Dealing with financial conflict - Part 2

[Family Court Strategies: When Your Partner Has BPD OR NPD Traits.]

At times like this we chose to solve problems or we chose to try to win. It's a critical choice every man must make in a relationship when there is conflict - to support the relationship or to prevail.

So how do we (men) handle these things if keeping the relationship stable is important? If my partner wanted to do an artichoke party for Christmas, I would just go with it. If I happened to feel strongly about having meat there, I would have said, "hey we need to have a little beef for uncle bubba, because he's a picky eater... ." and finessed it from there.  In any case, I would have been the first man in line to taste her lasagna the night of the party and tell her it was great... .and it sounds like it was.

Skip - Yes, I did read your post.  I want to point out where I feel like I'm getting conflicting messages, and how I don't think I'm being heard.

Your first paragraph comes across to me as black and white.  Support the relationship or prevail, no gray area.  What does supporting the relationship look like?  Is it me giving in 100%?  Can I support her ideas while being allowed to have my own? 

I ask because I did exactly what you said your course of action would be in the second paragraph I quoted here.  I supported her idea of vegetarian dishes, my only objection was I felt we should supply some meat for the meat eaters.  The only answer she would accept is "no meat whatsoever".  Would you accept "no meat, only artichokes"?  Should you?

I think it's ironic that your second paragraph closely describes what I did, but the message I am hearing is that I went about this all wrong.

This is still win/lose thinking though... .and I get Skips points, this is not the way forward. My question is though, and one coming from a position of experience... .If one builds the bridge to their entrenched position the entire time, and they typically are entrenched positions, how does one not wake up 5yrs down the track with the realisation that one has rarely if ever achieved the things they wanted to? The current stance is good for stopping the rot, which is great and sits perfectly with the stance of preserving the "marriage", but from experience it doesn't move the relationship closer towards a partnership, but more towards W having complete autonomy.

I think this is a good observation by Enabler, and describes how I feel about the situation.  It's just another instance of me having the choice to give in or not.  Like I said before, I have no idea how to operate in a relationship where compromise is not an option.  It's either give in 100% or fight a battle.

I'm not sure that there are any great solutions to these situations, which way to go is highly debatable.  Give in all the time and the expectations rise until they are unattainable, or fight some battles and maintain your own autonomy as a human to some degree.  I'm becoming of the opinion that relationships with a pwBPD are almost certainly doomed to fail, as you just can't satisfy their emotional needs and mentally survive.

[defogging]

At times like this we chose to solve problems or we chose to try to win. It's a critical choice every man must make in a relationship when there is conflict - to support the relationship or to prevail.

So how do we (men) handle these things if keeping the relationship stable is important? If my partner wanted to do an artichoke party for Christmas, I would just go with it. If I happened to feel strongly about having meat there, I would have said, "hey we need to have a little beef for uncle bubba, because he's a picky eater... ." and finessed it from there.  In any case, I would have been the first man in line to taste her lasagna the night of the party and tell her it was great... .and it sounds like it was.

Skip - Yes, I did read your post.  I want to point out where I feel like I'm getting conflicting messages, and how I don't think I'm being heard.

Your first paragraph comes across to me as black and white.  Support the relationship or prevail, no gray area.  What does supporting the relationship look like?  Is it me giving in 100%?  Can I support her ideas while being allowed to have my own? 

I ask because I did exactly what you said your course of action would be in the second paragraph I quoted here.  I supported her idea of vegetarian dishes, my only objection was I felt we should supply some meat for the meat eaters.  The only answer she would accept is "no meat whatsoever".  Would you accept "no meat, only artichokes"?  Should you?

I think it's ironic that your second paragraph closely describes what I did, but the message I am hearing is that I went about this all wrong.

This is still win/lose thinking though... .and I get Skips points, this is not the way forward. My question is though, and one coming from a position of experience... .If one builds the bridge to their entrenched position the entire time, and they typically are entrenched positions, how does one not wake up 5yrs down the track with the realisation that one has rarely if ever achieved the things they wanted to? The current stance is good for stopping the rot, which is great and sits perfectly with the stance of preserving the "marriage", but from experience it doesn't move the relationship closer towards a partnership, but more towards W having complete autonomy.

I think this is a good observation by Enabler, and describes how I feel about the situation.  It's just another instance of me having the choice to give in or not.  Like I said before, I have no idea how to operate in a relationship where compromise is not an option.  It's either give in 100% or fight a battle.

I'm not sure that there are any great solutions to these situations, which way to go is highly debatable.  Give in all the time and the expectations rise until they are unattainable, or fight some battles and maintain your own autonomy as a human to some degree.  I'm becoming of the opinion that relationships with a pwBPD are almost certainly doomed to fail, as you just can't satisfy their emotional needs and mentally survive.

[Bnonymous]

It's either give in 100% or fight a battle.

I'm not sure that there are any great solutions to these situations, which way to go is highly debatable.  Give in all the time and the expectations rise until they are unattainable, or fight some battles and maintain your own autonomy as a human to some degree. 

I'm not sure the "battles" terminology is a helpful way of looking at it, but, to run with it, what about the old adage "pick your battles"? To put it another way, situations will arise where independent core values are involved - these are the ones where our "autonomy as [human-beings]" comes into it. But most conflicts won't involve this; most conflicts involve interdependent values where there is room for compromise. Usually compromise means each of you gives a little and you meet in the middle, yes. But not always. Sometimes compromise means one party being willing to give up their minor preferences occasionally for the sake of upholding their more important values, such as marital harmony, or showing support for their partner.

(The difference between independent core values and inter-dependent values is written about here: https://bpdfamily.com/content/setting-boundaries )

Look at it this way: How important was the vegi Christmas to your wife? What did it mean to her? What did she have riding on it? Now how important was buying the meat to you? What did it mean to you? What did you have riding on it?

[defogging]

Don't read too much into the word "battle", you can insert whatever euphemism you would like.  

I'm not sure how much she had riding on it.  Her vegetarianism is a new thing.  When I met her she ate meat, and enjoyed the wild game I brought home.  This all shifted suddenly about 6 months ago.  From my perspective it seems like a way to set herself apart from me.  I have heard from the kids that she has told them eating meat is bad and Dad is bad for killing animals.  She tells me it's about her cholesterol, but wild game meat is actually very healthy for you and she still eats pastries/donuts.  I don't understand it, but that's a different subject.

The prime rib wasn't that important to me.  So, that in itself was not the issue I was pushing back against.

I think we need to look at this from a deeper perspective.  The core value for me was whether or not she should decide what 30 people are eating, without real input from them.  I know the crowd, and I know there are certain factions that look forward to my prime rib every year.  I know uBPDw selectively gets input from those who will go along with her. (I know my family was honest and said a few people would like veggie lasagna, but the majority would prefer meat, she wasn't happy with them about that)

I also know that what I'm told by my uBPDw is likely not what she is telling other people, based on experience.  So, you need to understand that if I had gone along with the vegetarian idea it's also likely that the story would have changed afterwards.  uBPDw may very well have told people afterwards "Geez... .why didn't defogging have prime rib for you guys, that was inconsiderate!"  Sounds crazy, but that kind of thing has happened before.  

Buying the prime rib was more of me just making the decision to please the meat-loving crowd on my own and not worry about what she might be saying to me/them/us.

Right/wrong/win/loss?  Who knows, I saw it as the best way to make the most people happy when I'm in a damned if I do/don't situation.

[Bnonymous]

It sounds like you receive validation from pleasing your guests, and that this is what was important to you - is that correct?

Your wife is probably pretty enthusiastic about her new-found vegetarianism. If you are correct that it is partly a way of setting herself apart from you, that's no bad thing - pwBPD struggle with identity and finding things which make them feel a confidence in their own unique and separate identity is likely to be a positive thing. I would want to nurture and encourage this.

From your posts, I get the impression that your wife isn't a very confident person. It was probably a big thing for her to come up with the vegi Christmas idea. It would have been a way of sharing her enthusiasm with your guests and making a stand for something she believes in. She was, in a sense, sticking her neck out to do this. Having the idea rejected probably felt like having a part of her self rejected. It probably also felt like a knock to her confidence, a questioning of her ability to be a good host and please her guests, and a questioning of her ability to come up with good ideas. It was probably very painful for her to have the idea rejected.

If you receive validation from pleasing guests with your prime rib, then maybe you felt similar things? Maybe you felt like the no-meat idea was a rejection of who you are? Maybe you felt like she was trying to deny you an opportunity to make people happy and receive validation from that?

It sounds like maybe both of you felt that the other was rejecting what they had to offer and standing in the way of your guests welcoming that - like maybe both of you felt "(S)he is rejecting me and doesn't think I have anything worth offering - (s)he won't validate me and (s)he is trying to stop me from receiving validation from others too because (s)he won't let me offer them what I want to give?"

I'm just trying to work out where you were both coming from.

I would guess that you feel that having both lots of food on offer was a suitable solution/compromise, that you weren't trying to stop her serving vegi lasagna but she was trying to stop you serving prime rib - is that right? I can see that point, but it's actually not that simple, unfortunately.

If part of her idea of a vegi Christmas was "I can take this opportunity to show people that they can have a good time, eat well, and enjoy themselves without meat!" then the presence of meat would directly undermine the entire project. Similarly, if part of her idea was to introduce people to foods they wouldn't usually try and discover that they liked them, or provide an opportunity to challenge prejudices that vegi food is boring, then the presence of meat would indirectly undermine that project too, as people naturally tend to gravitate towards what they know and many wouldn't even have tried her lasagna if the familiar prime rib was on offer too.

Worse, if you were both feeling as I suggested, then the presence of meat set up a kind of competition between you where she was likely to lose (because people stick with what they know). Every time someone chose prime rib or vegi lasagna, they may have been seen as choosing "a side". Every time someone rejected vegi lasagna in favour of prime rib, they may have been seen as rejecting her in favour of you.

I know this sounds a bit melodramatic, mountain-out-of-molehill, over-thinking, but... .When a marriage is breaking down, when people who are meant to be partners have started to feel like enemies, when there is deep suspicion and distrust between the partners, pretty much everything starts to feel symbollic. What should have been a fun party planned and hosted together, bringing you closer, became one more battleground.

I'm not saying you should have given in if you felt it was important to you. But I am suggesting that you could have considered how important it was to your wife too, and not written it off as her being awkward and unwilling to compromise and wanting everything her own way. You could have handled it as Skip suggested, raising the addition of meat very tactfully and gently and gradually, supporting her idea, and being the first in the queue for her lasagna.

It's something to think about in future. Next time you find yourself thinking she's digging her heels in for the sake of it and being unreasonable etc, try thinking about how it might look from her side. Even if that doesn't change what you eventually do and you still stick to doing what you want to do, it might at least help you to approach such situations as something other than a battle of wills.

[Notwendy]

It may be more symbolic than the meat/veggie thing.

Setting herself apart from you may be an expression of herself as an individual. ( even if she struggles with her identity). People in dysfunctional relationships tend to have poor boundaries. Maybe this is her way of distinguishing herself. Also, people can change their diet preferences over time. There is a lot of interest now in plant based diets, and maybe she wants to try it.

There may also be some poor boundaries with her thinking. If she wants a veggie Christmas, she may assume others want it to. My H does that- assumes I am thinking or wanting the same thing as he does. If I have a different opinion - he sometimes thinks of it as a rejection of him. Your wife may have felt that way when you didn't want a veggie dinner. In this case it would not be about the meat, but about her.

It may include control. Food can be emotionally triggering to some people. I have brought food into my parents' home and my BPD mother has thrown it out because I didn't have her consent to it. Nothing wrong with the food, it's about her need to control her environment.

Clearly, it was important to you to have what your guests know as a traditional meal for Christmas at your home.  When your wife suggested the veggie dinner, this changed your traditional way to host. You didn't want to disappoint your guests. There was an emotional component to this besides a preference for meat. For your wife- there was also probably an emotional component to her wish for a veggie meal. It's not about food but about two people's emotional needs. How to meet them with a compromise? That's the question.

[Cat Familiar]

As a former very strict vegetarian, I thought I’d share some thoughts.

My sense is that defogging’s wife is defining herself as “not him” through her newfound vegetarianism, and that’s notable in telling the kids he’s bad for hunting and eating meat.

I think it is really inappropriate on a major holiday get-together to impose a vegetarian meal on a large group of people who don’t necessarily share that habit, particularly since there’s been a family tradition of having roast beef.

To me, it looks like a divisive attempt to shame people into a belief that they may not want. Holidays are supposed to be a fun gathering for bringing people together, not a teachable moment.

If she wants to do a vegetarian event on another occasion, then let everyone know ahead of time and the ones who are willing to participate will come and the others won’t.

[Notwendy]

Interesting thought on the idea of feeling morally superior by being a vegetarian?

That could also reflect poor self esteem- needing to do that to boost herself up. Maybe a need to identify as part of something bigger?

Food is emotional and also a part of control. What one eats is something that a person can control completely. PwBPD are prone to eating disorders.

[Skip]

 
Everyone, let's be careful not to become part of another family's drama triangle.

Are we here to litigate a Christmas day menu and determine what should and should not have been served on some absolute scale? Are we here to discuss how to please the most people at Christmas dinners?  Are we here to judge who is the most "high conflict" in a high conflict relationship? Are we here to fan the flames of conflict and widen the divide?

Or are we here to try to help a member in a high conflict relationship, where both partners have adopted high conflict approaches to each other for even the smallest of disagreements, to find ways to stabilize the relationship so that the young kids don't end up in broken home in the next 24 months. Everything in this relationship points to that eventuality. Both partner instantly trigger on most every slight, they pull forward months of past conflict into the problème de jour, and they treat each other with high levels of contempt and justify it based job the greater good for others and justify it on the fact that they have no reasonable choice other than to be uncompromising because their partner is a SOB.

[Notwendy]

I don't want to divide but I don't know the solution. In my own marriage, I cave to these things. I just don't have the emotional toughness for the fight. It would be veggies on the table.  I don't have a high conflict marriage- as I cave constantly when there's an argument like this over a relatively small thing. Yet, that isn't good for a marriage either.

I wouldn't even know how to solve this conflict. The prime rib seems to be a tradition and something everyone enjoys. The new veggie thing is important to the wife. Somewhere, someone's got to give but if it is always one person, that's not sustainable in the long run.

The only thing I know to do is to try to see it from the other person's standpoint. I'm not defined by these kinds of things but I think a pwBPD puts their self image on the line with them. It doesn't make sense sometimes but there's more behind it.

[Skip]

I think we need to look at this from a deeper perspective.  The core value for me was whether or not she should decide what 30 people are eating, without real input from them.  I know the crowd, and I know there are certain factions that look forward to my prime rib every year.  I know uBPDw selectively gets input from those who will go along with her. (I know my family was honest and said a few people would like veggie lasagna, but the majority would prefer meat, she wasn't happy with them about that)

defogging, this is probably too superficial and situational to be a "core value". Even if it wasn't  too superficial and situational , a healthy core value is not "I know better than others". 

A core value would be more like "I want my children raised in a healthy and constructive environment". You can live this. Your wife can live this. We here can live this. Everyone can get behind this.

And core values are ranked - so the highest of core values should always be served if there is a values conflict. This (children), if I'm not mistaken, is much further up on your list than serving your special prime rib recipe on Christmas day to family members .

There were thousands upon thousands of holiday "differences of opinions" this Christmas. From menus, to trees, to gifts, to which party to attend, to - you name it. Some families handled these things with love and grace - and some got in the got into the mud and battled it out.

What did your kids learn about a healthy and constructive ways to deal with minor holiday stressors? Value 1. They see a lot more than we know - they absorb this stuff through "osmosis". Ask a child psychologist. It's safe to assume that they are learning from these transactions with your wife.

One last point. Researchers surveyed people in high conflict divorces to find out why they were acting in such a non-constructive way. The number one response was to blame it on their partner. Often both partners blamed their bad behavior on the other partner. "They had no choice".  Ironic.

You had many other choices that I belive would support your values better - and number thing with core values is that we hold ourselves accountable to "Walk the talk".

[formflier]

Defogging,

Rather than shifting arguments or "what it's really about"... .I would encourage you to stick with reflection on your approach to this conflict, especially one you have labeled as "silly" (if my memory serves me correct).

The reason I encourage this (and I suspect others are as well) is that you control your part in this and I believe that a change in the manner in which you approach these things is likely to result in much less high conflict behavior.

I would hope you would agree that less high conflict behavior is good for everyone, especially the kids.

FF

[defogging]

Both partner instantly trigger on most every slight, they pull forward months of past conflict into the problème de jour, and they treat each other with high levels of contempt and justify it based job the greater good for others and justify it on the fact that they have no reasonable choice other than to be uncompromising because their partner is a SOB.

This is inaccurate .  Please do not assume you know everything about our relationship.  I live here, you do not, and I will provide an assessment of our relationship if people on this board want that.

Skip - I have thought about a response to your last two posts.  I will add that when you answer the questions I posed in my last response to you.  This post: Posted on: December 28, 2018, 04:30:53 PM

formflier - I didn't shift the argument.  Bnonymous asked how important the prime rib was, and this made me think about what the underlying issue was.  The underlying issue is uBPDw making decisions for others (ie, violating boundaries).

Looking at my part in this?  I see that.  Perhaps my posts don't show it, but I'm well aware.  I have the opportunity multiple times each day to decide whether or not to engage.  I don't engage 99% of the time.  We are debating about one of the times where I decided to engage.  Please keep that in mind.

[Bnonymous]

Hi defogging,

Your last post sounds pretty defensive. I understand that. I can see how it probably looks and feels to you like we're blaming you for everything. I'm sure that no one means to assign blame or take sides. We're focusing on you simply because you are the person we're talking to.

If it were your wife here, posting about the prime rib/vegi lasagna incident, saying how you never support her, there's no winning with you, you thwart her whenever she tries to do something nice, she's tried and tried but you're impossible etc, I would be talking to her as I am to you. I'd be telling her "Woa, slow down, try to see if you can look at this from defogging's point of view - maybe he takes pride in being a host, maybe he's worried about disappointing your guests, maybe he feels that you made the decision unilaterally without consulting him or thinking about how he feels about it, maybe he has reasons that are nothing to do with thwarting you? This hostile, suspicious and dismissive attitude you have to each other is not good for the kids and is leading you towards a car crash divorce - do you really want that?"

But it's not your wife who's here; it's you. So it's you to whom people are saying things like this. Not because you're the one who needs to hear them, but because you're the one who's here. Try to keep that in mind.

It's not really the situations that are concerning, so much as the underlying attitude some of us think we can see in your posts. The marriage sounds like it's in big trouble. There is a sense that neither of you give each other any benefit of the doubt or try to see things from the other's point of view. There is a sense that you are each deeply distrustful and suspicious of each other, and that you each feel like the other is out to get you and thwart you at every turn. There is a sense that you each take everything the other does extremely personally and that every minor disagreement is viewed by the two of you as being a battle in an ongoing war between you. I get the feeling that you don't even see each other any more - I get the feeling that you look at each other and see only an enemy, an obstacle, a millstone round your neck etc.

If you want to lower the conflict between you for the sake of the kids, then you need to honestly examine these attitudes, be aware every time they surface, and make a conscious effort to see past them, to look at each other and see a person with individual thoughts, feelings, and needs, which don't all revolve around thwarting the other.

I can't tell her this because she isn't here. You are here, so I can tell you.

You have said that you want to prioritise the kids, so we know that you have a strong motivation to do the work necessary to reduce the conflict in the marriage. We don't know about your wife. We want to help you to achieve your goal, the goal you have told us you have. You can do that by focusing on your side of the interactions.

We all have different approaches and different focuses here, but we are all trying to work together to reach a common goal: your goal, the goal that you have told us you have.

My approach/focus is centred on trying to help you to see your wife as a person again, not just as an adversary. Because I think, somewhere along the way, for whatever reasons, you have lost the ability to see her that way.

There are better ways to handle disagreements. But the first thing you need to do is change your attitude towards your wife so that you stop seeing her as an enemy, stop dismissing everything she does as intentional stubbornness, and start looking for (and listening to) her reasons and her feelings. That's the first step.

At the moment, the adversarial view you have of each other is causing you to be reactive. You are primed to expect to be attacked and thwarted, so you instantly interpret things through that lens and immediately react as though it were fact. Try to be aware of these tendencies (which have almost become reflexes). Try, in the moment, to step back, breathe, and challenge the automatic interpretations. Try asking yourself if there could be other reasons for the things she's saying/doing and conflict-reducing ways you could respond to them.

It sounds like you've lost the ability to give the benefit of the doubt to your wife - maybe start by trying to see if you can get that ability back?

[formflier]

   The underlying issue is uBPDw making decisions for others (ie, violating boundaries).

So... is your value that neither of you should make decisions for others or is the value that your wife shouldn't make decisions for others?

 
   I don't engage 99% of the time.  We are debating about one of the times where I decided to engage.  Please keep that in mind.

Engage or not engage seems dichotomous... .black or white.  Do you see that and understand that?  I've raised this issue several times and it appears others have raised it as well (by suggesting you had multiple choices), yet I don't see any responses.

Please understand... .I'm not trying to blame you.  I am trying to get you to see that this is NOT an A or B issue.   Approaching it as and A or B issue is unlikely to generate a good outcome.  

To be clear... .I think you should engage much more often... .much more and I think you should engage in vastly different ways than you have apparently been using up to this point.

Said... .asked another way.  Are you pleased with the outcomes so far?  

FF

  

[formflier]

If you want to lower the conflict between you for the sake of the kids, then you need to honestly examine these attitudes, be aware every time they surface, and make a conscious effort to see past them, to look at each other and see a person with individual thoughts, feelings, and needs, which don't all revolve around thwarting the other.
 

Bnonymous

Solid advice!  Well done!    

FF

[Skip]

I think bynonymous frames this constructively. Formflier, too.

I have avoided commenting on solutions to the domestic quarrel about meat or no meat on the menu - but I will respond because you asked.

'Fogging,  if I was trying to keep this family unit together for the sake of the children, I'd accept that this is going to require some caretaking on my part. If your wife is mentally ill, things will never be on a level playing field. You don't want to be a doormat, but at the same time, you don't want to wound and injure her. pwBPD don't resolve these things. The wounds fester and then all how breaks loose.

Sure, we can applaud you for your battle victories (you showed her!), everyone likes to see karma. Or we can be mindful of the bigger picture and tell you that you are seeding the wrath of hell and try to help you change that trajectory for your kids. They have a lot to lose.

Would you accept "no meat, only artichokes"?  Should you?

If I had video taped my wife being upset and shared it with her in-laws just a 13 days earlier, I'd recognize that I went too far. I would would not make a minor thing like a Christmas dinner a "hill to die on". Not now. That was a very humiliating event and while I'm a strong believer that daylight is the best disinfectant... .the way that played out was more like retribution than rehabilitation. I'd own that (personally). I made a big mistake.

I'd also look to my values. Christmas is a time of goodwill and peace - a time to lay the battle irons down and bask in the warmth of family and friends. The meal is a secondary and an expose' of my culinary skills, tertiary.

My priority would not be to gather my spouse and children close and in the spirit Christmas. If menu debate was going to tarnish that spirit, I opt for my higher values.

I'm not saying you should have done it this way - but I could easily create a dozen other scenarios that didn't require you to force your will and push the envelope a second time in 2 weeks (and during a holiday were wounds hit with 2x the power). And I would venture to say that if the back story behind the video and the meat and your feelings about your wife's ability to host the event was known by those present, you would have seen some of the same reactions you are seeing here on the boards. However bad she is/was, you actions were bad, too.

And just as a point of perspective, I attended a New Years eve dinner last year and the host catered in a vegetarian Italian food meal (including vegetarian lasagna) and everyone had a wonderful time. Whether it was lasagna, turkey, ham or beef is not the point - I went to the event to share with friends. Everyone else did, too. And I surely would have preferred he and his wife shared in a labor of love in assembling the party (not a fight over decorations, menus, and invitations).

Those are my thoughts.

[Enabler]

The old me would have pushed ahead with meat. The new me would have dug down to see what the motivations were for the meat ban, paused for a bit, of the motivation was on ethical grounds and intended to be a ‘thing’ or value statement, I would have rolled with it although stepped back and allowed her to guide it. If it was based on “everyone is a veggie now” I might have trodden carefully to maybe allow her to enlighten herself that this ‘fact’ is not fact at all.

It’s tricky to seem like you’re questioning an idea without sounding condiacending about it... .at least it is for me as I’m naturally invalidating. “Hmmmm that cauliflower lasagna idea sounds lush... .” is never going to come out in a serious voice.

My guess is you see these family events as a presentation of what you’re about... .you want to show off a little with prime rib... .I like glory cooking as well. But you know what, sometimes I crowd out my wife, today she cooked a lovely lunch for a couple in the village and I intentionally sat back, did the washing up and laid the table. Succeed or fail it was definitely her thing and not mine. I think she appreciated that.

[formflier]

Now that you've had some time to reflect on the various questions and input you've gotten on the prime rib issue... .how does the situation look?  Any new insight?

FF