Reality check

[TestimonyLost]

In the continuing saga with my wife, we’ve hit an impasse on some seemingly small issues: cola, coffee, alcohol, R-rated movies, M-rated TV shows, and M-rated video games. She has declared all of them as non-negotiable deal breaker issues. But I’m also having a lot of trouble backing down on any of them. On a lot of the big stuff, she’s willing to change—adjusting tithing, giving me space to change how I engage with church, and just generally loving and accepting me as a nonbeliever. But on those six things, she’s essentially looking for a lifelong recommitment to abstain from all of them. It would not be a temporary situation.

I’m embarrassed to admit, I’ve seriously been contemplating divorce lately because I just can’t imagine letting these things go forever just because she wants me to. When I think about making those commitments, all I can see is the inevitable resentment that builds up over time while I live strict Mormon standards as a nonbeliever.

So with that in mind, I need your help, I need some perspective. In short, am I just being an ass here? Should I be willing to let those things go forever and just be happy that I can disengage from church and keep my marriage and family intact?

[crossmyheart]

Not sure I am the best source of advice. Probably a non-LDS marriage counselor would be less biased.

But just my 2¢:
I used to be like your wife- strict fundamentalism. I pushed my DH to be an upstanding priesthood holder so he could advance in the church- as a status symbol of our family's righteousness. I can only imagine how heartbroken I would have been if he were the one to leave the church first. Maybe she is trying to force these arbitrary restrictions on you to try to save you and your priesthood, hoping that her strict morals will somehow keep you clean.

She is afraid for your salvation and you have scared her into a corner so she has her eyes shut, ears closed and is yelling "LALALALALALALA I cant hear you!"

My shelf broke due to my own personal experiences with the fake side of the religion. Over time, my DH has come to see the truth in some of my issues with the church and he has relaxed his views. I had to meet him in the middle first though.

You have to decide for yourself- play the long game and find the cracks in her shelf and see if you can get her to compromise, or walk away. Both choices will be painful.

Good luck.

[Stig]

All of the things you list as issues you don't want to abandon appear trivial on their surface. But, they're indicative of a larger problem; namely, that you have to continue to submit to someone else's idea(s) of what constitutes morally acceptable behavior. You have to live in a manner you don't wish and don't believe to be either necessary or morally superior. That, for me, is the real deal breaker. I'm in a very similar situation and have basically concluded that I very likely cannot be happy in the long term living in a household in which the Church's strict teachings are going to be enforced and where I am made to feel morally inferior to my wife (even if unintentionally).

[Red Ryder]

M rate TV and video games? Cola? Really? Of the 6, alcohol is probably the only one she should have an issue with. A little education around the effects of alcohol could eliminate that as a concern if she were to understand the concept of drinking responsibly.

If these are deal breakers for her than I'd say go ahead and call her out on them. Do a google search for divorce attorneys and leave the web page results up on the family computer for her to eventually see. Or instead of taking my passive aggressive approach, have an honest conversation with her and let her know you're going to look into divorce. She'll change her mind really quick if these issues aren't a deal breaker but rather her attempt at controlling the situation. What grown woman is willing to divorce over cola and video games? Infantilized Mormon women.

The deal breaker conversation is extremely tough but hold your ground and let her see you're serious. If she doesn't back down and you think divorce is the best option then go ahead and start the divorce process. If she does back down, don't gloat and peacock around with a Coke in one hand and a video game controller in the other. Show empathy for her while reassuring her that you will be a responsible adult, father, and best damn husband you can be. Support her emotionally and reassure her that fear is driving her reactions. Remember the church has instilled this fear by over emphasizing child like behaviors.

In doing this you're redefining what's normal while reducing her church instilled fears. It takes time and a lot of patience but eventually she will see your new behaviors are no big deal. You just have to be a little assertive to get what you want.

[Linked]

There's a lot of good advice here already, from different viewpoints. I love NOM. I can relate to your situation, coffee and alcohol are a huge issue for my wife as well. Caffeine and my media choices were already in place when we got married, so we haven't had any issues with the other stuff you mention.

I think the first thing you should do is realize that there is no such thing as a forever commitment. You can always bring it up again if you feel smothered at a later time. Or if you commit to abstain for your wife now, that doesn't mean you can't decide it's not worth it anymore next year and have the divorce discussion. I recommend you reserve your right to change your mind.

With that said, another possible path you could take is to have one of those tough conversations where you make it clear which of these things are important to you to do, wait a little while, then do them. If you want to go see Logan and play Halo make sure she knows, but don't go do it immediately, let her get used to the idea that you want to do that. Then in a few weeks or a month, just go do it. You aren't lying to her, you aren't surprising her, and you are being true to your new self. Don't beat her over the head with it, just do the things you feel are the new you. And be the same in all the ways you are the same. Then you can both evaluate if you are happy together with the new you and who she becomes based on the new you.

[TestimonyLost]

Thanks for the thoughts everyone.

Not sure I am the best source of advice. Probably a non-LDS marriage counselor would be less biased.

But just my 2¢:
I used to be like your wife- strict fundamentalism. I pushed my DH to be an upstanding priesthood holder so he could advance in the church- as a status symbol of our family's righteousness. I can only imagine how heartbroken I would have been if he were the one to leave the church first. Maybe she is trying to force these arbitrary restrictions on you to try to save you and your priesthood, hoping that her strict morals will somehow keep you clean.

She is afraid for your salvation and you have scared her into a corner so she has her eyes shut, ears closed and is yelling "LALALALALALALA I cant hear you!"

My shelf broke due to my own personal experiences with the fake side of the religion. Over time, my DH has come to see the truth in some of my issues with the church and he has relaxed his views. I had to meet him in the middle first though.

You have to decide for yourself- play the long game and find the cracks in her shelf and see if you can get her to compromise, or walk away. Both choices will be painful.

I hadn’t thought about it that way. It very well could be what she’s thinking, at least in part.

You use the word compromise but I worry that neither of us are in a position to do it. I fear we each feel that all of these items are non-negotiable. I don’t know where to go from there.

Yes, pain has been and will continue to be a part of this process for both of us.

All of the things you list as issues you don't want to abandon appear trivial on their surface. But, they're indicative of a larger problem; namely, that you have to continue to submit to someone else's idea(s) of what constitutes morally acceptable behavior. You have to live in a manner you don't wish and don't believe to be either necessary or morally superior. That, for me, is the real deal breaker. I'm in a very similar situation and have basically concluded that I very likely cannot be happy in the long term living in a household in which the Church's strict teachings are going to be enforced and where I am made to feel morally inferior to my wife (even if unintentionally).

I’m sorry you’ve reached that conclusion. That’s a sad place to be. You’re absolutely right about submitting to someone else’s moral framework. But in the echo chamber of my own head, sometimes I feel like an adolesecent teenager who’s screaming, “You can’t tell me what to do!” That’s why I’m seeking advice here. I just can’t tell if I’m being petty or if there’s some substantive problem here.

M rate TV and video games? Cola? Really? Of the 6, alcohol is probably the only one she should have an issue with. A little education around the effects of alcohol could eliminate that as a concern if she were to understand the concept of drinking responsibly.

If these are deal breakers for her than I'd say go ahead and call her out on them. Do a google search for divorce attorneys and leave the web page results up on the family computer for her to eventually see. Or instead of taking my passive aggressive approach, have an honest conversation with her and let her know you're going to look into divorce. She'll change her mind really quick if these issues aren't a deal breaker but rather her attempt at controlling the situation. What grown woman is willing to divorce over cola and video games? Infantilized Mormon women.

The deal breaker conversation is extremely tough but hold your ground and let her see you're serious. If she doesn't back down and you think divorce is the best option then go ahead and start the divorce process. If she does back down, don't gloat and peacock around with a Coke in one hand and a video game controller in the other. Show empathy for her while reassuring her that you will be a responsible adult, father, and best damn husband you can be. Support her emotionally and reassure her that fear is driving her reactions. Remember the church has instilled this fear by over emphasizing child like behaviors.

In doing this you're redefining what's normal while reducing her church instilled fears. It takes time and a lot of patience but eventually she will see your new behaviors are no big deal. You just have to be a little assertive to get what you want.

Yep, it’s really down to that. But that’s part of what has me torn. I alternate between thoughts of, “Man, this is small-time stuff and she should really just get over it” and “This is small-time stuff so I should be willing to let it go.”

Before initiating divorce, I think I’d just make the changes unilaterally and see how it goes. I don’t actually think she’d divorce me right away but I worry the breach of trust would have long-term effects on our relationship that could lead us there eventually.

There's a lot of good advice here already, from different viewpoints. I love NOM. I can relate to your situation, coffee and alcohol are a huge issue for my wife as well. Caffeine and my media choices were already in place when we got married, so we haven't had any issues with the other stuff you mention.

I think the first thing you should do is realize that there is no such thing as a forever commitment. You can always bring it up again if you feel smothered at a later time. Or if you commit to abstain for your wife now, that doesn't mean you can't decide it's not worth it anymore next year and have the divorce discussion. I recommend you reserve your right to change your mind.

With that said, another possible path you could take is to have one of those tough conversations where you make it clear which of these things are important to you to do, wait a little while, then do them. If you want to go see Logan and play Halo make sure she knows, but don't go do it immediately, let her get used to the idea that you want to do that. Then in a few weeks or a month, just go do it. You aren't lying to her, you aren't surprising her, and you are being true to your new self. Don't beat her over the head with it, just do the things you feel are the new you. And be the same in all the ways you are the same. Then you can both evaluate if you are happy together with the new you and who she becomes based on the new you.

I love it here too. As I said to RR above, your last paragraph is probably my plan B. I like your addition of being very open about the whole thing. Carrying out Plan B, of course, is a very different story as it goes against both my personality and the relationship dynamic I have with my wife. I like everyone to be happy and onboard with a decision before moving forward, something that seems less and less likely every day. Plan A still remains naively hoping she'll just get over it all.

[Stig]

This post in another thread applies here as well, IMO: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1508&p=18207#p18186

[Linked]

I love it here too. As I said to RR above, your last paragraph is probably my plan B. I like your addition of being very open about the whole thing. Carrying out Plan B, of course, is a very different story as it goes against both my personality and the relationship dynamic I have with my wife. I like everyone to be happy and onboard with a decision before moving forward, something that seems less and less likely every day. Plan A still remains naively hoping she'll just get over it all.

I have started doing Plan B a little bit in my relationship with my wife lately. I told her I wanted to see the Book of Mormon musical when it comes to town. She was angry and sad and cried and we didn't talk for a day. A few weeks later I bought the tickets when they went on sale. My wife knows how I feel about garments, so I bought some new underwear and wear it sometimes.

Plan B has been really different for me too. I like to discuss decisions way more than make them. I stalk my major purchases for months before pulling the trigger. I try to get my wife's opinion on everything and she hates that. So it is weird for me to be making unilateral decisions, but I think it is good for both of us. (My wife is not a big decision maker either, we don't really have a dominant/submissive relationship, just two submissive people avoiding decisions together. That could be different in your relationship, not sure...)

[Korihor]

Is a can of Coke really worth getting a divorce over?
This question can be applied to both sides equally. Again, it's not the Coke but the principle of the matter.

I can see the Alcohol thing and maybe coffee being an issue from a strong LDS perspective. But Cola and video games are surprising to me.

Suck, I really don't have any good advice other than just rip off the bandaid instead of pulling it slowly. Which ever direction you choose - just go with it instead of spending forever suffering in inaction. As Linked said, you fully reserve the right to change your mind later. If you lean to finding a solution, you can always re-evaluate the divorce card. If you lean to divorce, you can always re-evaluate and rekindle the flame.

Actually, I take all that advice above back and place it after this - go to a professional marriage counselor!!! NOT an LDS Counselor. It will create an open forum for each of you to express your concerns and frustrations - then you might be better able to make the decision above.

I don't know how long you've been married, but I'm sure however many years you've already invested in the marriage is worth a couple months and few hundred bucks to help make a life long decision.

Based on what you''ve stated, it appears to me that neither spouse is able to share their true feelings and the rules of "you can't do this" are just fronts to mask the underlying reasons. Counseling has no real magic other than creating a safe place to open up. Sometimes we just need a referee to set the ground rules.

[Thoughtful]

Counseling is a good idea. A good therapist can help each of you reframe your perspectives in healthy ways and understand each other's viewpoints.

Also, marriages aren't really about keeping score, but they also kinda are. It's likely that any of these things would be a deal breaker if she's otherwise happy in your marriage. But if things are neutral or rocky, something like Coke or Halo could be the nail in the coffin.

The formula for an ongoing marriage is basically
- keep a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative interactions (that's a neutral marriage. At 4:1 people don't stay together. Greater than 5:1 is more likely to be happy).
- respond to your partner's bids for affection consistently and reliably.

If you want to do the above, put in some time working on your ratio and responsiveness. Front loading will build up happiness for both of you in the relationship. Then have your coke, knowing it's going to count on the negative
side so you'll need to keep the positives higher you maintain harmony.

[Red Ryder]

The formula for an ongoing marriage is basically
- keep a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative interactions (that's a neutral marriage. At 4:1 people don't stay together. Greater than 5:1 is more likely to be happy).
- respond to your partner's bids for affection consistently and reliably.

If you want to do the above, put in some time working on your ratio and responsiveness. Front loading will build up happiness for both of you in the relationship. Then have your coke, knowing it's going to count on the negative
side so you'll need to keep the positives higher you maintain harmony.

This is great! I haven't seen the ratios before but it rings true to our experience after 6 months of therapy.

[Linked]

The formula for an ongoing marriage is basically
- keep a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative interactions (that's a neutral marriage. At 4:1 people don't stay together. Greater than 5:1 is more likely to be happy).
- respond to your partner's bids for affection consistently and reliably.

Like Red Ryder said, this is great. I've never seen it before, but I like the idea. In me and DW's time in therapy we touched on having positive instead of negative interactions, but not to this level of detail.

And the one about responding to bids for affection struck me. My wife is very private, even with me, and doesn't make obvious bids for affection. She will mention something in passing, like a show she is interested in (which I am supposed to understand means I need to get tickets), and then I won't do anything with it, and she feels like I don't love her because I didn't do what she wanted because I don't connect the dots. And on the other side I am obvious with my bids for affection partially to model to her how I would like to see it and it totally rubs her the wrong way. Relationships, eh?

[Red Ryder]

Hopefully talking about therapy doesn't hijack the thread. We spent some significant time talking about the things we wanted from our spouse. The therapist then wrapped it all up in nice wonderful verbal wrapping paper then proceeded to toss it out and tell us we can't expect each other to read minds. She then had us focus on learning to listen and to pick up on each other's bids. It takes effort to do this but I can tell you how much better it has made our relationship. She feels like I'm listening most of the time. I feel like affection is given when needed most. Listening results in one of us getting to talk and feel validation and vice versa.

Of course when talking about church issues then it all falls apart. The church still has that effect on our relationship. Slowly it's deteriorating though.

[MoPag]

She is afraid for your salvation and you have scared her into a corner so she has her eyes shut, ears closed and is yelling "LALALALALALALA I cant hear you!"

Not only is she afraid for your salvation, but thanks to the loads and loads of bullsh*t she was taught in YW and RS, she thinks she is responsible for your salvation as well. I bet she really thinks that doubling down and trying to control you like this will eventually lead you back to the spirit and activity. A Mormon woman's identity and self worth are completely wrapped up in her husband's priesthood/devotion to the church. In short, your faith crisis has caused her to have an identity crisis. And the crazy demands she is making are really just her searching for some type of control.

I'm so sorry you are going through this; you and anyone else reading this who might be in a similar situation. You've gotten lots of great advice on this thread. I can tell you from personal experience that divorce doesn't necessarily solve problems. It will just gives you a new set of problems. It all come down to which set of problems are least damaging for you and your family.

[Thoughtful]

The formula for an ongoing marriage is basically
- keep a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative interactions (that's a neutral marriage. At 4:1 people don't stay together. Greater than 5:1 is more likely to be happy).
- respond to your partner's bids for affection consistently and reliably.

Like Red Ryder said, this is great. I've never seen it before, but I like the idea. In me and DW's time in therapy we touched on having positive instead of negative interactions, but not to this level of detail.

And the one about responding to bids for affection struck me. My wife is very private, even with me, and doesn't make obvious bids for affection. She will mention something in passing, like a show she is interested in (which I am supposed to understand means I need to get tickets), and then I won't do anything with it, and she feels like I don't love her because I didn't do what she wanted because I don't connect the dots. And on the other side I am obvious with my bids for affection partially to model to her how I would like to see it and it totally rubs her the wrong way. Relationships, eh?

Both of these concepts are well researched by John Gottman/The Gottman institute. Check it out, online. YouTube, etc. He made a lab and can predict divorce with accuracy based on watching couples. The 5:1 ratio has been expanded beyond marriage to parenting, school behavior, all sorts of relationships.

The higher the positives to negatives, the happier the marriage.

It also explains why abusive marriages are so difficultto leave -- the positives ratio is high enough to keep the
Victim coming back.

[Give It Time]

The formula for an ongoing marriage is basically
- keep a 5:1 ratio of positive to negative interactions (that's a neutral marriage. At 4:1 people don't stay together. Greater than 5:1 is more likely to be happy).
- respond to your partner's bids for affection consistently and reliably.

Like Red Ryder said, this is great. I've never seen it before, but I like the idea. In me and DW's time in therapy we touched on having positive instead of negative interactions, but not to this level of detail.

And the one about responding to bids for affection struck me. My wife is very private, even with me, and doesn't make obvious bids for affection. She will mention something in passing, like a show she is interested in (which I am supposed to understand means I need to get tickets), and then I won't do anything with it, and she feels like I don't love her because I didn't do what she wanted because I don't connect the dots. And on the other side I am obvious with my bids for affection partially to model to her how I would like to see it and it totally rubs her the wrong way. Relationships, eh?

Both of these concepts are well researched by John Gottman/The Gottman institute. Check it out, online. YouTube, etc. He made a lab and can predict divorce with accuracy based on watching couples. The 5:1 ratio has been expanded beyond marriage to parenting, school behavior, all sorts of relationships.

The higher the positives to negatives, the happier the marriage.

It also explains why abusive marriages are so difficultto leave -- the positives ratio is high enough to keep the
Victim coming back.

This is the negativity bias (because we humans have a bias toward negativity and we need to have several more positive experiences than negative in order to register we're happy). I've seen the ratio of good to bad range from 3:1 all the way up to 10:1, with what working most of the time being 5-6:1. If it's 11:1, we get suspicious that things are too good. I think the reason for the range is because some people have more happy hormones than others, some people may be going through a very tough time and need to have more good experiences than most people and then get back on track.

I'm not sure about what the guy has to say about abusive relationships is true, or at least true in all cases. When I first read the information written for married couples, I bristled​ at it, because it's phrased very much like the abuse cycle. If you're going to do something your spouse doesn't like (abuse), be sure to counter it with five good experiences (honeymoon phase). While it is good to make sure you aren't constantly irking your spouse, I don't want to do all that counting and have just decided to treat people as well as I can all the time, because I know times will come when I'll just be very imperfect.

Also, in my case, my ex inserted negativity every time in every interaction. I mean all the damned time. I stayed with it for one reason only, this was an eternal marriage and I took that seriously. If I had a hard time getting up the gumption to go, it would be because I was so darned worn down. I guess I'm saying this ratio is a good thing to keep in mind, but in trying to counteract the bad experiences my sons were having, I'd try to give them five or six good. It gets exhausting. Also, I don't know if the man who did this study has expertise in DV, I can tell you that complicated issue can't be boiled down to such a simple formula.

Now, for my actual idea for you. I realize that this isn't just about cola, coffee and video games. I do agree some marital counseling or mediation might be in order. Here's my proposal.

Is it possible to dedicate one room in the house that can be your man cave? Outfit it with just about whatever you want (within reason). It's your room. You lock it. You take care of it. She doesn't go in there (unless she needs some reassurance about porn or something). Let her have an equivalent space like a she shed. Now that you have your man cave, apply the negativity bias ratio and spend one hour in your man cave for every five hours you spend with the family. She gets the same privilege for her she shed, in return. It's like having a little chunk of your life that is yours. Couples do it with budgets, it's just taking the same idea and applying it to time.

[Thoughtful]

This is the negativity bias (because we humans have a bias toward negativity and we need to have several more positive experiences than negative in order to register we're happy). I've seen the ratio of good to bad range from 3:1 all the way up to 10:1, with what working most of the time being 5-6:1. If it's 11:1, we get suspicious that things are too good. I think the reason for the range is because some people have more happy hormones than others, some people may be going through a very tough time and need to have more good experiences than most people and then get back on track.

Very interesting. I think that some variability in anecdotal observation is in that in the Gottman's lab or other replicated research, what qualifies as a positive, negative, or even "interaction" would be carefully defined. Working within an individual marriage, individual tastes, preferences, styles, and perceptions would all influence an observer as well as whether they are in the relationship being assessed or evaluating from the outside. That said, John Maag at University of Nebraska cited research with ratios as high as 12:1 being extremely effective. In the schools where I consult, we try to get teachers to 5:1 and usually they are hovering around 3:1 class wide pre-intervention.

For myself, because I'm that nerdy and I have counted, I find that 4:1 is a low level irritability. "Are you mad at me?" Would be answered with, "not really, I'm just off" but adjusting the ratio for one partner does have a near immediate effect on satisfaction for both. I can't easily maintain more than 7-8:1 because sh*t has to get done and sometimes that means making some requests (which count to the negative side, even if they are made nicely). So anecdotally I can say there's something to it, and the Gottman's have 30 or 40 years of research backing up.

I'm not sure about what the guy has to say about abusive relationships is true, or at least true in all cases. When I first read the information written for married couples, I bristled​ at it, because it's phrased very much like the abuse cycle. If you're going to do something your spouse doesn't like (abuse), be sure to counter it with five good experiences (honeymoon phase). While it is good to make sure you aren't constantly irking your spouse, I don't want to do all that counting and have just decided to treat people as well as I can all the time, because I know times will come when I'll just be very imperfect.

Also, in my case, my ex inserted negativity every time in every interaction. I mean all the damned time. I stayed with it for one reason only, this was an eternal marriage and I took that seriously. If I had a hard time getting up the gumption to go, it would be because I was so darned worn down. I guess I'm saying this ratio is a good thing to keep in mind, but in trying to counteract the bad experiences my sons were having, I'd try to give them five or six good. It gets exhausting. Also, I don't know if the man who did this study has expertise in DV, I can tell you that complicated issue can't be boiled down to such a simple formula.

By "the guy" I'm not altogether sure if you are referring to me, or referring to what I said about JG's research. Certainly there are parallels--and my comments about that are mine--I haven't seen anything from the Gottman's on that specifically--it's an inference I also made. And you're absolutely right, it's an oversimplification of a complex issue, but there's the pattern.

I think there's a bit of humanity in the fact that while we may try to be kind and treat others appropriately all the time, we are also self centered, get distracted, get upset even about other unrelated things, or even things that should be unrelated but get tied up into our relationships in complicated ways (ah, such as a faith transition) and that inadvertently or directly effect how we respond to a partner's bids for affection as well as our ratio of positive to negative responses. Ultimately, positives aren't always purposeful choices nor are negatives. So paying attention when things are rocky can allow us to have some influence there that if we aren't reflective and aware we would not be having. It sounds pretty manipulative to spell it out as a ratio, but anytime a person is wanting to improve a relationship there is going to be some level of manipulation. So, "I'm going to be nicer and more responsive to my spouse" doesn't sound like manipulation or coercive, it sounds thoughtful and reflective whereas "I'm going to increase the ratio or positives to negatives" does sound skeevy. It boils down to the same thing though. When out of practice or needing an immediate intervention, counting can be a pretty effective way to get back in the habit that maybe came more naturally at other times in a relationship.

In terms of my suggestion to up the positives in order to indulge in Coke or a game of Halo--I would not equate that with abuse, though I can see what you're saying and I apologize for insensitive wording that triggered past trauma for you. Just because someone does not like something or it is negative, does not mean it is abusive for it to occur. In this example in particular, having a soda does not cause harm to the spouse, and it's even probably a little extreme for a spouse to believe they have a right to dictate what their partner may drink. (There's probably a boundary issue that has been maybe part of the norms of the relationship so it's not easy to change, and changing that expectation or norm might take some ongoing work and there may not be time for that to happen with the rate the relationship is spiraling currently.) Still, what harms the spouse is not the drinking of coke but the meaning that is inferred by the action of drinking the soda. The expectancies of the TBM partner and the meaning they have assigned to it mentally are the source of the threatened harm, not the actual action of drinking soda. Also the NOM partner isn't drinking the soda to coerce threaten, control, or abuse their spouse, but rather because they enjoy soda. The harm is the feelings of insecurity, loss, fear, and so on that arise for the TBM spouse. So the suggestion of the ratio would be one (likely effective) way of alleviating the insecurity that action brings into the relationship, particularly if the relationship isn't yet at a point where congruent communication is happening or being facilitated yet.

One thing I've learned in this process for myself is that all my own insecurities about my spouse up and leaving, giving an ultimatum or otherwise freaking out about my deviating from our original plan and eternal vision, is that he has the exact same fears that I will throw in the towel. Building in security even when we don't agree is a skill that isn't learned or practiced in LDS marriages because we tend to be pretty well indoctrinated that any 2 righteous LDS can marry and make it work through dedication to the church (Thank you Pres. Kimball...) and like you illustrated, that we suffer through hell now so that we can have that eternal marriage later. So we end up married to church and roles that "never change" rather than to a spouse who will and does change over the course of a lifetime. We typically do a terrible job of learning and practicing how to navigate that normal flux and change in our spouse, and ultimately there are issues that most spouses will never agree on. Some kind of compromise, even if it's unwritten, unspoken, "I will look the other way while you do this or that thing" arrangements will be eventually necessary in an authentic marriage. However, that isn't going to happen if there isn't security and I think that's where the ratio comes into play--whether you're counting it out literally or not. There's a point where it's a net loss, even if eternal marriage is weighing in on one side of the coin. People walk away when it's no longer reinforcing enough to stick around.

[LostGirl]

I agree with thoughtful that fear of change and the consequences of change can be powerful.

From my side I have spent many hours worrying about how my husband would react if he learned how I was feeling about the church. Being conditioned by years of talk about how people fall away into sin, your wife is probably afraid that coke and video games are just your gateway drugs to bigger sins. She could also believe that if you want to change those things that nothing is stable and that you may not want your marriage any more. Ironically, in trying to stop you from changing, she could cause a much worse change in your relationship.

Personally I could understand the qualms about alcohol. But the coke and video games puzzle me.

I don't think a real relationship can survive with one party dictating the terms. It feels very manipulative to me but it may be unconscious.

Perhaps as others have suggested, some therapy could help her to express what she is afraid of, and could help you to express how you are feeling about the ultimatum. As to who to choose for a counsellor I fear you may have a catch 22 situation as no LDS counsellor could see your situation impartially, but your wife may feel that a non lds counsellor would not understand her point of view.

[Give It Time]

This is the negativity bias (because we humans have a bias toward negativity and we need to have several more positive experiences than negative in order to register we're happy). I've seen the ratio of good to bad range from 3:1 all the way up to 10:1, with what working most of the time being 5-6:1. If it's 11:1, we get suspicious that things are too good. I think the reason for the range is because some people have more happy hormones than others, some people may be going through a very tough time and need to have more good experiences than most people and then get back on track.

Very interesting. I think that some variability in anecdotal observation is in that in the Gottman's lab or other replicated research, what qualifies as a positive, negative, or even "interaction" would be carefully defined. Working within an individual marriage, individual tastes, preferences, styles, and perceptions would all influence an observer as well as whether they are in the relationship being assessed or evaluating from the outside. That said, John Maag at University of Nebraska cited research with ratios as high as 12:1 being extremely effective. In the schools where I consult, we try to get teachers to 5:1 and usually they are hovering around 3:1 class wide pre-intervention.

For myself, because I'm that nerdy and I have counted, I find that 4:1 is a low level irritability. "Are you mad at me?" Would be answered with, "not really, I'm just off" but adjusting the ratio for one partner does have a near immediate effect on satisfaction for both. I can't easily maintain more than 7-8:1 because sh*t has to get done and sometimes that means making some requests (which count to the negative side, even if they are made nicely). So anecdotally I can say there's something to it, and the Gottman's have 30 or 40 years of research backing up.

I'm not sure about what the guy has to say about abusive relationships is true, or at least true in all cases. When I first read the information written for married couples, I bristled​ at it, because it's phrased very much like the abuse cycle. If you're going to do something your spouse doesn't like (abuse), be sure to counter it with five good experiences (honeymoon phase). While it is good to make sure you aren't constantly irking your spouse, I don't want to do all that counting and have just decided to treat people as well as I can all the time, because I know times will come when I'll just be very imperfect.

Also, in my case, my ex inserted negativity every time in every interaction. I mean all the damned time. I stayed with it for one reason only, this was an eternal marriage and I took that seriously. If I had a hard time getting up the gumption to go, it would be because I was so darned worn down. I guess I'm saying this ratio is a good thing to keep in mind, but in trying to counteract the bad experiences my sons were having, I'd try to give them five or six good. It gets exhausting. Also, I don't know if the man who did this study has expertise in DV, I can tell you that complicated issue can't be boiled down to such a simple formula.

By "the guy" I'm not altogether sure if you are referring to me, or referring to what I said about JG's research. Certainly there are parallels--and my comments about that are mine--I haven't seen anything from the Gottman's on that specifically--it's an inference I also made. And you're absolutely right, it's an oversimplification of a complex issue, but there's the pattern.

I think there's a bit of humanity in the fact that while we may try to be kind and treat others appropriately all the time, we are also self centered, get distracted, get upset even about other unrelated things, or even things that should be unrelated but get tied up into our relationships in complicated ways (ah, such as a faith transition) and that inadvertently or directly effect how we respond to a partner's bids for affection as well as our ratio of positive to negative responses. Ultimately, positives aren't always purposeful choices nor are negatives. So paying attention when things are rocky can allow us to have some influence there that if we aren't reflective and aware we would not be having. It sounds pretty manipulative to spell it out as a ratio, but anytime a person is wanting to improve a relationship there is going to be some level of manipulation. So, "I'm going to be nicer and more responsive to my spouse" doesn't sound like manipulation or coercive, it sounds thoughtful and reflective whereas "I'm going to increase the ratio or positives to negatives" does sound skeevy. It boils down to the same thing though. When out of practice or needing an immediate intervention, counting can be a pretty effective way to get back in the habit that maybe came more naturally at other times in a relationship.

In terms of my suggestion to up the positives in order to indulge in Coke or a game of Halo--I would not equate that with abuse, though I can see what you're saying and I apologize for insensitive wording that triggered past trauma for you. Just because someone does not like something or it is negative, does not mean it is abusive for it to occur. In this example in particular, having a soda does not cause harm to the spouse, and it's even probably a little extreme for a spouse to believe they have a right to dictate what their partner may drink. (There's probably a boundary issue that has been maybe part of the norms of the relationship so it's not easy to change, and changing that expectation or norm might take some ongoing work and there may not be time for that to happen with the rate the relationship is spiraling currently.) Still, what harms the spouse is not the drinking of coke but the meaning that is inferred by the action of drinking the soda. The expectancies of the TBM partner and the meaning they have assigned to it mentally are the source of the threatened harm, not the actual action of drinking soda. Also the NOM partner isn't drinking the soda to coerce threaten, control, or abuse their spouse, but rather because they enjoy soda. The harm is the feelings of insecurity, loss, fear, and so on that arise for the TBM spouse. So the suggestion of the ratio would be one (likely effective) way of alleviating the insecurity that action brings into the relationship, particularly if the relationship isn't yet at a point where congruent communication is happening or being facilitated yet.

One thing I've learned in this process for myself is that all my own insecurities about my spouse up and leaving, giving an ultimatum or otherwise freaking out about my deviating from our original plan and eternal vision, is that he has the exact same fears that I will throw in the towel. Building in security even when we don't agree is a skill that isn't learned or practiced in LDS marriages because we tend to be pretty well indoctrinated that any 2 righteous LDS can marry and make it work through dedication to the church (Thank you Pres. Kimball...) and like you illustrated, that we suffer through hell now so that we can have that eternal marriage later. So we end up married to church and roles that "never change" rather than to a spouse who will and does change over the course of a lifetime. We typically do a terrible job of learning and practicing how to navigate that normal flux and change in our spouse, and ultimately there are issues that most spouses will never agree on. Some kind of compromise, even if it's unwritten, unspoken, "I will look the other way while you do this or that thing" arrangements will be eventually necessary in an authentic marriage. However, that isn't going to happen if there isn't security and I think that's where the ratio comes into play--whether you're counting it out literally or not. There's a point where it's a net loss, even if eternal marriage is weighing in on one side of the coin. People walk away when it's no longer reinforcing enough to stick around.

First of all, I'm reading this before work and I'll have to leave soon, but this was excellent and I wanted to respond.

Second of all, I can't find where I said, "the guy". I'll read it later when I can devote more attention to it.

Third, what you say about Coke and Halo not being abuse is true, unless the person is doing those things deliberately to get the person's goat, then it's abuse. However, if I could clarify about that entire aspect as it applies to this situation, I couldn't have done better than you.

Fourth, what you say about manipulation and making marriage work is pragmatically and uncomfortably true.

Fifth, every now and then, I come across someone wanting to do something they know their spouse won't like. Very frequently, the consensus that comes back is, they probably won't divorce you over it. One thing abusers do it's they'll take anything, anything they can and leverage it to their advantage. Even though this ratio has it's positive application and it's something I try to keep in mind, even in working to make myself happier, the way this was presented in the first few articles I read about it, it was definitely presented in a way that some people could use to get away with mistreating others.

I would write further to soften the blow of that last statement, but I have to get to work. Please excuse any autocorrect, etc. No time to proofread.

[Hagoth]

Maybe start with little things like this: http://archive.sltrib.com/story.php?ref ... s.html.csp