Why "we" instead of "you"?

[Incognito]

When I get my tax refund I hope to get a kindle. That will be first on my list of e books. Thanks.

[IndiReloaded]

[url]http://www.howstuffworks.com/vsd.htm[/url]

[HeartIsAching]

[url]http://www.howstuffworks.com/vsd.htm[/url]

Wow, great stuff. Bookmarked for future perusal.

[searock]

Have you ever considered that your wife may feel like you don't care enough? Maybe she would like you to take her side and ask her what's wrong and why she is angry, rather than just play the victim and take your distance from her, as if she were crazy. You sound like you are worn out and fed up with this relationship, and you got into couple counseling just so that *she* can be "fixed". Which is just continuing doing what you already do, treating her like an unbalanced person who has no control over her feelings and just happens to vent her frustrations on you. Your mistake is that you don't try to empathize with her, instead you distance yourself from her. This is not what marriage is supposed to be about.

If you are into counseling just so you can prove a point and model her in the shape you like, then I'm sorry, but you're wasting your money.

As for the we-you argument in particular, it's obviously just another manifestation of your distancing from her instead of dealing with things *together*. I agree with what others have said (Vincenzo especially, it's basic diplomacy as Indi said - I'm surprised you don't see it for yourself actually, and Wakeup: her anger is a problem *to you*, so it is a problem of the both of you).

Oh and the example you made about your disliking people being your problem rather than your (as a couple) problem just proves the fact that you are extremely egocentric. You don't see yourself as part of a couple, you see yourself first and foremost as an individual, who is married to a woman. I'm surprised you actually ever got married at all, with this way of thinking. I'm not saying one should lose their individuality when getting married, just that being married is all about dealing with stuff *together*. You don't seem to agree with that.

[Incognito]

Have you ever considered that your wife may feel like you don't care enough? Maybe she would like you to take her side and ask her what's wrong and why she is angry, rather than just play the victim and take your distance from her, as if she were crazy. You sound like you are worn out and fed up with this relationship, and you got into couple counseling just so that *she* can be "fixed". Which is just continuing doing what you already do, treating her like an unbalanced person who has no control over her feelings and just happens to vent her frustrations on you. Your mistake is that you don't try to empathize with her, instead you distance yourself from her. This is not what marriage is supposed to be about.

If you are into counseling just so you can prove a point and model her in the shape you like, then I'm sorry, but you're wasting your money.

As for the we-you argument in particular, it's obviously just another manifestation of your distancing from her instead of dealing with things *together*. I agree with what others have said (Vincenzo especially, it's basic diplomacy as Indi said - I'm surprised you don't see it for yourself actually, and Wakeup: her anger is a problem *to you*, so it is a problem of the both of you).

Oh and the example you made about your disliking people being your problem rather than your (as a couple) problem just proves the fact that you are extremely egocentric. You don't see yourself as part of a couple, you see yourself first and foremost as an individual, who is married to a woman. I'm surprised you actually ever got married at all, with this way of thinking. I'm not saying one should lose their individuality when getting married, just that being married is all about dealing with stuff *together*. You don't seem to agree with that.

Ok, I'll try to answer most of this.

Point 1: She does think that I don't care enough (or possibly at all) because I don't just bend over and take her abuse with a smile. That is twisted thinking.

Point 2: She did tell me a long time ago to "ask her what was wrong when she is angry", but when I ask and the answer is ,oh I'm pissed off and bitching at everyone and everything around me "because [I] wanted to go to the store and didn't" then there is quite obviously something wrong with that. That type of answer is NOT an answer that will make me console you, THAT is the type of answer that will cause me to walk away in disgust.

Point 3: As stated above, I don't just walk around empathizing with people over any asinine thing. If she had a bad day, or circumstance, was upset and wanted to vent to me I would listen intently and empathize. I'd even be open to empathizing the best I could IF anger over the situation wasn't directed at me and her daughter all the time. Directing your anger at innocent parties cannot be defended and whomever wants to try to defend such behavior can kiss my ass because I have lived with it for 7 years, and it is absolutely indefensible.

Point 4: I wish people would read my posts more carefully. I would never spend money [just] to prove a point. It just so happens that I asserted a few things that I already know are correct, namely that radiating anger and negativity to everyone around you just because you are upset over something small is not healthy for her or anyone around her. I am quite sure that there will be behaviors of my own that I will get some counsel for and it will be up to me to change those.

Point 5: The "we" "you" may or may not be a manifestation of me distancing myself from her. On the outside, given the situation, it probably seems that way. However, I have always voiced that it is up to the person him/herself to change. That makes it an individual problem. Its no different than the couples who come here and say "I want to change Soandso's bad habit. How do I do it?. I always tell those people that all they can do is point out the problem to the person, calmly explain why it bother them, and hope the person see it the way they do. You can cause someone to change, but unless [they] see whatever they are doing as a problem that they want to change it will not be permanent. Do you see where I am going? Individual problems are up to the individual to work on and change. They are not "we/our" problems, they are individual problems, to be worked on by the individual, if said individual actually wants to change.

Point 6: Saying that I don't like people proves that I am egocentric? Hardly. I have a way with written words, so maybe I come off as egocentric here, but you need to have an ego to be egocentric. Mine is quite small. I don't like people for very simple reasons, like the fact that many are unpredictable, mostly unreasonable, are time hogs, and I've been used by people before. I'd be perfectly fine with seeing people once a week, maybe.

Point 7: The couple vs. individual. Well I think I explained enough about this when talking about people's problems and how they have to own it or change it themselves. At any rate, I got married because I was in love, and then only a few weeks after being married 'the anger' reared its ugly head. I was horrified. I had never had someone get angry over something small and not talk to me, touch me, or even breathe in my direction for 1-2 weeks. That was not my problem then and isn't my problem now. Back then I did voice my concern and hurt over it. I even suggested that we actually talk about whatever it was.... Long story shortened is that it still goes on, just without the 1-2 week angry period, or the cursing.

[Wakeup]

I'll tell you one thing incongnito; if you come off this defensive when it's your turn to analyse what you need to change in yourself, then you're are going to come across the exact same way i suspect your wife is coming across to you when you tell her it's HER anger and has nothing to do with you and what you need to change.

The "we" "you" may or may not be a manifestation of me distancing myself from her. On the outside, given the situation, it probably seems that way. However, I have always voiced that it is up to the person him/herself to change. That makes it an individual problem. Its no different than the couples who come here and say "I want to change Soandso's bad habit. How do I do it?. I always tell those people that all they can do is point out the problem to the person, calmly explain why it bother them, and hope the person see it the way they do. You can cause someone to change, but unless [they] see whatever they are doing as a problem that they want to change it will not be permanent. Do you see where I am going? Individual problems are up to the individual to work on and change. They are not "we/our" problems, they are individual problems, to be worked on by the individual, if said individual actually wants to change.

Now going only on what you've shared thus far: You are a prime example of an enabler. You enable your wife to take her daily frustrations out on you by withdrawing and or fighting with her which by doing so, you are trying to control. You would do well to get some books on codependency while you're getting that one that Indi recommended. You are frustrated from not being in complete control of not only herself, but your ownself as well.

My advice; Stop being so unyielding to change in yourself. You dig in your heels and no one is going to undig you anytime soon. You've totally lost the emotional connection with your wife (I'm wondering if there ever was one there) and with the attitude you're displaying here, you're never going to bridge that emotional disconnect. Your problems are about the two of you and you both relate to one another. Neither of you relate to one another very well. Therefore her problem points are your problem points and your problem points are her problem points because you both have to live with each others bullshit. You manifest in your withdrawl and uncaring attitude, she manifests in being angry at the world in general because likely she doesn't feel appreciated or understood (just like you right now which is manifesting in you being defensive and justifying).

You are magnets and you bring to you what you put out. Start putting out a more loving attitude and ask her to do the same for goodness sakes. You're suppose to be on the same team not life long rivals.

[searock]

I didn't say that your dislike of people proves that you are egocentric. I said that your considering your dislike of people as YOUR problem, rather than you and your wife's, does.

I agree with Wakeup and I stand by what I said earlier. You need to change your attitude. Stop being so defensive and stubborn.

If she is angry or upset it's not up to you to judge whether the cause of her upset/anger is "worthy". It may mean nothing to you, but it obviously means a lot to her, if it is making her feel that way. This doesn't make her feelings less important. Empathizing is not about understanding the causes to another person's feelings. It's about trying to understand the way they are feeling, regardless. This should come naturally in a married couple.

[IndiReloaded]

You can cause someone to change, but unless [they] see whatever they are doing as a problem that they want to change it will not be permanent. Do you see where I am going? Individual problems are up to the individual to work on and change. They are not "we/our" problems, they are individual problems, to be worked on by the individual, if said individual actually wants to change.

While its true that it is ultimately an individual decision to change/not change, act/not act, engage/not engage in a process, your conclusion that it is not your problem is terribly small-minded. You are far less intelligent than you think you are, Cog. I'm sorry.

If a person breaks into your house to steal, it is certainly "their individual problem to solve", but only an idiot would say it is not your problem also. You can choose to either quickly herd your family out the back door or attack them with a baseball bat. In business parlance, you are a 'stakeholder' in your wife's anger problem. Just like she is a stakeholder in your stubborn, egocentric, passive-aggressive attitudes.

I'd like to point out that you are choosing not to act in your marriage problems. I haven't seen a single post with you acknowledging any contributions to your marital problems. And there are plenty, its plain to see to all of us here.

Think about it.

[IndiReloaded]

I
If she is angry or upset it's not up to you to judge whether the cause of her upset/anger is "worthy". It may mean nothing to you, but it obviously means a lot to her, if it is making her feel that way. This doesn't make her feelings less important. Empathizing is not about understanding the causes to another person's feelings. It's about trying to understand the way they are feeling, regardless. This should come naturally in a married couple.

This^. Tho, that said, expression of her feelings do not take precedence over his. There must be rules for what is/isn't an acceptable expression of feelings. You don't just get to emotionally vomit on one's partner without consequence. I think it was Gray's 'Men are from mars' that recommends a 'permission to Volcano' when a partner needs to vent their spleen. A supportive partner will then just listen, understanding this is just a vent and not a personal attack. It takes practice and self-control to do be the listener.

But sometimes, a partner loses it (we've all done it) and blasts their partner. In that case, its the followup that is important. Cog's wife should recognize that her outburst wasn't nice and she should apologize for it.

I think I once read that there are 3 types of couples: those who both argue quietly, those who both fight with passion, and those who are a mix. Divorce rates are highest for the mixed couple, I guess b/c they are incompatible in their styles--each making the other partner uncomfortable. In the end, its not the issue, its how you respond to it.

[Incognito]

I tried to give you more rep for that wakeup, but I couldn't. I read and agree with all it, with the exception of the anger issue. It was always there, even before me. Her friends and family admit that she has been like that for a long time, so its not simply a manifestation of her disconnect in the relationship. I also said that I am not against changing anything within myself. It's just that if I am trying to change [whatever] and get that same angry projection it stops whatever positive relationship changing steps I was taking.

It is also strange the way everyone seems to gloss over the reasons why she has been angry while telling me to empathize. The cooking dinner later than she wanted, and not going to the store weren't made up examples of reason why she got angry, those events actually happened. How does it make sense to say "There there... you treated all of us like sh*t because you wanted to go to the store, but weren't able to? Aw, I understand. It will be alright."? What universe does that make the slightest bit of sense? How can you [not] look at someone who would say those words as a weak, loser with no self respect?

[Incognito]

@Indi: Another post I wish I could give rep for. Thank you! I could give you oral pleasure for that post, lol. Anyway, that is it in a nutshell. I have NO problem listening to venting, even if its about me. When I get shat upon for things not related to me, all of the time, that is where I have a major problem. I have even told her all of this, but we are still here. I will give her the fact that she no longer throws things, curses me out, or allows her anger to carry on for weeks like she used to when she was angry or upset. That doesn't mean that she is dealing with her anger in a healthy way right now though, because she obviously isn't.

[IndiReloaded]

No problem.

Actually I was hoping you were going to get defensive about my attack on your intellect, so that I could point out how it detracts from my otherwise excellent points.

Anyway, I'm sorry for that part of the posts. On the contrary, I admire your efforts to sort out your marriage issues. Try to stay results-focussed: setting up counselling isn't a solution, anymore than her simply going is. Tho you do deserve credit for initiating the process.

Curious: when there is an argument/outburst. Who usually takes the first step to putting things right? I.e. who extends the olive branch?

Have you considered a mild dose of antidepressants for her? If you can get over the stigma, I think it might take the edge off her hair-trigger responses to things so she can focus on problem solving. A lot of middle-aged women go loopy from the hormone flux, I understand. Just a thought. You'd have to approach this suggestion tactfully, without implying she is 'crazy'.

[Incognito]

While its true that it is ultimately an individual decision to change/not change, act/not act, engage/not engage in a process, your conclusion that it is not your problem is terribly small-minded. You are far less intelligent than you think you are, Cog. I'm sorry.

If a person breaks into your house to steal, it is certainly "their individual problem to solve", but only an idiot would say it is not your problem also. You can choose to either quickly herd your family out the back door or attack them with a baseball bat. In business parlance, you are a 'stakeholder' in your wife's anger problem. Just like she is a stakeholder in your stubborn, egocentric, passive-aggressive attitudes.

I'd like to point out that you are choosing not to act in your marriage problems. I haven't seen a single post with you acknowledging any contributions to your marital problems. And there are plenty, its plain to see to all of us here.

Think about it.

The stakeholder illustration illustration makes perfect sense, and I cannot disagree with it at all, but while a stakeholder has an obvious interest they cannot actually affect change. Yes they can complain because they are a stakeholder, but they can't go to the ground level of whatever company and start giving orders. That is up to the company itself to do. Even if the company totally screws up and goes bankrupt the stakeholder could not have stopped it from happening.

At any rate is see that I should want to be part of the solution since the problem affects me, I get that. I tried that many times before, didn't get anywhere, and that ship has consequently sailed. If the counselor suggests new ways for me to be helpful then I may try them, but simply trying to bear all of the anger in the name of being patient is out.

You also mention that I haven't pointed out any of my flaws. One is that I don't like people, and therefore am not social. I mentioned this before a few posts ago. Before we go down this route though I must ask, because you sound like my wife when you said that last bit, why is it necessary for me to throw out one of my flaws if I am addressing one of yours? Why would I address her anger issues and arbitrarily toss one of my flaws in the conversation if it wasn't a problem right then? Just for the sake of fairness?

[Incognito]

No problem.

Actually I was hoping you were going to get defensive about my attack on your intellect, so that I could point out how it detracts from my otherwise excellent points.

Anyway, I'm sorry for that part of the posts. On the contrary, I admire your efforts to sort out your marriage issues. Try to stay results-focussed: setting up counselling isn't a solution, anymore than her simply going is. Tho you do deserve credit for initiating the process.

Curious: when there is an argument/outburst. Who usually takes the first step to putting things right? I.e. who extends the olive branch?

Have you considered a mild dose of antidepressants for her? If you can get over the stigma, I think it might take the edge off her hair-trigger responses to things so she can focus on problem solving. A lot of middle-aged women go loopy from the hormone flux, I understand. Just a thought. You'd have to approach this suggestion tactfully, without implying she is 'crazy'.

Lol, Indi. I actually missed that post when I commented on the other one. I am on my phone, on the road, so it is easy for me to miss responses. I still wasn't going to war with you over that comment though. We all get touchy over certain things because of our own personal experiences. I went off on someone earlier this week here on LF, lol.

As far as who extends the olive branch? It used to be me for years until I stopped trying because she would simply stay angry until she was ready to get over it. The past two years she started being the one to try to solve the problems, but she'd simultaneously try to justify her anger to me. When I didn't accept that she treated me like crap over something that I had no control over she would get angry at that and there would be a legitimate argument. Currently no one is extending a branch, speaking of the past week.

As far as antidepressants go, I haven't suggested that to her. In fact, I wouldn't. I'd probably talk to her doctor. I do know that if the subject came up that I'd have to approach it with care because taking anything like that can make you feel less than human. I took antidepressants a long time ago and if my mood was even slightly bad my family would say "oh, someone must not have taken their pills today" which was usually accompanied by laughter. I wouldn't demonize someone's treatment like that.

I am actually going to talk to my doctor to see if me taking something once again might be beneficial as well.

[IndiReloaded]

The stakeholder illustration illustration makes perfect sense, and I cannot disagree with it at all, but while a stakeholder has an obvious interest they cannot actually affect change. Yes they can complain because they are a stakeholder, but they can't go to the ground level of whatever company and start giving orders. That is up to the company itself to do. Even if the company totally screws up and goes bankrupt the stakeholder could not have stopped it from happening.

I respectfully disagree. Stakeholders can hold an enormous amount of power or at least influence in a decision. Look at unions. Customers vote with their wallets, students vote with their choice where to study, employees vote with their productivity. In your case, the shared value should be obvious: stable marriage, happy children, productive home life. Things that contribute to those are part of the solution, the rest are problems to be solved: together. After all, your business model is a partnership. Smart executives pay close attention to these things.

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stakeholder_analysis[/url]

Speaking of which, I must go. :-) Check back later.