ML and Ukrainian Women.

[Jooky]

Ed, if your mother was insulted by the shoe rule, IMHO, your wife should have changed it for your mother.  Your mother is your mother, and deserves respect as such, from both you and your wife.  Your mother should be immune from any house rules that are not injurious of the home (i.e. cause physical damage, rather than inconvenience), or injurious to her.

Wow. You criticize people for being controlling, but you sure like to dictate how others should live their lives.

[Boethius]

I'm not telling other people how to live their lives.  I said it was my opinion.  Nothing more, nothing less.  Take it or leave it, I don't care, and it will not affect how I approach my daily life. (And BTW, that post was in response to a question from Ed.)

Ed, ML, Billy, and anyone else is not going to change his/her views, approaches, or how they live, based on what I, or anyone else, posts, nor would I expect them to. 

[BillyB]

We have never argued, except about how to discipline our children, and we compromised on that. 
 

 
Arguing over disciplining children means your husband disagrees with you essentually telling you "no" to your prefered way of disciplining children. You two compromised and seems like ML and Gal compromised on bread if you had the patience to let ML finish his story. Some of you like to prematurely write the story of somebody's life without letting them finsih it. Why is ML controlling and your husband not? Why is divorcing over bread acceptable and divorcing over how to raise a child not?

 
Anyway, me and me teen virgin have never argued so if you need some relationship advice, I'd be happy to administer some tips. First tip is to marry a person who have similiar beliefs pertaining to major issues such as child rearing so there won't be conflicts that could lead to divorce. Not all conflicts end with compromise so compromise before marriage.

 

I gently remind him we don't wear shoes in the house,

 

A clear example of you telling your husband "no". No big deal since YOU are the one saying "no" but when a man says "no" it's all about control.

 

Dude, have you any idea how impossible it is to actually debate anything with you?

I'd rather have my ignorance over your knowledge because I have so much of it.

[Boethius]

Oh, and PS, Ed - I have no idea what you are referring to re the Constitution, as I don't recall ever commenting on the need for US Constitutional amendments - not something I have followed, so I have no opinion.

 

Arguing over disciplining children means your husband disagrees with you essentually telling you "no" to your prefered way of disciplining children

Nope.  Not the way it happened. 


I need no relationship advice from someone who spent all of two weeks in a "relationship" and at that, the "relationship" was chaperoned by Mommy.

Come back to me when your teen hits 30.

[Gator]

This thread and the many posters are an example of the entertainment value of RWD.

I am not sure that ML's behavior can be classified as controlling.  All I can say - it is not the way I would treat a woman. 

Maybe ML's "gal" asked for him to help her lose weight and this is his response.   If so, that would not be controlling.   But we do not know the agreement betweeen the two.   IMO, a dietician  would stress the value of whole grain bread and it would be better to eat more bread than a BLT, especially knowing the Russian heavy use of майонез.   

Note to ML:  I can tell you like this woman, and I sincerely wish thst the relationship gives what you and she seek.  If it advances to the level of true love, you will discover that you will still love her even if her Size 6 grows to a Size 8.  Qualities that were initially perceived as not ideal have a way of becoming " fine enough." 

[Faux Pas]

This thread and the many posters are an example of the entertainment value of RWD.

I am not sure that ML's behavior can be classified as controlling.  All I can say - it is not the way I would treat a woman. 

Maybe ML's "gal" asked for him to help her lose weight and this is his response.   If so, that would not be controlling.   But we do not know the agreement betweeen the two.   IMO, a dietician  would stress the value of whole grain bread and it would be better to eat more bread than a BLT, especially knowing the Russian heavy use of майонез.   

Note to ML:  I can tell you like this woman, and I sincerely wish thst the relationship gives what you and she seek.  If it advances to the level of true love, you will discover that you will still love her even if her Size 6 grows to a Size 8.  Qualities that were initially perceived as not ideal have a way of becoming " fine enough."

Okay, thats the optimist view, now give us the pessimist's or can you?


 

[ML]

OK, I confess that you finally outed me.  I made a careless slip and let the cat out of the bag with my bread comments.  Several of you heard Dr. Pavlov calling and gave the expected response.

However, I must also share with you my frustration with my seeming inability to get this ‘Control’ thingy to work right.

I love to control people and women especially, so I looked for simple ways to achieve my goal.  When I started a relationship with an oriental woman I thought: This is going to be easy.  As soon as I got her to move in with me, I really lowered the boom.  No more use of chopsticks, whether in the house or elsewhere.  I really had her there and would show her who was the boss.  To my disappointment she said: “Fine with me.  I was getting tired of picking the splinters out of my lips and this western flatware makes a lot more sense anyway.”  Well this just wasn’t going to work for me because where could I get my control rush as controller if the controllee didn’t really mind giving up the object?  So I cut that relationship off fairly quickly and looked for another victim.

First up; an Irish Gal.  I romanced her properly and seduced her to moving into my home.  I gave it a little time; but then one day . . . BAM . . . No more drinking beer.  I was almost dizzy with anticipation as I waited for the fireworks to begin so that I could lay down the law in more firm fashion and get her to bend to my will as controller.  But can you believe this bietch?  She said: “OK, thank heavens; you finally gave me the excuse I was looking for to give up that crap.”  I can’t tell you how deflated I was, but to cut my pain off . . . out the door with her.

I had to do a lot of research to try to find a foolproof controlling scheme.  I was ecstatic when I found out about this bread phobia with FSU women.  I decided to do several tests first with more casual acquaintances before the full implementation.  And the tests worked as predicted.  Whenever I would tell the Gal that we should skip bread at the restaurant or where ever, they gave me this wild eyed look like I had just suggested she get under the table and perform oral sex.  Several of them just got up and walked out while others completed the breadless meal but never returned my calls or texts again.  So I knew I was really on to something at last.

But alas, you can probably sense my continued frustration when my  Gal has now admitted that she likes the result of our almost breadless existence.

Anyone have suggestions on a more sure-fire control feature that the Gal will not co-opt?

[Daveman]

Heh...

...

Anyone have suggestions on a more sure-fire control feature that the Gal will not co-opt?

Time maybe for a little reverse psychology, ML...


Shoes only allowed INSIDE the house, never outside! 
Underwear must be worn only on top of other clothes...

[BillyB]

Nope.  Not the way it happened. 

Why should we believe you when you are so sure about other people's relationships? Since you like to write other people's story, let me write yours....
 
   Your husband is either stupid or knows what he's doing when he wears shoes in his house. I believe after 25 years and hundreds of "gentle" warnings not to wear shoes, he does understand your policy but he doesn't respect you on purpose. He stopped caring. Only if he knew the secret of bread and how it gets under your skin would it be more effective than using the shoes.
 
   There are times you caught him discipling the kids alone so instead of showing unified support for your man you threw your two cents in effectively undermining his authority as father but the importance of your kids growing up violent or not is in your hands because husbands are not qualified to discipline kids alone. You argue with him in front of the kids to the point where your husband throws up his hands and says "That's it! You deal with it!!!" and then walks out of the room. You proceed to disipline the kids and the kids are relieved mommy saved them again.
 
    You then come to the forum to announce your perfect marriage and how wonderful your husband is since he compromises with you on these issues. Truth is he's forced to compromise and does rebellous acts such as wearing shoes in the house on the days it's your turn to clean. He listens to you half the time while I listen to you none and that is the reason he's twice the man as I.
 
Am I right or am I right? No applause please. Just throw money.
 
 

[Boethius]

"Rebellious acts" are for children.  Perhaps you pulled such passive aggressive stunts and the result was the mother of your child dumped you.  Or perhaps you are anticipating "rebellion" from your child bride.
 
My husband is a man, not a child.  No, he just carries groceries, and, since he loves the comfort of cowboy boots, doesn't want to put the groceries down to remove them, then put them on again when he hauls more bags of groceries to the kitchen.
 
Nobody is perfect, but when I read your posts, I bend down on my knees and thank God for giving me the man I married.
 
I do all the housecleaning, and as we all enter our house through a garage, our shoes are not dirty, I just don't like the idea of shoes you wear on the streets being worn in the house, so there's another of your "theories" down the drain.

[GQBlues]

During the few months my wife arrived, she got fairly settled to the point when she wakes up and gets ready for school in the morning, she would start singing. Gosh, I love my wife, but her singing is pretty horrific (yeah, sue me). Dreadfully void of any tone color, or is it timbre? My cats would immediately scram from the room and howl as soon as she attempts to toss her unleash first high note.
 
Well, since I'm a controlling kind'a guy (like ML), I shared with her a joke gullible controlling American men know all to well...I asked her what she did with the money.
 
My wife stopped punishing us singing for a few seconds, looked at me inquisively, and asked..."What money?" So, I said the money her parents gave her for singing lessons. Well, apparently it was the first time she had heard of this 'controlling' method, she bursted laughing and thought it was the most effective controlling method she ever heard.
 
That pain stopped.........at least for that morning.

[ECOCKS]

During the few months my wife arrived, she got fairly settled to the point when she wakes up and gets ready for school in the morning, she would start singing. Gosh, I love my wife, but her singing is pretty horrific (yeah, sue me). Dreadfully void of any tone color, or is it timbre? My cats would immediately scram from the room and howl as soon as she attempts to toss her unleash first high note.
 
Well, since I'm a controlling kind'a guy (like ML), I shared with her a joke gullible controlling American men know all to well...I asked her what she did with the money.
 
My wife stopped punishing us singing for a few seconds, looked at me inquisively, and asked..."What money?" So, I said the money her parents gave her for singing lessons. Well, apparently it was the first time she had heard of this 'controlling' method, she bursted laughing and thought it was the most effective controlling method she ever heard.
 
That pain stopped.........at least for that morning.

Sounds like you're mentally abusing her through humiliation, don't be surprised if the police show up to question you about this matter.

[I/O]

I'd rather have my ignorance

Apparently.

[Hammer2722]

Ok folks, can we all get this thread back to our regularly scheduled broadcast instead of using it as an opportunity to insult your least favorite forum members?              

[ECOCKS]

Ok folks, can we all get this thread back to our regularly scheduled broadcast instead of using it as an opportunity to insult your least favorite forum members?              

I agree wholeheartedly.

Some people repeatedly prove they are unable to discuss a situation and their only resort is to attack an individual member at the personal level.

Since it screws up the thread and topic it is a pain. My vote is that the mods be more aggressive in splitting off threads that diverge so drastically.

Perhaps one of the mods should step in and switch it over to the Anything Goes thread?

[Misha]

Why do you bother? 

I don't really know (sigh) 

[Daveman]

I agree wholeheartedly.

Some people repeatedly prove they are unable to discuss a situation and their only resort is to attack an individual member at the personal level.

Since it screws up the thread and topic it is a pain. My vote is that the mods be more aggressive in splitting off threads that diverge so drastically.

Perhaps one of the mods should step in and switch it over to the Anything Goes thread?

       Interesting!  The mods vote that the members would be more aggressive in maintaining the topic integrity and curtailing personal attacks PRIOR to drastic divergence, or Godwin's Reductio ad Hitlerum, or even simply pausing for juuuuuuust a few seconds of actual thought process prior to clicking that "Post" button.   

 

practicing what I preach...
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

[ECOCKS]

       Interesting!  The mods vote that the members would be more aggressive in maintaining the topic integrity and curtailing personal attacks PRIOR to drastic divergence, or Godwin's Reductio ad Hitlerum, or even simply pausing for juuuuuuust a few seconds of actual thought process prior to clicking that "Post" button.   

 

practicing what I preach...
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

Sure we'll try it (again) and see what happens.

[OlgaH]

Underwear must be worn only on top of other clothes...

Superman - manly man? 

[ECOCKS]

I'm a little confused so please help me out.....

Is this thread supposed to be about a TR to Kharkiv or by some magic is the discussion of controlling WM allowed and then can it be general or should it be in the context of attacking ML's alleged controlling behavior?

[Hammer2722]

 

[Daveman]

I'm a little confused so please help me out.....

Is this thread supposed to be about a TR to Kharkiv or by some magic is the discussion of controlling WM allowed and then can it be general or should it be in the context of attacking ML's alleged controlling behavior?

After the forum upgrade is completed, the gun talk can be split off..


And getting back on topic...


When a Russian woman is involved... Bread control sans Gun control is probably a recipe for Funeral Control...


I mean, would any of you attempt to take bread away from the RW in Ed's house???      Not me, I'll bring an extra loaf or two along when I visit! 

[OlgaH]

Nobody is perfect, but when I read your posts, I bend down on my knees and thank God for giving me the man I married.

I feel the same.

[ECOCKS]

OK, so the TR IS a CONTROLLING WM/ML thread now.....

As a reminder, MY wife has all the artisan pumpernickel she wants.

For her it's the shoes and cleanliness in the home that could result in an escalating confrontation.

So, is it the concensus that having rules you live your life by constitute "control" issues that indicate the potential spouse should avoid the relationship?

If one refuses to own a Chevrolet the other should run?

How about requiring fish on Fridays (without a religious context)?

Above but WITH a religious context?

If one refuses to live in large cities, is this a control mechanism?

What about someone who ONLY will live near the ocean?

What if they recently bought a $250,000 motor-home and insist that ALL vacations must include the RV?

And, to be clear, if a fiance agrees to this initially, marries the person, gets their green card/citizenship and then decides she cannot take it, it's all A-okay to just write it off as the ugly spouse being controlling?

Just being sure I understand the ground rules that some folks are espousing here.....

[Daveman]

OK, so the TR IS a CONTROLLING WM/ML thread now.....

Not necessarily.  The TR is ongoing I guess, and ML did open the door for discussion about the bread situation.  Whether it should be morphed in being all about ML's Psychologically Induced Bread Control Dysfunction appears to be up for debate....

As a reminder, MY wife has all the artisan pumpernickel she wants.

For her it's the shoes and cleanliness in the home that could result in an escalating confrontation.

So, is it the concensus that having rules you live your life by constitute "control" issues that indicate the potential spouse should avoid the relationship?

If one refuses to own a Chevrolet the other should run?

How about requiring fish on Fridays (without a religious context)?

Above but WITH a religious context?

If one refuses to live in large cities, is this a control mechanism?

What about someone who ONLY will live near the ocean?

What if they recently bought a $250,000 motor-home and insist that ALL vacations must include the RV?

And, to be clear, if a fiance agrees to this initially, marries the person, gets their green card/citizenship and then decides she cannot take it, it's all A-okay to just write it off as the ugly spouse being controlling?

Just being sure I understand the ground rules that some folks are espousing here.....

Here's my take on it... simply this...


Ultimatums rarely, if ever, have the desired long term benefit in any relationship. They're short term 'fixes' which, if used regularly, invariably breed contempt.  This has to be one of the most absurd ultimata, as presented here, that I have witnessed in recent years.  In fact, it is so ridiculous that I still cannot take it seriously - "sure, eat bread if you want, but in your OWN damn apartment! You ain't gonna be doing it here!"  The thought really cracks me up. 


Seems to me that the scenario is about maintaining physical attractiveness as opposed to Evil Hordes of Processed Grain. 


I think a more reasonable analogy would be how the woman would feel if the man decided to grow his hair long and wear a shaggy beard -- I can't imagine an FSUW whom I have encountered not immediately entering into "control and change your partner's appearance" mode. 


I seriously doubt any would tell him "grow your hair in your OWN place", but hey, ya never know...