Fiancé cancelled wedding, but still wants me to stay?!?!!?

[nane1104 146]

My husband wasn't into wedding planning either. So I pretty much did it myself with a little help from friends and family. I'd still ask him for his opinion on things, like listed two choices and asked what he'd chose but that was the extend he was involved.

I think you should not hold a grudge because of this. Plan your wedding and have a great time. It will be more fun this way rather you being upset about him not doing anything.

He has shown you he is serious about your relationship by doing the legal stuff and filing AOS.

[N-o-l-a 7,167]

3. Yes, he's said things a couple of times about how he'll be a good provider. My usual response: "What is this, the 1950s?!?" I've been paying my own way since I was 15, and I'm not about to stop. Plus I was in a financially abusive relationship before (where a partner uses control of joint finances as a way to control their partner's behavior, by making it impossible to get money to do anything they don't want you to do) and I don't want to put myself in that position ever again.

When we've talked about money stuff, he's always said he's OK about me doing most of the budgeting and financial planning because I'm a maths geek and he's not, so all the numbers make a lot more sense to me. But yeah, his family are quite old-fashioned and he does seem to have picked up some 'manly provider' ideals from them... I'll have a talk to him and find out if it's a problem that I was going to pay for most of the wedding, with his parents picking up the rest. We agreed to it back in Australia, when he was the one having issues with getting steady work due to visa status; now over here he's got a good steady job and I'm not allowed to work here so I have very little income. He keeps offering to pay for things and I mostly won't let him; maybe he has more issue with that than he lets on. I'll ask.

Well, you have to understand, that from a cultural perspective, and perhaps more of a subset of American culture, having a man want to be the provider is generally seen as a good thing. There are many women who really want that (and of course a lot who are just fine with it not being the case). Honestly, I kind of see that as a good thing that he wants to pay for things when you can't work, he'd kind of be an ####### if he didn't.

If he is in fact traditional, it should not be a problem that you, or rather more traditionally, your family is paying for the wedding. It used to be proper etiquette and still is in some circles for the bride's family to pay. You can read more up on this if it interests you.

[NikLR 13,220]

I agree with the posters who said that it's pretty normal for a guy not to be interested in wedding planning. My husband certainly wasn't. He didn't really care, it was a day mostly for me anyhow. I went over some important stuff with him, especially things we would have to pay for, but in the end, he had very little input. I have a large family but didn't invite hardly anyone either. I've never wanted a large wedding. The important people were there from my side (along with a few extra my mom included...she paid, whatever) and his family and friends were unable to come... Some people seem to be bothered but most were not as they werent there by their choice not ours.

[Morningmist 76]

Plan the wedding of your dreams. I'm sure your now husband will show up since it seems he doesn't mind one way or another.

My husband and I still have issues about "doing things together". He wants me to be more "proactive about cuisines when going out to eat". I don't really care about such things. I am like "whatever you want, I'll be there".

Maybe your husband is the same.

[rlogan 2,036]

...And that's just one example; he's made so many promises and kept zero so far.

...the trust is gone now, and I don't think that's a good way to start a marriage. But every time I say so, he begs me to stay and tells me we can still have the life we'd planned over here.

... if he'd told me that's what I was getting into I wouldn't have moved here.

...I gave up my old life to be with him, so going back means starting over again, and I just did that here a month ago. I'm tired, I'm out a lot of money, and I'm heartbroken ...

He's not the problem. You are.

You mentioned being with someone before who manipulated you with money. So that tells us you are like me - an easy target for manipulative people who test you when you first meet. They make all kinds of promises, break them, put you in a bad spot - and you stay with them. All they have to do is switch to begging and false flattery when you are sick and tired of it. You are naiive, trusting, and conscientious to a fault.

Order the book "In Sheep's Clothing: Understanding and Dealing with Manipulative People". There are different subtypes, but this is the best book to start with. I have read an enormous quantity of material on this since the insight came to me that the problem wasn't them - the problem was me. Falling into their clutches meant I didn't have good radar for these personality types, and didn't know that they can spot people like you and me at a distance. Just the way we carry ourselves is enough for them to zero in on us and begin what they call the "evaluation phase".

From the above quotes we know enough that you would not have married this person if you knew who he really was, and now you have all these reasons for trying to make it work even though it isn't who you would have married. That's what people like us do: chin up, work harder, hope for the best despite how bad we feel.

You have people making excuses for him that ignore how many promises he has broken. People that don't like one thing or another don't need to lie repeatedly about it and break promises. This is not a person you can trust - but more importantly you can't trust yourself to make the right decision until you fix what's wrong with you: listening to words instead of watching actions. Not listening to your gut instincts when those red flags started appearing. Not having dealbreakers. Not respecting yourself enough, which is why he doesn't need to respect you.

I have an incredible wife, wonderful kids, and am happier than I ever have been in my life because I finally came to the insight that I couldn't fix them: I had to fix me.

[Villanelle 4,121]

He's not the problem. You are.

Oh em gee. Its me again. Posting under you. Im not stalking you I swear. You just always have such interesting stuff to say!

Seriously.

Im not sure how I feel about this... Its definitely a different perspective and threw this thread into a whole new direction.

I mean it started out with everyone (mostly agreeing) and telling Aussie - it would never work, he wasnt going to commit etc etc, and then once he went through with the civil ceremony the table turned and all the (not to be using a sexist label but its true) all the females spoke up and gave the old- well thats how men are- they dont do wedding planning excuse and forgave it.

Im interested in seeing if Aussie will post back in response to your comments. If she feels your comments apply to her or not.

[Teddy B 17,251]

I'm going with "It takes two to tango".

Very rarely does one side deserve all of the blame in a relationship.

[NikLR 13,220]

I'm going with "It takes two to tango".

Very rarely does one side deserve all of the blame in a relationship.

Agreed!

Communication is key in a relationship. Imho so is collaboration and compromise. But you can't get either of those without communication.

[Jawaree 717]

Hope the OP will be fine & not just convinced herself

about this narriage, even if one don't want to sit with

a wedding planner seem the family would have known

(mom) about K1 & an upcoming wedding

[rlogan 2,036]

Oh em gee. Its me again. Posting under you. Im not stalking you I swear. You just always have such interesting stuff to say!

Seriously.

Im not sure how I feel about this... Its definitely a different perspective and threw this thread into a whole new direction.

I mean it started out with everyone (mostly agreeing) and telling Aussie - it would never work, he wasnt going to commit etc etc, and then once he went through with the civil ceremony the table turned and all the (not to be using a sexist label but its true) all the females spoke up and gave the old- well thats how men are- they dont do wedding planning excuse and forgave it.

Im interested in seeing if Aussie will post back in response to your comments. If she feels your comments apply to her or not.

You were very reasonable here. I have published in this area too, and received a very nice review from my favorite author. Discussion board participants very often take cheap shots, not realizing they are poking a gorilla on this topic of manipulation. It is one of the most important subjects in long-distance relationships because it is so much easier to conceal who we really are, and I like to share what the science has to say about it. I don't choose "sides" so much as applying a science that I am very avid about studying.

We just saw the canard about "taking two to tango". It is the straw man argument pretending that someone said one person deserves "all the blame". It is also a form of the fallacy of the golden mean. The most common form of this canard is: "Always three sides to a story - one side, the other side, and the truth being somewhere in between". It is not only trivially untrue, but our justice system is based on a complete rejection of that principle. The jury must choose between the prosecutor saying guilt and the defense saying not guilty. It is all the more incredible that all 12 jurors must agree: unanimous, not majority or even supermajority vote. If they cannot come to a unanimous verdict, it is a mistrial and not "half guilty".

It is a ghastly injustice to assume everyone is a liar too. That is what we are saying with such puerile pronouncements. Are we actually going to accuse this woman of lying - that he did not break these promises? It is also an injustice to change the story from breaking promises to merely not liking wedding planning. That is no excuse for lying and broken promises. Some people are rationalizing and minimizing here. The problem isn't him disliking wedding planning. The problem is lying and broken promises.

A person who breaks his promises is the only person to blame for that. 100% of the blame. A person who allows other people to repeatedly break promises to them - that is 100% their fault for continuing to trust them. When we apply these puerile rules, we are incapable of identifying exactly where the problems lie. Communication has to be honest, not underhanded manipulative tricks that convince people to do things they would otherwise not agree to. Promises are just that: promises. Accepting a broken promise is not compromising. That is being a doormat. He is wrong to lie. She is wrong to be a doormat. That is an infinitely more clear analysis than "it takes two to tango".

This woman expressed deep value in religious confirmation of her wedding. So much so that she would not agree to marry a person without it. So he promised her she would have it. That is not a communication problem. That is someone breaking a promise. There is no reason to accept this any more than the broken promise of fidelity, the promise of wanting children, the promise of moving to America to live, or any number of things a person says are deeply important to them and therefore enters into solemn agreements about. I am an atheist. But I accept this woman's values and do not trivialize them.

You can make the same arguments about men liking porn, not being as thrilled about children, or not being as religious. Those are all true. But lying and deceiving about these things and making promises you do not intend to keep are what destroy relationships.

Good God almighty how can we excuse the mother not even knowing about the wedding? Are we reading different stories here? Oh well, men are so forgetful. Even after the "millions" of times he made those promises, he kept forgetting...

[Teddy B 17,251]

Somebody slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[GurkenSalat 48]

Somebody slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

Somebody is trolling...

Aww, great, now I have that "One of us" song in my head

[NikLR 13,220]

It takes two to tango is pretty clear.

If you accept broken promises in your life, then you teach the other person how to treat you. If you break promises then you show the person who you are and it's up to them to decide if that is a deal breaker in their life or not. If a person isn't willing to accept broken promises, then they would not be in a relationship with someone who habitually does so. Thus it takes two to tango. Pretty darn clear IMO.

Codependency or manipluative personality or whatever psychological babble you want to throw at it, the catchphrase is there for a reason. It works.

[NikLR 13,220]

In the end the OP CHOSE to marry her husband knowing everything she wrote. She can either live with it or not, that is her choice and no one else's.

[Teddy B 17,251]

We just saw the canard about "taking two to tango". It is the straw man argument pretending that someone said one person deserves "all the blame". It is also a form of the fallacy of the golden mean. The most common form of this canard is: "Always three sides to a story - one side, the other side, and the truth being somewhere in between". It is not only trivially untrue, but our justice system is based on a complete rejection of that principle. The jury must choose between the prosecutor saying guilt and the defense saying not guilty. It is all the more incredible that all 12 jurors must agree: unanimous, not majority or even supermajority vote. If they cannot come to a unanimous verdict, it is a mistrial and not "half guilty".

I find it odd that you chose the justice system to enforce your point that the saying "three sides to every story" is a fallacy. The US justice system is perhaps the purest form of "three sides to every story". You have the prosecution and the defense manipulating and twisting the facts to make their side of the story seem more believable to the jury, when in fact the truth is always somewhere in between. It's the same in any relationship, or in all aspects of every day life, people manipulate facts to make themselves appear to be in the right or look better than they really are. This is some really simplistic stuff here.