Manning up in my relationship?

[vashti]

... just don't touch that radio, for god's sake!!

[Mish]

no, others think so too. you just focus on us because you have some kind of anger with us.

maybe we bring up stuff you don't want to think about. violent reactions and all that.

if it don't apply, then let it fly.

First I don't know any others who think that way too.

Second, Hehe, Miso I thought you'd be a lot more intuitive than that.

That's not it at all.

I just don't have a lot of tolerance for unjustified dominant behavior. Anything that has any premise or stemming from "I'm right because I'm better than you or I know better than you" without a proper explanation that will make sense to me doesn't seat well with me.

Look at Indi for instance. She can state her case and tell me she knows better than me, but because of her explanation, her delivery I agree and I submit where it makes sense. Notice, I don't where it doesn't, but either way I never go down the same pathway I go with the two of you, that's because I see her having the best intent and trying the best she can to understand and to explain. I can honestly see her having the best intentions and even my best interest in mind. I can't justify or rationalize to myself not delivering the same to her.

I actually like you two as people and I have nothing against you two, I can see at the end of the day you two just try to help the best way you can. It's just sometimes when I see one of the above coming from either of you (This unjustified dominant behavior) it rubs me the wrong way and sets me on the path of wanting to break you

[misombra]

see?

you even want me to SAY things the way YOU want me to say them.

[vashti]

ahahahahahahahahah!

[Mish]

see?

you even want me to SAY things the way YOU want me to say them.

And you don't?

Look, ask yourself. Are you even listening to me? Are you even trying to understand? Are you listening to me with intent to understand?

Because all I see you doing right now is trying to "Out-dominate" me. Which is exactly how I described you just a minute ago. You know you won't be able to succeed, but you try anyway. Because this is the way you are. This is the way you will always be and I guess this is why we will always be like that

[vashti]

Misombra, why oh WHY won't you submit to his dominance?

[misombra]

lol.

q burro.

[Mish]

Poo Poo Head

[IndiReloaded]

This is because it comes back to relationship becoming a constant win / loose instead of win / win like it should be.

Something to think about. I agree, btw.

There's some interesting material on this in Covey's 7 habit book when he talks about win / win.

I need to sign this book out again.

I think we might have different interpretations of what is dominant and what is submissive Indi. A submissive person is not a push over.

Assertive? vs. Agressive?

A submissive person is the one who has a better capacity to understand, to nurture and to follow. For example, you may think of yourself as dominant person, but from my experience with you I would say you are very submissive. And there's nothing wrong with that.

I'm not sure my husband would agree with you, lol. But perhaps. Sometimes.

So, here's something to resolve: if the submissive partner is the better 'understander', how is it that the dominant one would know what is best for everyone. Isn't there a logic problem here? Wouldn't it stand to reason that the submissive one be best for knowing 'what is best'?

There were just other personality mismatches that made us not a very good match. As you say, noone's fault. The world is full of possibilities and I don't want to settle for someone who's not a good match for me.

Is this the one you took to Fiji? God, I hope not.

So, what about Radio Girl?

[Mish]

Assertive? vs. Agressive?

I wouldn't even put it in those terms. I'm not sure how best to describe it. Just a dominant person will have this drive for action, this motivation to achieve goal, drive to succeed, a vision if you like. This is what I meant about knowing where the best outcome is. The direction to go to that the other person may not be seeing, simply due to not having that drive or not being driven in that way.

So, here's something to resolve: if the submissive partner is the better 'understander', how is it that the dominant one would know what is best for everyone. Isn't there a logic problem here? Wouldn't it stand to reason that the submissive one be best for knowing 'what is best'?

Once again down to vision and drive to make that vision a reality. The way I see it, the knowing is that vision, the achieving is a combination of all the elements and I agree the achieving part must have a consensus. I guess, this will be the part that will separate a dominant person from a control freak, whether that consensus be even allowed in the first place.

Or am I missing something here?

Is this the one you took to Fiji? God, I hope not.

So, what about Radio Girl?

The one I took to Fiji was the Radio girl (That I so viciously and brutally controlled, as Vash puts it )

The fling happened not so long ago. By the way she's still chasing me. She asked me out to lunch this Sunday, I agreed, but reminded her that we're still just friends.

[Mish]

Assertive? vs. Agressive?

Indi, how about this comparison?

Success vs Happiness

Both equally as important and having partners which move relationship in these directions brings good balance.

I'm thinking, the virtue of a dominant person will be success. In social circumstances, in business, in finding best partner, having best resources, having good vision and plan for the future. While virtue of submissive person will be the level of happiness in business / work life, in family life, relationships and so on. The emphasis will be on how happy are we regardless of how much success we have. Maybe having less success, but being more happy is a better alternative, will be the drive.

[GrkScorp]

I ask her, why did you switch on the car radio when I was talking to you, why didn't you switch it off when I asked you to? She explodes, "You have no right to ever tell me what to do".

We beak up the same day and I never look back.

Now people, tell me. Was I in the wrong to do and say what I did?

To say what you did? No.. you were absolutely right, in fact, not enough emotional blackmail and leverage.. but that's because you're a guy, and when you have respect for someone, you don't do such things..

To do what you did? I'm going to sound like Yoda now, but there's really no other way to say it.. There are three emotions in this world.. that's right.. just three.. every other feeling you feel you feel is just some combination of these three.. you can think of them like colors.. RGB.. Fear, Love, and Anger.. Fear is the most basic and most primative.. it's important for survival.. and a powerful motivator.. so is Love, which is important for replication.. but then there is Anger.. and anger has a very special role.. anger is actually important to enforce a primative sense of social "justice" and restore some form of balance that has been caused as a result of some wrong-doing.. You often hear "love is blind", but if that's in fact the case, then anger is deft aswell..

If you take a moment, and think about it rationally.. you Mish, could see that she was just over-reacting.. that her reaction was irrational, and the result of some bottled up emotions.. plus.. it's regular chick-drama to give them a sense of feeling independent and free.. and they think by saying stuff like "you have no right to ever tell me what to do" that they are now more of a woman.. this actually starts way back, when she's in the car.. angry at you for something else.. and now everything you do is your fault.. she's looking for excuses to explode on you.. and when you tell her to talk or turn off the radio.. she's feeling the NEED to rationalize that your actions are negative in some way.. so she honestly rationalizes that you're trying to control her and tell her what to do.. (look, women feel the NEED to argue.. don't.. just don't even try to think of it from a logical stand-point.. that's just the way it is.. you as a man, MUST be wrong for some reason.. it's a NEED.. it must be satisfied.. end of story)

So, in the moment.. while both of you were angry.. the first surface layer of thought was.. "wtf? excuse me? this is fcukn' crazy.. I don't have to deal with your psycho emotional sh*t.. i'm done dealing with this.. you don't seem to realize when you need to tone it down and cut this bullsh*t out.. so now it's my turn to ignore you sweetheart.. for good.. we're over.. now".. and within the limited scope of this first layer of thinking.. you're absolutely right.. it's hard for a third person to come in and put themselves in that situation, but that's exactly the thought process that you were limited to at that moment.. because of anger..

However, there is always a second layer of thought taking place.. ALWAYS.. and that second layer actually looks at the broader picture.. "Wait, is this a remote incident, or is this part of a long-run trend that i've had to deal with and will continue to have to deal with? Has she made any reasonable progress or improvement in managing her emotional outbreaks? Is she being as considerate to me as i'm being to her? I understand that she's over-reacting right now, but what does this behavior exactly mean given all the details and history?".. Maybe you were too angry at the moment to consider or see that her reaction was clearly just irrational and motivated by anger.. she was on angry/emotional-b*tch-autopilot.. she wasn't thinking.. she was just nagging.. maybe you didn't see that because you were angry yourself.. as a result of what she was doing.. so you were limited to the first layer of thought.. that's fine.. maybe that was the case.. but maybe for a flash of a second, this thought process popped into your mind.. and you said.. "enough is enough.. this is her now, this was her in the past, and this is going to be her in the future.. and I don't want to be with such an inconsiderate and irrational individual with such issues.. there's just no point in staying together.. this is the perfect chance to end it.. now I have a reason.." and as you grew more comfortable with that thought.. (in just seconds).. you grew less in love with her.. you felt less respect for her.. and less reason to tolerate her drama.. so you thought.. "there's no way i'm taking this crap from her".. and you ended it.. on the spot.. right there and then..

I'm not going to comment on if this was the right thing to do or not (not because it was right, and not because it was wrong, just because the situation is too personal for me to pass judgement on as an outsider).. But what I can say with certainty is.. that she had it comming.. one way or an other.. and to no fault of your own Mish.. the issue was entierly her own if those are the main details to the story..

Best,

GrkScorp

[IndiReloaded]

Look at Indi for instance. She can state her case and tell me she knows better than me, but because of her explanation, her delivery I agree and I submit where it makes sense. Notice, I don't where it doesn't, but either way I never go down the same pathway I go with the two of you, that's because I see her having the best intent and trying the best she can to understand and to explain. I can honestly see her having the best intentions and even my best interest in mind. I can't justify or rationalize to myself not delivering the same to her.

Oh God, please. Vash & Miso are laaaaaghing right now.

Mish, you don't realize that Miso, Vash & I are a Triumvirate. We PM each other to decide who is going to be 'bad cop' for an issue & the others act as foils. Its all carefully decided in advance & depends on the personality of the poster who gets what role. Giga stands ready as the big Nuclear Bomb(shell) should things turn ugly.





Yes, I'm joking.






Maybe.

[vashti]

I'm laughing because he called you "submissive", indi, and apparently meant it as a compliment.

[misombra]

yeah maybe if we were as submissive as indi we might all be in business.

hey indi, go make me a drink and do my laundry.