Mornin', Kirt...
>Looking back I realize I had four stages from my end. 1] Trying to convince
>her to experiment with all-raw, 2] Disappointed/angry when she would make
>an exception, 3] Mad "only" that she would lie to me about exceptions, and
>4] letting her be about it.

How similar your viewpoint to Denis here?!

>1 and 2 were simple immaturity and I finally realized that she had every
>right to eat whatever she wanted, and that whether she ever got "over the
>hump" was more up to her than me. This took me about three years or four
>years to realize (!), and then I spent another three years trying to get
>her to be honest about exceptions (3). In the last year or so I have come
>to accept that she has every right to lie about what she eats if she wants
>to,

What took you seven years you helped me understand and avoid in seven days.
"the value of the spoken, written word...if one listens". Of course, I am
still a pilgrim...but my friends and acquaintences all tolerate my
idiosycrasies, they are used to it, and we are all old enough and have
become tolerant enough to actually enjoy each other's weird traits! Those I
"break bread" with (excuse, an old and expressive saying) have tested
several raw vegetables, sans sauce, and are amazed--and less
>I'm looking forward to stage 5, though I have no idea what it will be!

Gail Sheehy calls it "Passages"---if not one thing, another. Philosophy in
ancient Greece, I'm told, was wasted on those younger than 35.

>Melisa, however has been looking forward to stage 4 since the whole mess
>started ;)

Mars and Venus must continuously deal with these. It is when both are too
immature to cling to patience and tolerance that impossible schisms occur.
As food means,preferences, gathering,  preparation, sharing, and clean-up
are such a central part of marriage it behooves to sharpen awareness of
this, and then it seeps into the rest.Even if only one of the partners is
strong in this regard, the outcome is vastly more assured.

I may even write a book.

>As far as telling folks: one way might be to say you're experimenting with
>a strange diet, and you are trying to stick with it very strictly in order
>to evalute how well you do on it. If you end up staying with it, you can
>explain that as well, but the idea that it may be time-limited is usually
>comforting (and probaly true!) to others (and oneself perhaps), and besides
>giving you some room to be weird in, makes it seem like a grand
>investigation more than a save-the-world or recover-the-ancient-secrets
>agenda. Hopefully, that's what it is anyway...

Yes, the reason god gave us heels was to dig in with when our beliefs are
rigidly confronted.

Pat