When Adultery is Good for a Marriage...

A new book by Mira Kirschenbaum takes a rather more sympathetic view of affairs and those who engage in them (review here: http://lifeandhealth.guardian.co.uk/relationships/story/0,,2284505,00.html ).

Contrary to popular wisdom, she advocates not telling your spouse if you've been unfaithful, except in two circumstances (you've had unsafe sex, or the affair is about to be exposed) as she believes telling does more harm than good, and reduces the odds of the WS returning to the fold.

She lists 17 types of affairs - some of which she believes should not signal the end of the M (including the heating-up-your-marriage affair, let's-kill-this-relationship-and-see-if-it-comes-back-to-life affair, do-I-still-have-it affair, accidental affair, revenge affair or midlife-crisis affair) and some which do (he break-out-into-selfhood affair, unmet-need affair, having-experiences-I-missed-out-on affair, surrogate-therapy affair, ejector-seat affair).

So - WS seeking a sympathetic counsellor, might want to wander down to Boston Massacusetts where her practice is based...

Sounds just like the sort of book cheaters have been longing for! Still doesn't change the fact that anyone who cheats on their spouse is sick in the head.

Hmm another reason not to get married.

I guess aids is cool to catch huh? The clap, gohhneriaha? syphillis? hepatits?

Affairs are very self destructive why engage in them when they dont end well?

I wouldnt and the minute I knew she was spreading her legs for someone else her ass would be out the door!!!

That's my word!

Wow, she sure has an interesting take on truth and honesty! In the article she says (and I quote), "A lot of people confess because they feel they just have to be honest. Well, honesty is great. But it's a very abstract moral principle. A much more concrete, and much higher, moral principle is not hurting people. And when you confess to having an affair, you are hurting someone."

By not telling your partner the truth, isn't this hurting them more? They're basically living a lie, and you know it, but you don't bother enlightening them, because it would mean that YOU would suffer for it.

And if you were so concerned about the "higher moral principle" of not hurting your partner, wouldn't you refrain from engaging in the infidelity in the first place??

I don't know... I don't have any answers myself. It just seems pretty twisted to hide the truth in order to manipulate others into treating you the way you want them to. But it's what most people do.

Oh yeah, another excuse to justify for having an affair. An "ALL ABOUT ME" bible for the cheaters.

Wow, she sure has an interesting take on truth and honesty! In the article she says (and I quote), "A lot of people confess because they feel they just have to be honest. Well, honesty is great. But it's a very abstract moral principle. A much more concrete, and much higher, moral principle is not hurting people. And when you confess to having an affair, you are hurting someone."

 

By not telling your partner the truth, isn't this hurting them more? They're basically living a lie, and you know it, but you don't bother enlightening them, because it would mean that YOU would suffer for it.

 

And if you were so concerned about the "higher moral principle" of not hurting your partner, wouldn't you refrain from engaging in the infidelity in the first place??

 

I don't know... I don't have any answers myself. It just seems pretty twisted to hide the truth in order to manipulate others into treating you the way you want them to. But it's what most people do.

I totally agree with every word you've said here!

"What they don't know won't hurt them" is a rationalization and a manipulation, not a kindness.

Honesty is not an abstract moral principal. It is the foundation of trust and integrity.

And I disagree with her categorizations of which types of affairs are marriage-ending, and which aren't. Any of them can be marriage-ending, because they create lies and distance and erode the marriage from the inside out.

And I disagree with her categorizations of which types of affairs are marriage-ending, and which aren't. Any of them can be marriage-ending, because they create lies and distance and erode the marriage from the inside out.

Her view seems to be more centred on the WS and their perspective only (I'm guessing, I haven't read the book, just the review) and when THEY should stay or go. Which is, of course, just half of the story - but if one follows her advice not to tell, I guess that's the only perspective that features?

Her view seems to be more centred on the WS and their perspective only (I'm guessing, I haven't read the book, just the review) and when THEY should stay or go. Which is, of course, just half of the story - but if one follows her advice not to tell, I guess that's the only perspective that features?

Not having read the book, I also can only guess at her meaning. But let's take one example, the "do-I-still-have-it" affair.

If her point is that someone who is having that type of affair is not a person who is unhappy in the marriage or hating on their spouse or has any desire or intention to leave the marriage, I can understand that. That person is having internal doubts about themselves and their desirability, maybe missing some lost youth, wanting validation from someone who is not their spouse and is more 'objective' about their desirability. S/he just wants to know whether others still find them attractive so they can feel better about themselves.

But, in carrying out the affair, they have to lie to their spouse or omit truth about their whereabouts and what they're doing. They have to carry out this deception, and maintain it forever. That creates distance and erodes the marriage even if their spouse never finds out because the cheater needing outside validation is hiding a big, huge, devastating secret from their spouse, and will have it hanging over their heads forever in fear that their spouse might find out.

I also believe the act of deception and all the lies has a way of making it easier to start thinking of their spouse in a disrespectful manner "gee, it was so easy to fool my husband, he's not so bright". It can also make the cheater think of their spouse less as their spouse, but as a disassociated enemy they have to scheme against - to lie and deceive, it's easier if they are a 'stranger', so in their mind, they turn their spouse into someone they aren't connected to so much, or into an enemy who would prevent them from getting the validation they so desperately want from others. And it makes it more likely they'll cheat again and again, because it was so easy to cheat the first time and get away with it. The external validation can become so enticing they start to want more and more shots of it to keep feeling good about themselves.

All of those things would cause a cheater to start treating their spouse differently, which will cause a reaction in the spouse, and a downward spiral in their relationship even if the spouse doesn't know s/he is being cheated on. And even if the cheater doesn't act differently to the spouse, his/her mindset has changed, and their way of thinking about their spouse has changed.

In short, the author is full of sh*t!

It sounds like an interesting read, and I will probably pick it up to see what it is all about.

Kirshenbaum is adamant that an adulterer must never confess - not even if their partner asks directly

Well, honesty is great. But it's a very abstract moral principle. A much more concrete, and much higher, moral principle is not hurting people. And when you confess to having an affair, you are hurting someone.

That is insane. If I ask that question, you can be sure that I am fully prepared for the answer and more importantly, I expect to be told the truth.

I am not a 2 year old kid that is unable to understand the far-reaching consequences of certain actions. And I am not even going to discuss her idea that lying and cheating is somehow moral to begin with, let alone morally superior to honesty and fidelity.

Should I ever need therapy, I now know what my first question to my counsellor will be.

Another reason for not telling is that it makes it far more difficult for a remorseful adulterer to return to the fold. 'If your partner will find out about your affair, your whole future happiness together depends on whether he's basically vengeful or basically merciful,' she said.

I am so glad to hear that the betrayed partners have no right to decide whether or not they want to remain in a relationship with a cheater. And here I was, thinking that I actually was allowed to decide that for myself.

Silly me, I should have known that the only way I am supposed to live my life is in blissful ignorance. How dare I want to choose how to live my life instead of living a life where others make all the important decisions for me?

I am so glad to hear that the betrayed partners have no right to decide whether or not they want to remain in a relationship with a cheater. And here I was, thinking that I actually was allowed to decide that for myself.

 

Silly me, I should have known that the only way I am supposed to live my life is in blissful ignorance. How dare I want to choose how to live my life instead of living a life where others make all the important decisions for me?

I guess that's the difference between IC and MC / family counselling. In IC the counsellor draws the circle around the individual, and all the rest are just factors in that person's life, rather than agents themselves with their own needs, agendas, agency...

Cheating is never good for a marriage or any relationship. Where it can be beneficial, is that the selfish individual's needs are met. Whether those needs are healthy, is debatable.

What makes more sense is if you can't practice monogamy, don't corrode the institution of marriage by lying and cheating. Don't get married or find someone else with the same attitude towards monogamy and have at whomever either one of you want, in an open marriage/relationship.

This book appears to be nothing but more than justification.

But, in carrying out the affair, they have to lie to their spouse or omit truth about their whereabouts and what they're doing. They have to carry out this deception, and maintain it forever. That creates distance and erodes the marriage even if their spouse never finds out because the cheater needing outside validation is hiding a big, huge, devastating secret from their spouse, and will have it hanging over their heads forever in fear that their spouse might find out.

Possibly. Or they may bask in the knowledge that they're hot, bounce back into the M with renewed vigour and commitment, knowing they're not about to get dumped for the hottie in accounts, because they've still got it, after all.

I also believe the act of deception and all the lies has a way of making it easier to start thinking of their spouse in a disrespectful manner

That I have to agree with. Whether it's from getting away with fooling them, or from the external validation which pegs them, but not their spouse, in the "hottie" camp, there are many ways an A can shift the balance of power. If the balance was unequal to start with, it MAY equalise it - though the chances of getting that spot on would IMO be rather random - but more likely it will create imbalances where there were none, or exacerbate existing ones, or shift the balance of power the other way in an equally unhealthy configuration.

Knowledge is power, ultimately.

The deception involved in hiding this huge secret from their spouse allows a cheater to bleed deception and disrespect into other parts of the marriage.

Not only that, the energy focused on the affair, sexual, attention, etc., takes that energy away from the marriage.

A wife banging some guy on the side is less inclined to do the same with their husband, for example.

A husband squiring some girl on the side is less inclined to take his wife out on the town, for example.

I think that a cheating spouse who realizes that they've gotten away with it looks at their spouse as an idiot whom they can do anything they want to as long as they are clever at their deceit.

a book telling them it is good for their marriage?

Toxic.

The moral/philosophical conclusions she's drawing are down-right idiotic. The fact that human weakness makes us tempted to lie and cheat does not make it ok and right.

The rules are there to curb those dishonest tendencies. If there are any valid exceptions to the rule of honesty and loyalty (which is debatable) one should never change the rule to allow for the exception just to make people feel better.

As for her 17 categories of the motivation behind the infidelity, that would be a useful tool, if you could tune out the static of her ill-conceived morality.

I think it is a perversion to take an institution like marriage that must have a foundation of trust to thrive and survive and propose that prolonged dishonesty could be good for it.

The person cheating may feel that they personally got something out of it, but there is no way the time and attention they were giving to someone else didn't hurt their spouse or the the marriage.

This is the kind of relativistic ethics and rationalization that my H and his OW (who was also married) engaged in to justify what they were doing.

Will she come out with another book that explains how stealing from your employer is actually good for the company?

We all share this tendency towards weakness. And since hypocrisy is considered one of the gravest sins of post-modern times, it makes us more comfortable to change the rules rather than risk earning the "H" label.

We all share this tendency towards weakness. And since hypocrisy is considered one of the gravest sins of post-modern times, it makes us more comfortable to change the rules rather than risk earning the "H" label.

In order to truly eliminate the hypocrisy label, the changed rules have to apply to everyone, not just the one who chooses to cheat. So their spouse should also be allowed to have sex and romance with others, if it's ok for one of them to. And that makes it an open marriage, which is very different from what they both signed up for in the first place.

A new book by Mira Kirschenbaum takes a rather more sympathetic view of affairs and those who engage in them (review here: http://lifeandhealth.guardian.co.uk/relationships/story/0,,2284505,00.html ).

 

Contrary to popular wisdom, she advocates not telling your spouse if you've been unfaithful, except in two circumstances (you've had unsafe sex, or the affair is about to be exposed) as she believes telling does more harm than good, and reduces the odds of the WS returning to the fold.

 

She lists 17 types of affairs - some of which she believes should not signal the end of the M (including the heating-up-your-marriage affair, let's-kill-this-relationship-and-see-if-it-comes-back-to-life affair, do-I-still-have-it affair, accidental affair, revenge affair or midlife-crisis affair) and some which do (he break-out-into-selfhood affair, unmet-need affair, having-experiences-I-missed-out-on affair, surrogate-therapy affair, ejector-seat affair).

 

So - WS seeking a sympathetic counsellor, might want to wander down to Boston Massacusetts where her practice is based...

Well.. I've always thought like this author..

So - WS seeking a sympathetic counsellor, might want to wander down to Boston Massacusetts where her practice is based...

Perhaps this is the crux of the author's need for exposure through a controversial book. Those that benefit from infidelity for money, will always encourage or sympathize with it.

Sounds just like the sort of book cheaters have been longing for! Still doesn't change the fact that anyone who cheats on their spouse is sick in the head.

as is anyone that stays M to someone who is not interested in meeting their needs, I assume ?

Thanks, OWoman. I'll probably read it. It's nice to see some nuance and shades of gray in an area where almost everyone sees things in black and white, and speaks in absolutes.

The overreactions to the "idea" of the book here have been hilarious. I know that some of us have made similar points, here.

Thanks, OWoman. I'll probably read it. It's nice to see some nuance and shades of gray in an area where almost everyone sees things in black and white, and speaks in absolutes.

 

The overreactions to the "idea" of the book here have been hilarious. I know that some of us have made similar points, here.

See, where I think there needs to be more nuance and shades of gray is not in altering the rules themselves, but in how we respond to people who break them. Once you take away mercy and understanding when a rule is broken, you're forced to either:

-Condemn the cheater as unforgivable

or

-Soften the rules themselves so that no one will be at fault

It seems this author also wrote "too good to leave, too bad to stay" which also sounds interesting.

I read that, actually, and it was good and helpful. I wonder whether the article about the book is distorting what the author is saying.

I'm not in the camp that believes the spouse should always be told, so I agree with her there, but not because of this:

Well, honesty is great. But it's a very abstract moral principle. A much more concrete, and much higher, moral principle is not hurting people

That's just silly. Maybe she didn't mean it the way she worded it. But that is the main point I take issue with.

I suspect what she might really be getting at is a hierarchy of goods versus less goods versus "evils". So when grogster talks about "black and white" perhaps that is what he is getting at as well.