the balance of power in a long-time marriage is an extremely delicate matter. constant negotiations are critical in maintaining that fragile balance. nowhere is that balance more obvious than the obligations each spouse maintains in their separate family (the spouse's siblings, parents, and other relatives). in MY family, these obligations have always been nominal (easy) as i maintain no contact whatsoever with my father or stepfather, made all the rules in terms of contact with my mom; and, obviously, my sisters are nothing but delightful. bill's family was a little different (a lot). we spent a lot (A LOT) of time with his parents, and very little time with his sisters.
this weekend, a situation arose in which i asked bill to accompany me to see a member of my family. HOWEVER. before i could ask him (he heard me speaking on the phone), he took the upper hand (struck the first blow, so to speak) and said "i'm not coming." i ignored this breach of the rules (ok. "guidelines.") and countered. "i ALWAYS came with YOU!" normally this would work, but i underestimated his resolve.
"i went by myself once in a while!"
this, of course, necessitated mathematical calculations, which, inevitably, SHOULD have led to my victory. "if you take into account the number of visits-contacts, the percentage of my non-participation so closely approaches zero that it's not a viable number. and your participation in my family visits-contacts is not 100% either! so THERE! i win!"
too quickly i celebrated. i, obviously, was not at my best. i did not anticipate his next response. in our relationship, the OBVIOUS winner.
"so what?" he said.
i saw my victory dissolve right before my eyes. i could hardly believe it. "dammit!" said i. in absolute defeat.
the "victor" laughed. oh, he more than laughed. his cackles became guffaws, which turned into loud, raucus laughter.
it wasn't until a couple minutes later that i realized that i could, indeed, have won. too late. i had forgotten the trump card to his "so what." what was wrong with me? how could i be so humbled - TWICE! - in one argument? the rules ("guidelines") allowed me to respond and triumph with one simple retort. the rules ("guidelines"), however, dictate that i must IMMEDIATELY respond with the trump.
"sew, sew, sew your buttons on."
Posted by Stacey at July 20, 2004 10:37 AMin our relationship, my wife's "glare of death" trumps ANYTHING i might have to say. :-(
Posted by: tj at July 20, 2004 11:01 AMSee... that is what caused the fall of my marriage... I would have just answered...
"I didn't ask you to sew anything, I ASKED you to come see my family."
Now I know the correct answer for husband #2.
- Dana
Wow, your grasp of the intricate dynamics of the modern "long-time" marriage is nothing short of amazing. You should write a book.
Posted by: TW at July 20, 2004 12:19 PMare you being snotty, miss tw?
tj: i've got the look down pat with the kids, but not bill. the last time i thought i gave him what i *thought* would qualify as the look of death, i asked him if his life flashed before his eyes; and he said "huh? why?" gotta work on it.
dana: exactly. logic and common sense mean nothing in marriage.
Posted by: stacey at July 20, 2004 04:00 PMHuh. There's a balance of power? Negotiations? Oblgations toward the other family? Mathematical calculations... winners and losers... guidelines and rules... trumps, timed retorts.
Good grief. That explains the failure of the first marriage. But how has the second one lasted so long? I suppose the fact that he's spent the past two and a half years living in a seperate apartment during the week probably helps, eh? HAHAHA! just kidding, of course. You guys crack me up! But I would love to read the book!
Posted by: Keri at July 20, 2004 04:14 PMI sometimes cheat and use innuendoes of titilation after dark. Men can be such suckers!
Posted by: Cowtown Pattie at July 20, 2004 10:51 PMNot snotty at all, stacey. You ARE remarkably accurate. Sounds just like my house.
Posted by: TW at July 21, 2004 12:00 PM