Quote:
|
Originally Posted by incommunicado ... But, 10 years of marriage is a long time. We were a family and family isn't something that comes with children, it's something you become when you take your vows. That's a lot to walk away from because of one downward spiral, no matter how painful. So we decided to work it out.
I'm sorry guys, but those of you who have been married for a decade or more without a known stumble or confidence shaker are the few and the proud. Those of us that make it to 15 years with only 1 bad year in the relationship are the warriors. And the majority are on 2nd and 3rd marriages. |
Well, it was said "It is easy to have many women. What's very difficult is to have just one!"
I understand what you mean and where you come from. Yet, I believe people turned judgamental after your own choices for wording your question.
I didn't take the time to look back to read all your history from other posts, and I know I wouldn't do it anyway, as I am sure many others didn't as well. However, I don't believe it is my responsibility to "fix" the way your post "mislead" me, and the fact is, in order to answer THIS post, I believe it's more important to stick to your own current words, that to attempt to fill some voids looking for the puzzle's missing pieces in oldest posts.
And this isn't the prejudice's appology, and I don't endorse many of the comments other members posted. When we face a post from one spouse talking about the other, we don't have the chance to get to know the other spouse, but the way the poster portrayed him or her. Thus, even when the poster means to talk about the spouse, the poster is talking about him or herself. So, I hardly could judge your wife from your words, the only I can do is judge your words. Not even you, just your words.
I don't believe it is casual to choose one way or another to say something (morever if written words, since you have the time to think and express yourself at your own pace, and to re-read and correct what you write), nor it is casual to choose what to say and what to mute. These choices tells a lot about you, about the problem, and about where you're standing to face it, and even sometimes these choices tells you more than the explicit words.
Of course, I can missunderstand the whole thing, however every one of us answer back from our own (miss)understanding, hoping our (miss)understandings to be able to help you reach some insight, even if it makes sense only for you.
The question is... from what you said, and the way you said it, there isn't anything able to lead us to missunderstand the situation? Re-read your post, please, because I believe you expressed pretty well the bottom of your question, wheter you like it or not.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by incommunicado ACTUALLY, INCOMMUNICADO COMES FROM A VERY OLD JOKE "WHERE'S SO-AND-SO?" "HE'S INCOMMUNICADO." MEANING, HE'S NOWHERE. IT WAS CHOSEN AS A REPRESENTATION OF MY ANONYMITY TO THE GROUP. |
I don't know the joke, it called my attention your choice (again) for a nickname, and the way I (miss)understood it since Spanish is my born language. However, I believe I understand where the joke relies: "incomunicado" (just one "m" in spanish) is the legal term for someone jailed and isolated, monetarily deprived from the right to speak with others. In many Latinamerican countiries, during military governments and/or with para-legal systems, this also could mean to be "missing" (nowhere). This makes your choice even more intriguing by now.
Anyway, all of this is to point out that I am being lead more by the CHOICES you make, that I may know from your posts, than by the way you portrayed your situation and the choices you claim to make for the portray sake. And I am inviting you to look at them.