tenochtitlan

I still have some issues of the old type, those of course can't be resolved conclusively, but the situation is better now in a variety of ways. We both still have different communication styles and that stands in the way sometimes, but after having many conversations I think we are in a better place, every next conversation was building a bit upon the previous one. Also I noticed that having this discussion here is both useful and not useful, and because of the ways it's the latter I stopped showing up here. I was useful as a trigger to make sense of the situation and to consider alternative viewpoints that might not have occurred to me, but it wasn't useful, because, let's face it, with some of you I wasn't able to find common ground and the conversation was only making me more tense and angry, and also, for complex reasons, it made the problems look heavier than they actually were. I realized it wasn't useful to fight with you to defend my view of the situation. So now it's better, even though not completely resolved, and as I said I don't think that this can ever be completely resolved, and adding the aforementioned reasons, I won't be taking part in this anymore. I just wanted to say thank you to all of you who tried to be helpful. It's appreciated. Take care.

Ok, how do you make sense of that - she told me she's ok with the financial situation, but then in the chat with her friend she tells her that it's not good with a handsome, but poor man, and that she would teach her daughter in subtle ways to choose men based on money? And about me not believing her - do you mean to say that you have never been in a situation in which you had no evidence that someone is not telling the whole truth, yet couldn't shake the feeling something's wrong with what they are saying, based on their behavior and other things they have said?

Of course I understand that this could be limiting, but I don't understand what is the alternative. You seem to approach everything I say with a certain relativization that I can't move around. Of course however I frame it in words you could say that there are dangers in this framing. Of course you can find ways in which "open conversation" is bad and maybe ways can be found in which "good relationship" is bad. I don't know what to do with that. What is the alternative? Of course I will have a certain expectation of what "good" or "open" or "done right" conversation is or "should be" or however you want to frame it, however much you try to avoid "low levels and high levels" it is not possible to not have any preference for some qualities of conversation over others, however subtle and impossible to put into words they are. If you tell me you have no preference or expectation whatsoever, I don't think I can believe you. She also has an idea of how conversation should go, and so does everyone. And we are trying to meet in the middle, so to speak, to find a common language. I have said so many times in so many ways how open I am to changing my approach, and I keep being accused of closedmindedness. So I say again : I am open to change. I hope it's clear. I may struggle to find a common language with her and with you, but I keep trying, and this part of being open. I really don't think that this is "my understanding that I am imposing on conversation", there is really no alternative - if you stop looking for the common language there is no conversation anymore. Ok, so I was just honest about what I think, I have not suggested I like to feel superior. I did say that other people around us think the same and she would immediately confirm if you asked her, and there are many stories that make it obvious. As with you and your husband, it is not and has never been a problem for her. You might as well suggest that it's all the other way around - it's actually her that wants to talk to me, but I avoid it, and she wants intimacy, but I'm not giving it to her. On the general point, something in my experience created the impression in me that smarter people tend to be more serious. Of course I know that you can be anything and have met all kinds of people, but have observed this general tendency. Ok, maybe I have encountered too small a sample, I have not assumed that it "should be so" or something, it's just what experience has made me expect. I'm not holding on to it in any way. But again - maybe serious is not the right word. I certainly do believe that there are some character traits that are more likely to go with being smart, whichever they really are, and however many people we can point to, who are not like that - there must be some correlation between high intelligence and character for many reasons. But I think this is a digression, we don't need to agree on this. I really don't see where these accusations are coming from. Ok, I'm not saying it's all her fault, maybe it's not, I already said that in previous posts, but I don't see why it should be assumed that there is some deep and big problem with me. There is no reason to assume that I have been condescending, and I don't believe that I have been that way. It seems to me that this topic has kind of run out of usefulness. Yes, you all made some good points and made me think in new directions, for which I am grateful, but recently I'm just defending myself against unwarranted and undeserved accusations. It's like, yes, since I am open to change, I am open to you proposing what the problem might be with me, not only with her, of course, but I don't feel that this is done in a friendly way - like assuming that I am on the good side, really trying to find a win-win solution for everyone and respect everyone's position in this situation. The way I read your recent posts is like, you're bad, everything bad can be expected of you, and there is no hope for you.

Your post overall is a bit too oversimplifying things as usual, and a bit too accusatory, but this specific sentence is true. I did say that more than once, so it's not really new, but still, it is true. So then what can I do? I can't force myself to believe her when I just don't. Can you be truly certain that I'm wrong in sensing that this is not the whole truth?

That's all quite right and quite key for the whole situation. She has answered my questions, but again, I keep feeling what she said is not the whole story - there is something more beyond the hormones, there is something that makes her "make the choice" to limit her display of affection. I'd like to know what it is so that I could fix it, so how could I find out without her openly telling me? I'm tired of guessing but I guess that's all have now. And honestly, I don't quite believe what she told me. This is a key problem - what should I do, if I can't know for sure what she thinks and feels? She will keep saying that she appreciates me, I will keep feeling that's not true. The "showing affection" part is major - whatever she feels about me, I'm not satisfied with this limited amount of physical affection. But even aside from that - I can't shake the feeling she thinks stuff like that I am less valuable because I'm not as rich as her friend's husband. It's painful. Maybe I'm imagining it all? But it remains how I feel and I feel stuck about that. One theory I had - that she has two different levels inside, so to speak. On the one level, deep in her primitive core, she is a materialist, who wants to be rich, live in luxury, who thinks that men's value comes from how much money they can make, that the value of women is indicated by how much money their man is bringing to them, and she resents me for not being rich and feels ashamed of me in front of her rich-husband friends; she feels mad at me that I have chosen a path that's not very lucrative - art and writing; in a way she doesn't care about other people - partly art and writing are manifestations of my concern about others, the problems of the society, the human condition and so on, and I want to be useful and contribute somehow to the relief of their suffering, but she would care only about how much money what I do brings for wine and luxurious hotels. On the other level, closer to the surface of consciousness, she is very moral and has often expressed pronounced indignation at materialist women on tv, she believes being that way is bad, and so she is suppressing that lower level in her and denying it. So she sometimes has some slip of the tongue, which allows the first level to come to the surface, but otherwise will play the opposite role. I suspect she realizes what she wants from me and how she sees me on the first level, but on the second level feels guilty about that and suppresses it. So she will never openly display materialism or tell me she resents me because I am not rich, but it might nevertheless be true. And I'm not sure at this point if I can be ok with that.

I do not. Maybe you will take this to be a bad sign or to signify some form of arrogance or self-obsession on my part, but I think it's just a statement of fact that probably everyone that knows us both will agree with. And I generally have no problem with that, I have never had the intention to get a smart girlfriend, I am attracted to other things in other people, smartness is what I have for myself, in a way, but other things that I don't have I'm looking for in other people - like being what I call "alive", fun, less serious, and so on. So I'm happy with the way she is in terms of "IQ", I just sometimes would like us to be able to have a "deeper" conversation about life and stuff, I miss that a bit, after all she is my best friend in the world, and I feel that inability of hers to share my interests and excitement about intellectual stuff as a bit of a distance between us. But again, it's fine. And I agree that it shouldn't be either-or - you surely can be intellectual and down to earth at the same time, and I am trying to be that way, but my impression is that most people are actually either one or the other. Maybe down to earth is not the right phrase, it's hard to explain, and I don't think it's critical here.

Partly yes, but also it's a very restricted form of conversation - mostly I am talking and as I said in many cases she says nothing. And notice also - when later I have brought up this silence of hers, she admits that is was weird for her not to say anything in that instance, but she would say, she is just like that, what could she do, she is not a person of words.

Haha right. I anticipated that question - she isn't getting any help. She is afraid of hormone replacement therapy or that kind of stuff, and not without reason, there are often pretty bad side effects. Also a factor is that she's constantly on some restrictive diet which doesn't allow hormones to recover, but she has this obsession with being thin that doesn't permit her to pay more attention to hormones. We could say that being thin is more important to her than fixing hormones so that she has interest in sex, and she, quite consciously, sacrifices one for the other. If she went to a doctor he would immediately tell her to stop the dieting temporarily, and she wouldn't want to do that. I agree about the choice part. It makes sense to do it sometimes independent of whether you feel like it or not, because it's a part the way you show your partner affection and that you care about them. And that is why I feel there must be a reason why she is making this choice, and at this point I have no idea how to find out what the reason is without her telling me with words.

I think I understand, you have a point here. That does make sense and I am aware of this kind of dynamic on some level, I'm consciously trying to limit my natural need for open conversation. But still, several things. First, I understand the principle of interaction demonstrated by the story, but I think it matters that this is a parent-child, and not a partner-partner interaction. I am doing very much the same when it comes to my child, but I find it harder to see how it can work with my wife. Of course I know it can in certain cases, but I'm not sure it would in this case. Maybe you've had the impression that I've pushed her to talk openly too much, but I really haven't - we have had like 7 or 8 such conversations last year and that was it. I saw that it's not working and that she is resisting it, so I stopped and tried to give her some space and see how she would behave, and to try to think of a better approach. And what I've seen is that things don't get much better - if I "give her space" about this I feel she would just do nothing. Second, this point that, had you had an open conversation with your son, he would have clammed up - that is significant here. Because if I were in your son's position, I wouldn't have clammed up, see. So I think we shouldn't look at this as if this "less is more" approach is always right with everyone and it's somehow the high level way to interact with people - no, with some people open communication really is possible and it works. I guess it just took me a long time to figure out with whom it wouldn't work, because it works so well with me and as a child I always assumed it should work for everyone. But I understand it on some level - that there is something not quite romantic to openly tell your partner everything you expect them to do, there must be this silent, non-verbal mutual understanding, in order for the whole thing to feel genuine. It's just hard for me, I guess my brain works almost entirely on the level of words.

I just need to know how she feels, and she's not going to tell me if I ask her. So all I can do is guess what it might be and ask her if it's that. This is again too strongly stated. It's very far from an accusation, I am just sharing with her my doubts, because this is how I feel based on her behavior and things she has said. So then: if I feel this way, what should I do, if I can't share it with her, so that I can find out what she really feels? And again, this may be my problem, but I don't know what to do about it - I can't shake the feeling that she doesn't appreciate me; so if in every conversation she denies it, but keeps behaving in a way that makes feel that way, what should I do?

This is the hormones explanation - it's a problem with hormones, she says. As I said, she really does have some hormonal problems, but as redswim30 suggested, there is really the feeling that she is making a choice, there is a reason why she isn't showing physical affection that is beyond hormones. I have tried several times to probe this from different angles, but she keeps saying there is nothing, no problem with me or anything, and I keep feeling this is not the whole truth. But again, what if it is, what am I supposed to do with that? Maybe something I haven't asked is, is she ok with living this way forever? If not, let's try to do something about it. If yes, then I have to really consider if I want to stay - I certainly don't find it ok to live my whole life this way. It would be perfect for me if we stage the conversation such that I ask only yes-or-no questions, so she doesn't have to explain herself much, but I guess she would find the idea annoying, she doesn't like such contrived and artificial things, it would feel too formal. She's kind of doing both partly - there is some of what I'd call silent treatment, and some avoidance of sex. But we are not sitting there in silence - we do talk about stuff a lot of the time, she only gets closed when the topic becomes serious - not only about our relationship, but about anything serious. With some exceptions, she seems to prefer to avoid anything that requires too much uncomfortable honesty or formulating opinions about complex topics. That is actually one of the few things I don't completely like about her. I am an intellectually-minded person, I like talking about deep stuff, while she prefers to stay on the level of the mundane and practical. She has in fact told me in one occasion that I might have felt better with a more intellectual girl, since she sees how I've had many interesting conversations with female friends, but I told her that in that scenario there will be other problems. I actually like being with someone less intellectual, more down-to-earth, more alive, yet I do miss the opportunity to talk with her about what excites me sometimes. When we have talked about us, she always said as little as possible, many times didn't say anything when I needed her to, and if I push her and tell her what, aren't you going to say anything, and she might tell me something like, what do you expect me to say? She also seems to carefully avoid saying anything that might hurt me - like, if I ask her directly about our finances, as you say, she might tell me she would prefer to have more money, but if I bring up my doubts that maybe she values me only for the money and so on, which is what is somewhat suggested by the chat I saw, she would deny it. So I often feel she just afraid to tell me how she really feels. It doesn't help that those denials are not very convincing - I imagine, if she told me she fears that I might not value or appreciate her as a person, I would find that very problematic and would show her how absurd this is and will do whatever I can to convince her otherwise. While she simply says "no, of course not" with a relatively even tone, and that's it. It makes me feel she doesn't care how I feel. As for sex, she has said she has no desire whatsoever, and that that is not my fault in any way, that it's all hormonal problems. She does have some interest in sex rarely, as she admitted, only when I "push her", in other words, as a result of my initiative - if I do nothing, she would completely forget about it. And again, I kind of believe that, but it's only part of the story - like, if I were the hottest man she could imagine, she would find it easier to escape this lack of libido, and I feel there may be other things about me that contribute, like the money issue - if I were rich and were always giving her anything she wanted and allowed her to quit her job - she would be all over me. So we do it sometimes, but it's rare, and entirely on my initiative, which sometimes feels a bit like doing it against her will, she isn't very enthusiastic, which I don't like.

By the way, I missed that - I am talking about another inability here, not the inability to express herself in conversation, but the inability to show affection. This is, as I described, in case she is right that she really does feel about me the way I'd like to, but for some reason is unable to show it to me in behavior - like touching, kissing, and so on, physical affection. Because this is what she has said - there is no problem with me or the way she feels about me, it's just hormones, because of which she doesn't feel the urge to touch me. Interestingly, she says that she would miss it, if I stopped touching and kissing her and paying attention to her, and if I stopped telling her how beautiful she is, yet doesn't seem to notice that I am missing the same thing from her too.

I could agree with that. This is points to the fact that conversation can be done wrong, not that conversation done right can be useless or harmful. The way I see conversation, there is really no good alternative to it. I'd be interested to hear one of your examples, if you have the time. I think I will discover that that which is harmful in your example is not exactly what I mean by conversation or is simply conversation done wrong. Of course I'm not saying I'm the master of conversation and I can guarantee I will do it right, but really, there is no alternative tool. What else would you do, if you can't talk to each other? Yes, and that will be done thanks to a sort of conversation. Moreover, me and my wife could do this examination ourselves, without a third side, if she was open to conversation, as paradoxical as it may sound - there is no disagreement or difference that cannot be sorted out by conversation, including the inadequate ideas of what conversation is about. I think most people who go to therapy don't go with their most adequate view of how therapy should work. Indeed they go with many inadequate and broken beliefs about many things, including therapy itself, and therapy could help with that too. But yeah, certain attitudes can surely make it harder. But again - the only way for my inadequate beliefs or views to be solved is by conversation. I can't suddenly decide to make my beliefs perfect by snapping my fingers - I have to be pushed somehow by the external world, and this can be much facilitated by human interaction. This thing that we are doing here is just that - conversation that helps me sort things out. If here you succeed in changing my inadequate beliefs about conversation, it will be precisely thanks to your skill in conversation. Ok, inability was the wrong choice of word. I do think she is making a choice, I just want to understand it, and I don't see how that can happen without talking. As I said, I am open to understanding and accepting that this is all my fault, but I don't see how I can do that without it being shown to me in conversation. I don't understand this. I'm not saying why she should go to therapy - I need the therapy, because I need things to get better between us. Maybe she doesn't. Or maybe she could have a totally different reason to benefit from therapy. Again - I can only know this by conversation and I keep failing to understand how all of this that we have discussed is better when we stay in the dark about the other person's feelings and needs.

Good question. First I want to know what she thinks and how she feels about me and our relationship - most of the time I'm in the dark about that. Is she really fully honest when she tells me that it's all hormones, or does she feel on some level that there are other issues - in who I am or what I'm doing. Who knows, maybe at first she liked me, but now she doesn't, there are things about me that push her away, and she is just afraid to say it or to change anything. If I have no fault at all, I want her to be clear that I need that physical contact, and if there is something I could do to help her with whatever is causing her avoidance of it. I want to know her absolutely honest view of me and money - does she really resent me for not having as much money as some of her friend's husbands? If not, what does that chat that I mentioned mean, why did she say what she said? And if yes, I wouldn't want to be in a relationship with such a person - I want to be valued for what I am and not how much money I make, and I believe there are women out there don't think that that's idealistic. I am open to changing myself, as I've always been - if she tells me something in my behavior or actions that is the issue, I could consider looking for ways to change it. So knowing what really is the problem could be useful to me. I do want to be the person she wants me to be, I want her to be happy with me, so I need to know what is missing, and at this point I am only guessing. I want a relationship in which I am fully appreciated, and if I don't deserve to be - I prefer not to be in a relationship. So I guess I want her to tell me why she isn't enthusiastic about me, so to speak, so that I can change; or, if she tells me that there is no problem with me, to talk about what we could do about her inability to show her feelings - are we really ok with the idea that our interaction will be this way till the end of our lives? If so, I would suggest that we consider divorce. If not, we could look together for solutions. There is always something you can try, when I accept it deserves to be done. Also, redswim30 helped me to realize that I have never believed that "it's all hormones" - I've always suspected that there is a deeper issue that she has with me, but is just not admitting it. So it is a problem that however much she tries to convince me that there is nothing more than hormones here, I couldn't believe her. And imagine it really is all hormones. What then? First, based on what should I believe her that it is so, and second, if I do believe her, should I stay with her and accept that she loves me, but can't show it, so I will never feel loved, or I should divorce her because of something that in a sense is no fault of her own? But in more abstract terms, the essence of conversation is in my mind the following: we find that we have different views about how we want to live, and look for ways that are both satisfied, while making some inevitable compromises, so that we can be fully happy with each other and not resent the other person; or, we agree that the differences cannot be resolved - she may want me to do something that for me would be sacrificing too much of what I need from life, while if I don't do it, she can never truly love me, appreciate me and show affection - in that case we should agree to end the relationship. That's it. The alternative to talking here is that we are not happy with what the other is doing, but we say nothing, so the other changes nothing and we remain unhappy; or, keep staying in a relationship that can't work and waste time. I suspect some of you would tell me that I should already have seen that I am in the latter position, and should simply divorce and stop asking for more talking. But here I feel that we really have a lot that's working, and I'm not convinced that whatever she's not happy about in me cannot be changed. I do assume that it's possible that I am doing something wrong, that I have not noticed that I have treated her unfairly in some ways, that somehow I have not been a good enough partner - and maybe I can't see that and try to change it, unless she points it out to me, people have such blindspots sometimes. I imagine that we divorce and later meet, and this time, outside of the emotional investment and thanks to the distance of time, she tells me, "well yeah, the truth is I had this and that problem with you", and I would be like, why didn't you say anything, I could have easily changed that. That in my opinion would be unfortunate and I am trying to prevent it. However I accept another thing redswim30 noted - conversation can't be done forever, if it doesn't give results. Yeah, I think we shouldn't give up on conversation that fast, but that doesn't mean I am ok with spending my whole life in an endless conversation that doesn't make things better - at a certain point you have to admit that it would simply be better to find another partner, with whom you won't have the same problem. But I guess I do not feel that we have reached this point yet.

I think I sometimes don't express myself properly. I mostly agree with what you are saying, so maybe what you object to isn't really contained in my post. I certainly am not expecting the role of the therapist to be to convince my wife that I'm right. All I'm talking about is the value of conversation - she wouldn't accept this value when we talk, but the presence of a third person could help her accept it. So it's not that she will accept my beliefs about what we should do, but the value of conversation itself. If conversation leads to her admitting that she's not interested in maintaining this relationship anymore, then fine. And yes - in my mind the value of conversation is objective to such a degree that we should try to convince people in it. It's not a kind of value that anyone could decide for himself - if we don't have conversation, we don't have anything. As one thinker I read says, conversation is the only alternative to violence. So I don't believe that there is a good therapist who rejects the value of conversation. Even if he takes some position of listening and accepting the decision of the person to stay out of conversation, there will be some sort of examining where this resistance comes from, and a successful therapy, in my opinion, should decrease a person's resistance to conversation. One outcome of therapy for example could be that we understand why she avoids talking - she may not become more willing to talk, but just knowing why she doesn't want to talk is in my opinion a significant step forward. And that's something that comes up only thanks to some form of conversation. This is what I'm trying to say - I don't expect that. I do think that in relation only to the value of conversation, not to anything else. In other words, I believe that my need that we talk is absolutely justified and normal human need in any relationship, I think reasonable intelligent people, who are outside of the emotional investment of our situation, understand that and could help her see it. Yes, in terms of all of this that I am saying about conversation, I think that I am right and she is wrong. But I am not trying to manipulate her like a robot to be the way I want her to be - I just want us to be clear about what we want, and I don't see how that can happen without talking. If she doesn't want to have physical contact with me and is not interested in me in any way - then we have no relationship and have to split up; if, also, she does have some emotional attachment to me, but still doesn't want to have physical contact, then I have the right to say that this is not a relationship that I could find fulfilling and I would prefer to split up. This framing of "controlling someone" is a bit weird. In a sense you too want your partner to love you and to show it. To tell me that controlling someone isn't possible suggests to me that you don't believe that relationship problems could be fixed - once one of the partners loses interest in physical contact, say, there is no way for that to be restored, the relationship is over. I don't believe that. Maybe I'm wrong that conversation is the way, but at this point I'm not convinced there is no way. By the way, if you don't believe this could be fixed, why are you recommending me to bring up the chat subject with her? What would be the point?