How to leave impotent husband? / Deceptor not safe space for truth to be
Dear Ann Landers: I have been married (in name only) for five years. I was a lonely divorcee (age 47) and John was a well-to-do widower (60) when we were married.
The first night we were married I found out he was impotent. I know it's not his fault, but he should have told me. (He later said he was afraid he'd lose me.)
We had everything a happily married couple could want, a lovely home, friends, trips. I can't say I wasn't living the good life, although I missed the physical side of marriage some.
Now I have met a wonderful man. He is my age (52), and it was skyrockets and Roman candles the first time we were alone together. We're in love and want to get married, but I hate to hurt John.
Would it be wrong to leave John and grab what little happiness is left in life? —IN LOVE
Dear In Love: If you want to justify leaving John, the fact that he failed to tell you about his impotence is sufficient. (That's probably grounds for an annulment.)
Trying to keep an affair a secret will be like trying to smuggle dawn past a rooster. You'd better tell John before he tells you. —ANN LANDERS
If you use your present leadership-communication
skills, the way of communicating that inspires deceit
and sabotage, it's unlikely that you would be able to have John support
your new relationship. Why? Because of your addiction to blaming; you'd find yourself still blaming
I'm getting something other than "wonderful" —that
"52" conspires with you in deceiving John brings to mind other adjectives.
Yes? If it's happiness you want then focus
integrity. Neither you nor 52 can respect each other, not while the
foundation of your relationship is deceit. There can be no sustained
ever-expanding experience of spiritual growth and love in a space containing lies and
You ask if it ". . . would be wrong .
. ." The far greater wrong I see is for you to marry anyone, at least
not until you are the
space for men to tell the truth and to be honorable around you. I'm wondering what thoughts you have withheld from
I'm getting something other than "wonderful" —that "52" conspires with you in deceiving John brings to mind other adjectives. Yes?
If it's happiness you want then focus on your integrity. Neither you nor 52 can respect each other, not while the foundation of your relationship is deceit. There can be no sustained ever-expanding experience of spiritual growth and love in a space containing lies and withholds.
You ask if it ". . . would be wrong . . ." The far greater wrong I see is for you to marry anyone, at least not until you are the space for men to tell the truth and to be honorable around you.
I'm wondering what thoughts you have withheld from "52."
FIY:All divorced couples withheld thoughts of choice from each other on their very first date. There no exceptions to this phenomenon. Withholders automatically, magnetically, attract withholders.
When you put in (restore) your integrity you can begin to work on the leadership-communications skills it takes to inspire honesty, and, in having John support your relationship with 52. Also, 52 will have to acknowledge his deceit to John, not as a dump such as, "Sorry, I'm taking your wife," but as a genuine request, "May I . . . ?" —the answer to which, especially if it's No, must be honored, else it's an ultimatum.
BTW: One problem with deceit, as with John not telling you up-front about his impotency, is that one can't be absolutely certain that any undesirable consequence (such as his health problem) is not a consequence of one or more out-integrities. There's a possibility, however remote, that his "impotency" problem is a consequence of one or more unacknowledged deceits (perpetrations) way before he met you. Our integrity is such that we won't let ourselves get away with unethical behaviors. His deceit with you was merely one more in a lifetime of deceits and withholds.
To begin the communication mastery curriculum one must first commit to cleaning up life's perpetrations (deceits, thefts, lies, cheatings, and abuses), in so doing one eliminates the possibility of integrity as a barrier to producing one's stated intentions. Until one cleans up (acknowledges) life's perpetrations, all communication breakdowns, to include deceits and broken agreements, are influenced by one's integrity. Once one's integrity has been restored then a broken agreement is solely a leadership-communication problem, not a communication and/or an integrity problem. To restore your integrity do The Clearing Process —it's free, it works amazingly well.
One reason you couldn't experience that John was withholding something, some thought, from you, was that you too were withholding a thought from him. When two are in-communication it's virtually impossible for either to withhold thoughts; to do so creates a condition of out-integrity which can be immediately experienced. Thoughts withheld serve as barriers to the experience of intercourse. That you didn't engage John, up-front, in conversations about each other's health and about agreements, and truth-telling, reveals that you had been stuck doing your imitation of communication. Now you're blaming John for not telling you what you should have talked about. You'll drag this pattern of blaming into any new relationship.
It appears that you have not accepted responsibility for causing the end of your first marriage; communicating responsibly about it, telling the truth, will create space for success. Often a divorced person will tell their new partner about their ex, "He was abusive," "He divorced me," "He cheated on me." —all blame statements. In other words, if you find yourself not liking your partner's ex, never having met them, then you have supported blaming badmouthing. If a new partner non-verbally supports blaming then he/she too will eventually experience being blamed. Thank you, —Gabby
* Re: ". . . but he should have told me." This is called a blame statement. Communicated responsibly it would read; "I wasn't in-communication with him. I had so many incompletes I couldn't experience that he was withholding something, just as I was withholding certain thoughts from him. I didn't ask him if there were any health problems I should know about.** I see now —that I was not a safe space for him to tell the truth" —that I was more interested in snagging him than in being in-communication with him.
** These days it's smart to discuss the health history of both families. DNA usually passes health problems of grandparents on to children. If, say, breast cancer runs in the family, or someone has had mental health issues,or most importantly, if you have caused abuse in another relationship, then your date should know—up-front—before you seduce him/her with your wiles.
Use the Comment form to post comments, feedback.
Comment Box is loading comments...
To ask a question use Gabby's Forum (it's free — registration required)
Check back occasionally for minor edits (last edited 5/19/17)
[ top ]