactly what happened on L&S's thread. He consistently asked for different advice. I brought it up as an example of how we need to find the right balance and how to decide when a line is crossed, but myrev took it personally...even though he told me to look at his flags. I thought it was a good example of how a new poster was run off when we was pushed too hard too soon.


He held out for about a week and a half longer on MB, because it seemed he was getting more of the kind of advice he seemed 2 want. But he seems 2 have left MB as well (but its only been a couple weeks). I don't think he got run off here any more than he was run off there, though they gave more "go ahead and send flowers, texts and FB messages 2 your wife who's ignoring you, taking stuff from your house and living with a convict" advice 2 help him feel better, rather than accepting that she's gone and not someone he'll want back in the long run anyway.

-ol' 2long

Re: MA Core values [Re: 2long] #316625
10/02/13 12:14 AM
10/02/13 12:14 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,381
TX
CajunRose Offline
Member
CajunRose  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,381
TX
Originally Posted By: star
In fact, more times than not latelyIve worried that MA sounds like a divorce site rather than a marriage site. I see new members getting divorce advice almost immediately.sometimes even before getting their history down.


I wanted to go back to this comment just a bit. I think there may be more instances of members advocating for divorce more quickly and I'm most likely one of them. We all know it's very rare for a marriage to recover from certain situations, and I think some of us don't see much point in trying.

I don't think this is a bad thing, since we aren't, as you say, a marriage-at-all-costs website.

I think the important thing is to balance the talk of divorce and/or Plan B with introspection on the part of the betrayed spouse.

The marriage I came here to save ended, and by the time the papers were signed I was glad of it. Yet what I learned here has given me the tools to find someone who was a better fit for me, and to help us create a relationship that is much more healthy than what either of us had before.

In my mind, even advocating for divorce in a particular situation does not mean that we are not advocating for marriage. We may be advocating for the next marriage instead.


Current spouse: Night. D10, D9, S7

About me

You can't direct the wind, but you can adjust your sails.

http://www.divorcedmomfinances.com
Re: MA Core values [Re: 2long] #316627
10/02/13 12:19 AM
10/02/13 12:19 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
2long,

Quote:
He held out for about a week and a half longer on MB, because it seemed he was getting more of the kind of advice he seemed 2 want. But he seems 2 have left MB as well (but its only been a couple weeks). I don't think he got run off here any more than he was run off there, though they gave more "go ahead and send flowers, texts and FB messages 2 your wife who's ignoring you, taking stuff from your house and living with a convict" advice 2 help him feel better, rather than accepting that she's gone and not someone he'll want back in the long run anyway.


Of course you're right about his sitch...and everyone agreed. He probably would have left no matter what...I concede that. However, I did think he was clear about what he wanted. Smart or not...it is still his right to decide the timing.

You know, at first I was confused about why both you and Hold started giving hardline advice....but then it made sense. Both of you spent so much time feeling like doormats that it shouldn't be surprising that your advice now is much more hardline than either of you was willing to follow. And yet...I also wonder if there isn't some "over-correction" and quite a bit of "do as I say-not as I do(did)" I "get" that after all of the humiliation you suffered, that you'd like to spare others from the same state of powerlessness and limbo. I think it's very valid. But I also think that both of you had your own personal reasons for how things went down. I think as peer counselors, we may need to recognize that each person has a whole host of items we may never know or understand and that pushing them to do the thing we believe we "should" have done...is not necessarily right for them.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316628
10/02/13 12:21 AM
10/02/13 12:21 AM
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,381
TX
CajunRose Offline
Member
CajunRose  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,381
TX
Originally Posted By: star*fish
[quote]I think that by far, most of the problems on forums is the work of very few people.

I agree.
Originally Posted By: star
We've worked hard to find the best balance...and it's super hard.
I agree it's super hard. I also think there is at least one baiter who "got away with it" and is still baiting other posters, albeit in a way that falls within the TOS.

Originally Posted By: star
I would like to say however, that the very few posters who really got the harshest penalties, had pushed the limits of what would be acceptable on any forum. It wasn't simply their hardline advice on the board or just TOS violations. There was much more that wasn't visible on the board. At some point, we have to respect ourselves enough to say....enough! We don't just have a responsibility to our posters...as a board we have a responsibility to the forum as a whole.

I read this as saying that people were given harsher penalties or otherwise encouraged to go away because they were doing things off of the board (which TOS says we should not consider). This is what I suspected and is not really a surprise - I agree that at some point enough is enough. The issue that I have - and that I think a few others hear share - is that other posters who were causing problems in PMs or off-board to MA members, but possibly not to the BOD, were given essentially a free pass. This is what causes the perception that the hardline advocates were treated differently.

Originally Posted By: star
And it's really important to remember that most people on this forum NEVER go to PB....never.

That was never in doubt. It only takes a handful to destroy what the rest have tried to build.


Current spouse: Night. D10, D9, S7

About me

You can't direct the wind, but you can adjust your sails.

http://www.divorcedmomfinances.com
Re: MA Core values [Re: CajunRose] #316630
10/02/13 12:35 AM
10/02/13 12:35 AM
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,657
L
LadyGrey Offline
Professional Attorney
LadyGrey  Offline
Professional Attorney
L
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,657
Children first, always

To prioritize healthy reconciliation recognizing that marriage is the bedrock of society and that the interests of the children are always better served by a healthy, intact family.

I believe that folks on forums are all too willing sometimes sickeningly willing -- to throw the nameless faceless children under the proverbial bus when the faithful spouse is dealing with a cheating spouse who isn't yet genuflecting.

In my opinion, we should fight like rabid dogs to support reconciliation where there are minor children involved.

In my view, life is short and you deserve to be happy left the room the minute sperm met egg.

A forty year old with an eight year old and a ten year old has 30 to 40 years left to potentially be miserable. That eight and ten year old have 60 to 70 years to live with the damage caused by divorce, the fruits of which their spouses and children will also get to enjoy. I've lived it.

Studies show that no matter how miserable a couple is, 5 years later the vast majority report they are much happier.

Life isnt static.

There are without question cases in which divorce is the healthiest option herf and CR come to mind but no one could ever accuse either of giving up without a soul destroying fight.

The poster matters

To respect and honor each poster as an autonomous adult responsible for his own well-being.

This is where I think we sometimes run into trouble on the hardline front. To me, sometimes the language used sounds dismissive, emasculating and mean spirited. Since it isnt directed at me and I get my fair share of that stuff, I confess Im not much bothered.

I don't buy the whole men talk different to men line, but I do know that I address people in different contexts in ways that could be viewed as dismissive and mean spirited. So much is lost in the written word. I could detail a conversation I had with my son where I said, WTF is WRONG with you? How could you be so.whatever and people here would, understandably think Im being awful.

Tone and history arent readily communicated in writing. My assumption has always been that there is some male tone and history to which I am not privy that governs the whole hardline debate, which, frankly, Ive never understood but not from lack of effort.

The problem as I see it is that the poster stays as long as he wants to stay. We aren't all gluttons for punishment and this isnt your brother-in-law or next door neighbor where youll get another shot if you cross a line. If the poster gets to feeling too bad, they leave, and who can blame them?

It may be a problem without a solution, but Ive always thought a grace period would be helpful -- get to know someone a little bit before you tell him he has no balls, but of course, I am all about grace..

The Marriage

To inform, encourage and support each poster in discerning and articulating his* values, establish personal boundaries consistent with those values to govern both his behavior and behavior he will tolerate from his spouse, and to enforce those boundaries in a manner consistent with his values and respectful of both spouses.

To me, any discussion about the absent spouse is kind of pointless. He isnt here and he is going to do what he wants to do, and I think it is in general a waste of time and energy to talk about him and what he could/should/may do.

I think that the mission is best served by focusing on grounding, orienting and supporting the poster in determining the matters set forth above without reference to the behavior of their spouse.

I strongly believe that whatever your personal views are, if your efforts are focused on empowering the poster to make the decisions based upon their own values it is extremely difficult to impose your own agenda.

The problem with this is that it is not a week long or month long or year long process. You have to be willing to be present and wait and deal with a whole bunch of stuff in between that is whacked out. And the poster has to be willing to be present and wait and share a bunch of whacked out stuff. It isn't easy, but it is worth it.

To my understanding, this site was established for the purpose of allowing discussion of different viewpoints about how to create a healthy marriage.

However and I FINALLY figured out what has bugged me so much about this debate the fact that there is not a clearly delineated path on which one side lies success and the other side lies failure doesnt mean that there are no parameters. This isn't a free for all.

There are parameters: this site advocates in favor of supporting healthy marriages. The path to that goal may look very different for different couples and the definition of success will be both elusive and not static, but the fact that the target moves doesnt mean there isnt a target.

Target=Advocating for Marriage.

*The masculine pronoun is gramatically correct.

FTR, I didn't tell L&S to walk away. I spent a lot of time on those posts trying to get him to look at himself.



Last edited by LadyGrey; 10/02/13 12:46 AM.

Bidden or not bidden God is present.
Re: MA Core values [Re: CajunRose] #316635
10/02/13 01:08 AM
10/02/13 01:08 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,611
The Dark Side of the Moon
AntigoneRisen Offline
Board of Directors
AntigoneRisen  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,611
The Dark Side of the Moon
Originally Posted By: CajunRose
I read this as saying that people were given harsher penalties or otherwise encouraged to go away because they were doing things off of the board (which TOS says we should not consider). This is what I suspected and is not really a surprise - I agree that at some point enough is enough. The issue that I have - and that I think a few others hear share - is that other posters who were causing problems in PMs or off-board to MA members, but possibly not to the BOD, were given essentially a free pass. This is what causes the perception that the hardline advocates were treated differently.


From what I gather is being said here, I would call this a complete misunderstanding not only of what has been said, but of what transpired.

1.) No one has been encouraged to go away. People have earned penalties, which are given regardless of the content of people's advice. In response to those penalties, some have chosen to go away. That is each person's freely made choice, and we respect it.

2.) As I have said from the beginning, there is no service that MA provides for which TOS does not apply. None of the "hardliners", as they are being called here, were penalized for anything other than what was done using MA's services.

3.) Anyone can report a violation in PM and it will be investigated. No one is treated any differently.

Some have behaved differently, and so have incurred the same penalties that any member who engaged in the behavior would be receive.


Critical Thinking: The Other National Deficit

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316636
10/02/13 01:24 AM
10/02/13 01:24 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
2long Offline
member
2long  Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
Originally Posted By: star*fish
2long,

Quote:
He held out for about a week and a half longer on MB, because it seemed he was getting more of the kind of advice he seemed 2 want. But he seems 2 have left MB as well (but its only been a couple weeks). I don't think he got run off here any more than he was run off there, though they gave more "go ahead and send flowers, texts and FB messages 2 your wife who's ignoring you, taking stuff from your house and living with a convict" advice 2 help him feel better, rather than accepting that she's gone and not someone he'll want back in the long run anyway.


Of course you're right about his sitch...and everyone agreed. He probably would have left no matter what...I concede that. However, I did think he was clear about what he wanted. Smart or not...it is still his right to decide the timing.


I had ac2ally hoped he would stick around. I still would like 2 see him come back, though it's obviously his decision.

Quote:
You know, at first I was confused about why both you and Hold started giving hardline advice....but then it made sense. Both of you spent so much time feeling like doormats that it shouldn't be surprising that your advice now is much more hardline than either of you was willing to follow. And yet...I also wonder if there isn't some "over-correction" and quite a bit of "do as I say-not as I do(did)"


I never tell anyone 2 do as I say, not as I did. That's why I said, above that the best advice I can give someone is 2 never take advice. I believe that. Advice is cheap. But even paid-for advice (the kind of thing coaches do but therapists - and rightly so - do not) needs 2 be weighed by the recipient for content and value from their perspective. And always, it's the recipient's *responsibility* 2 make their own decisions. It can certainly consider advice received and books read, therapists consulted. And this is also why I always say that the "program" (e.g., MB, but not just them) doesn't deserve the credit for a marriage recovering, only the spouses do.

Quote:
I "get" that after all of the humiliation you suffered,


Interesting choice of words. I don't think I ever felt humiliated. I felt hurt, and a lot of wild emotions ran through my head on several occasions, not just right after d-day. But humiliation? I honestly don't think so. My wife's affair embarrassed her more than it did me.

Quote:
that you'd like to spare others from the same state of powerlessness and limbo. I think it's very valid. But I also think that both of you had your own personal reasons for how things went down.


In my case, there were 2 big reasons I didn't end my marriage. When I discovered the affair, we'd recently celebrated our 26th anniversary. And maybe more importantly, my wife never left me 2 be with Rat Meat. If she had, I would not have wanted her back, period. What held our marriage 2gether after d-day, while she continued her "professional contact" with RM for the next several years, was all the conciliatory things she DID do 2 make it up 2 me for her betrayal.

I *know* how I felt 39 years ago, before we got engaged and my best friend tried 2 renew a relationship with my wife while I was away in college. If she had wanted 2 be with him, I would have not wanted 2 be with her. No hard feelings 2ward either one of them, I would just have been done, and chalked the experience up 2 gaining a little wisdom.

Most newbies I post hardline advice 2 are in si2ations like L&S' - short marriage, no kids, not much in the way of assets (stuff anyway), and their whole lives ahead of them. Or, like one or 2 others I've been posting 2 recently - WW has been gone for a long time, drinks like a fish or otherwise has been living a separate life for a long time, so why hang on2 a cold, dead marriage and miss out on the good things in life?

Quote:
I think as peer counselors, we may need to recognize that each person has a whole host of items we may never know or understand and that pushing them to do the thing we believe we "should" have done...is not necessarily right for them.


I don't disagree, as I said above.

-ol' 2long

Re: MA Core values [Re: 2long] #316638
10/02/13 01:44 AM
10/02/13 01:44 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
CR,

Quote:
I read this as saying that people were given harsher penalties or otherwise encouraged to go away because they were doing things off of the board (which TOS says we should not consider). This is what I suspected and is not really a surprise - I agree that at some point enough is enough. The issue that I have - and that I think a few others hear share - is that other posters who were causing problems in PMs or off-board to MA members, but possibly not to the BOD, were given essentially a free pass. This is what causes the perception that the hardline advocates were treated differently.


I said "not visible" (to the normal poster)...not "off board". What was off board was off board...period. Nobody was penalized for any of that. And nobody (contrary to your assumptions) was given a free pass either. There were consequences...there always are.

This is a whole lot of conjecture and assumptions. I don't know how else to say this except that...you're so incorrect that it's sad to know anyone will read this and possibly believe it.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316641
10/02/13 01:59 AM
10/02/13 01:59 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
CR,

I had worked on a response to your earlier post, but after reading your last post...I'm sorry...I've lost the heart for it. You say you "know of at least one baiter who got away with it". One? Even if it's a few more....it's still a very very small percentage. I'll say again: The vast majority of our membership never sees the inside of the PB, posts respectfully, and follows TOS. A few people (baiters and others) "get away with it" from time to time and get penalized sometimes. That actually sounds like we're doing pretty good.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316643
10/02/13 02:11 AM
10/02/13 02:11 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
star*fish Offline
Board of Directors
star*fish  Offline
Board of Directors
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,010
2long,

When the description of someone's wife having an affair is likened to having one's balls cut off...the word "humiliation" came to mind. That was Hold's description....not yours, so I shouldn't have extrapolated. I didn't mean to insult you in any way. Sorry.


"Yes, I'll have the love combo, open faced with a side of respect and large a glass of forgiveness, easy on the ice please--my brother
Re: MA Core values [Re: star*fish] #316645
10/02/13 02:17 AM
10/02/13 02:17 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
2long Offline
member
2long  Offline
member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,069
No worries.

Maybe I should advise Hold 2 try a hardline approach? Because nobody can castrate you without your permission... ...I hope. wink

Re: MA Core values [Re: 2long] #316648
10/02/13 02:35 AM
10/02/13 02:35 AM
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,007
The Farm
Jayne241 Offline
Member
Jayne241  Offline
Member
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,007
The Farm
Lorena Bobbit?


42.
Page 3 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  Chrysalis 

Newest Members
Love_Smacked, starfire, JoyfulMimi, bruers, shattered72
2048 Registered Users
Latest Topics(Posts)
Hearts Blessing4
Woman urges NC lawmakers to end child marriage: For her it was a ‘life sentence’3
63 Marriage Facts1
COVID-19 and the Increased Likelihood of Affairs3
Updates Divorce Stats4
no more rainbow members?9
BR - The Art of War - Sun Tzu5
Questions & Answers About Marriage---responses from 7-10 year old kids4
seeing new members on mobile version5
Return of the Goddess31
Community Information
2048Members
1Penalty Box
6Suspended

42

Forums
8500Topics
463376Posts
 
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1
(Release build 20180111)
Page Time: 0.026s Queries: 14 (0.006s) Memory: 3.4228 MB (Peak: 3.8580 MB) Zlib enabled in php.ini Server Time: 2021-10-20 01:46:58 UTC