In a situation like the young girl you mentioned I think it is the same thing. Thomas nailed it. This is not her failure to lead. This is his refusal to respect her.

I’m curious – do you all feel similarly about a situation similar to the other one I mentioned?

Thank you for your validateyness. Yummy. :)

About that story on that other blog, my impression of the ones who suggested either that the man should be taken in hand and controlled, or that the woman should be trained in taking her submissive partner in hand and controlling him, was that they were all men or pro doms.

It seems obvious to me that the men who said that would think that gratifying their own sexual desires (which includes being taken in hand and controlled) is the best thing to do.

Sure, the best thing for them.

At any rate, I think that the people who said those things have the idea firmly in their minds that their idea of femdom equals <iall femdom, and if they’re anything like the people I referred to above, then it will take extraordinary lengths to show them that their ideas are only true for them.

Usually, I find that the effort:reward ratio of demonstrating this isn’t favourable to me, so I mostly don’t bother.

Personally, I have had a lot of experience with people assuming things about me without asking me about them first. I think that they assume these things simply because in their minds, they must be so. They feel those beliefs so strongly that when they present them to me as a fait accompli, it takes extraordinary efforts on my part to demonstrate that their assumptions about me were wrong. You may have encountered this kind of thing yourself, do you recognise it?

Now, I think it’s very likely that the Englishman considered his disconnection from you to simply be another part of your ongoing relationship. I think that he remembered that you had agreed to some things whilst you were together, and erroneously assumed that these agreements would stand regardless of his disconnection from you. Because he failed to negotiate your agreement or communicate with you about that in any way, he therefore never considered that you saw things differently, even after he re-initated communication with you.

You said that throughout your relationship, the Englishman had always been more than happy to let you lead until he took the decision to disconnect from you without negotiating your agreement. I think that as long as he felt that he could put his foot down in whatever way, he could feel in control. I think that the Englishman successfully disconnected from you by putting his foot down, and from that he may have felt that he could always put his foot down with you. I think that he believed in this assumption so strongly that it took quite a lot to demonstrate to him that it was erroneous.

So by asserting his disconnection from you he felt in control with you, and he may have erroneously assumed that he was also in control of how you would respond to his disconnection from you.

And as you discovered, his assumptions and beliefs about you were so utterly unshakable that he had to go to extreme lengths to learn that they were invented unsupported fantasy – lengths which you might feel were otherwise out of character for him.

It seems obvious to me that that the Englishman must have failed to consider that anything you had agreed with him whilst you were together became null and void once he disconnected from you. I feel that his persistent attempts to get you to reconnect with him, again assuming your agreement without negotiating it, reflect these assumptions and beliefs.

I think that the story on that other blog resonated with you because it was about

– a man making erroneous assumptions
– a man’s persistent assumption-based attempts to get what he wants from his partner
– a woman who was left completely out of the loop about her partner’s assumptions

I don’t know if you had people in your life telling you that you should give the Englishman a chance, like the commenters supporting the man on that other blog?

I think that the Englishman’s transgressions were extreme symptoms of other serious problems which are very likely to lead him into trouble in any relationships he has in future, and however much it hurts, you’re well rid of him. I’ve been there, and I suspect you have been too.

Also, one more thing:

Thomas says:
It is clearly wrong for someone to persist in doing something that makes their partner uncomfortable or worse in an effort to force the partner to give them what they want. Let’s say she “takes him in hand” for now. What happens when he wants more or something else and it does more than make her uncomfortable. This is not her failure to lead. This is his refusal to respect her.

When someone refuses to take no for an answer on there is no reason to expect that will stop in the future.

What he said. But you knew that. :)

When someone refuses to take no for an answer on there is no reason to expect that will stop in the future.

And Lubyanka, you said “I don’t know if this means anything coming from me, but I’ll say it anyhow: Well done. :)” – of course it does :) I respect your opinion. In fact, when I wrote this post, I knew you would be one of the people who responded. You have a lot of wisdom about taking care of ones self and I’ve always respected that about you (and tried to listen :)

I’m curious – do you all feel similarly about a situation similar to the other one I mentioned?

Mike

In my experience, the answer to all of those questions lies in one’s own feelings.

How to differentiate between a person’s expressions of pain and potentially risky behaviour? When the levels of discomfort indicate risk.

When do unmet needs become problematic? When the levels of discomfort indicate there is a problem.

At what point does boundary transgression necessitate ending a relationship? When the transgression(s) result(s) in unacceptable levels of discomfort.

When is it time to simply walk away? When the prospective discomfort from remaining is greater than the discomfort from walking away.

Also, I think it’s important to consider these questions firmly and solely from one’s own perspective. I’ve seen a lot of people get into trouble because of a profound fear of committing the (allegedly) ultimate crime – selfishness. Some people think that in order to be a good person, they must help others even if they don’t want to, and that conversely, not helping makes them a bad person.

(as an aside, my experience of people who regularly use the term “selfish” on others is that this is less often about the people they accuse, and more often an accurate reflection on those using the term)

As a result, a lot of people feel some kind of obligation to help, fix, or improve a person’s situation, even though their better judgement may be telling them to stay away. It was partly situations like this which helped me to clarify my thinking about what is and is not my responsibility.

Because I can recognise when assigning responsibility to me is inappropriate, I walk away when a person attempts to engage me by implying that I am responsible for fixing whatever they think is wrong (be that their unhappiness or whatever). Just because they  think  I can fix something doesn’t mean that I  must.

I know that other people’s pain, unmet needs, choices and behaviour are their responsibility, not mine. I know that any attempt to convince me otherwise is manipulative. I consider any such attempts to be unequivocal danger signals which I heed instantly.

Before I began constructing this comment, I was noticing a pattern which continues to amaze me. I’ve noticed that sometimes when people make choices which result in undesirable outcomes, they subsequently try to resolve the consequences of those poor choices by making poorer choices. Most usually the situation escalates for the worse. I think this is what happened with the Englishman. Personally, I try to avoid choices which unnecessarily burn bridges, and I think that’s a good way of assessing if a better choice might be available. Sometimes I succeed and sometimes I don’t, so this is something I try to remain aware of.

In the case of the Englishman as you relate it, he decided to remove himself from your life. Despite claiming that he took that decision nobly with your benefit in mind, he nevertheless took that decision without consulting you or negotiating your agreement. Whatever his reasons, I concede that he had every right to make that choice, since I consider that any adult can legitimately choose to refrain from participating in any other adult’s life.

However much I agree that this choice was his to make, I also agree that establishing a relationship with you, and then disconnecting from you without a word was disrespectful not only of your feelings, but also of your ability and entitlement to make your own choices. That choice also burnt a bridge between you, although he may not have appreciated that at the time. So that was poor choice number one.

Several years later, the Englishman rings you on the phone out of the blue. You wrote that he said:

“Since he has a good chance of going on to lead a fairly normal life, he felt it was safe and reasonable to contact me again.”

My first thought when I read that was, safe for whom? Reasonable for whom?

However much he was entitled to choose to remove himself from your life, I think that the choice of whether or not he re-enters your life is very much  yours.  I know if it were me, I’d have noted that he disregarded my feelings and right to choose for myself, and considered the likelihood of that happening again in future. He didn’t give you a chance to choose back then, so why would that change now? If I were in the position he was in of wanting to improve the outcome from my previous decision to remove myself from somebody’s life, I think I’d start with an email or letter, not a phone call, because an email or letter feels less intrusive to me. However, that’s by the by.

You clearly and explicitly told him you didn’t want him in your life anymore. As he did before, he continued to take decisions affecting you without first negotiating your agreement. By continuing to ring you on the phone and by arriving in your town, he demonstrated how much he respects and values your wishes and choices by continuing to disregard them. I think that every time he rang you after that was a poor choice. I think that showing up in your town was a poorer choice.

He promised to respect your wishes by staying away from your parents’ home, and promised that the next step was yours to make. He broke those promises by showing up outside your parents’ home and ringing you afterwards. In my opinion, those choices were epic fails.

I’m sure he did sound contrite on the phone, as you said. I’m sure he did regret the way his choices turned out. However, since he persisted in transgressing your explicitly and specifically expressed limits, he can’t have regretted transgressing  enough  to be trusted to respect any limits in future.

In the case of the Englishman, and in light of all this, I think you know that you did the right thing. No matter how much he was hurting, and no matter how much he thinks you can fix that, he persistently disregarded your clearly and explicitly expressed specific wishes and limits. For me that itself would be transgressing a hard limit, and I think that’s true for you too. I know this doesn’t make the pain of it all any less. At the same time, from the information you’ve given, I know you had no other healthy option available to you. In my experience, the right decision can hurt more than the wrong one in the short term, but works out a whole lot better in the long term.

The only good thing I can see from all of this is that at least you know how things turned out, and that the situation is resolved, at least for you. You know that he’s alive, you know that when your wishes and limits conflict with his that he is likely to disregard yours, and you know that given the choice, you won’t have him back.

I’d like to give you a big juicy chocolate-covered strawberry of validation for taking the hard decision with the most beneficial long-term outcome, and therefore effectively prioritising yourself.

I don’t know if this means anything coming from me, but I’ll say it anyhow:

Well done. :)

These are not the actions of a reasonable or stable person.

Arafin

Your recognition of your boundaries being violated, as well as the observation that you are a different person now, lead me to believe that you are quite capable of handling the situation. I’m sure it hurt, but there is always some degree of solace in knowing in your heart that you’re doing the right thing.

j