Had Affair trying to save my Marriage

[tami-chan]

That conscience thing you talk about......it has a strange way of popping to the surface when a cheat gets CAUGHT. Don't catch em, well, it could take DECADES for it to mysteriously appear, usually around the time the spouse is leaving them, even though they know NOTHING about the affair.

 

I agree, cheaters may have consciences, but they are BARELY present. Its the person presented with an opportunity and doesn't give in that has the conscience. (or much much more of one.)

 

 

Well..if you are right then we should all tell those who are trying to save their marriages and recover from infidelity that they should ALL just give up because those who have strayed are not redeemable..the marriage is not redeemable...What would be the point of saving a marriage and rediscovering love and learning to trust again when a cheater BARELY has a conscience?

[Reggie]

Don't know about the lack of a coinscience, TC. But, as you yourself know, once the cheating happens, in the vast majority of cases, the marriage is forever denatured. The advice that should be given to most BS is, IMO, "walk".

Even those sites procaliming they heal marriages say 30% make it, and, if they are honest, most of them limp along,IMO.

[tami-chan]

What does having an affair accoumplish? Action, reaction. And if the BS wants to humiliate the WS, its his or her ball.

 

I already answered this above.

 

If the BS wants to humiliate the WS? oh well...sucks for both of them, mho.

[tami-chan]

Don't know about the lack of a coinscience, TC. But, as you yourself know, once the cheating happens, in the vast majority of cases, the marriage is forever denatured. The advice that should be given to most BS is, IMO, "walk".

Even those sites procaliming they heal marriages say 30% make it, and, if they are honest, most of them limp along,IMO.

 

Denatured (lol..reminds of alcohol). Well...like I said, if the WS spouse are deemed as barely having conscience then why even bother trying to re-establish a marital relationship? Waste of time, no?

[Reggie]

IMO, many are deficient in the conscience department. Lots of NPD's and BPD's among cheaters.

Regardless, it's just too big a hit for most to get past. We just are not wired to abide this. It is proof positive that one's spouse does not love her/him to the exclusion of others and with the values put in place in our society, this desire for exclusivity is pretty entrenched.

[tami-chan]

He's on ignore for me, if you MUST know, because he has a certain way of posting, IMO, that is very grating. You seem quite similar. And, similarly, I believe you are one of the many "sour grapes" republicans on LS who just can't stop whining because YOUR candidate lost his azz.

 

Now, let's try to stay on topic, shall we?

 

Posted by Dexter Morgan:" I'm on ignore with donna because she can't answer questions or fails to qualify and substantiate her comments with fact."

 

She tried here. Talking about rationalizations and such.

[tami-chan]

Don't push your luck!

 

I will try...very hard!

 

Well, they need to suffer a little bit for the HUGE and prolonged suffering they have inflicted on their so-called "loved one".

 

If the WS is truly remorseful and sincerely sorry, he/she WILL suffer-realizing the damage/pain/havoc the cheating caused.

 

And that humiliation may be self-imposed, it may not need come from the BS.

 

From what I have gathered here from the remorseful WSs, there really is a significant degree of humiliation that is self inflicted.

 

Correct. But the idea of the WS feeling the same level or equal "pain" should help them see what they have really done. No consequences = no change.

 

I agree. But "equalizing the pain" should not be the focus( I do not think that is even possible anyway)-if the spouses want to save the marriage, then that should be the focus.

 

 

Perhaps, but as an x-BS, to me there would need to be a little more tangible suffering than her conscious.

 

well, "tangible suffering" will have to be defined by degrees. I am sure every remorseful WS will exhibit "tangible sufffering" one way or another.

 

If she had a conscious, she wouldn't have cheated in the first place.

 

Apparently, Dex, there is this thing called a "FOG" and it diminshes the conscience.

[tami-chan]

IMO, many are deficient in the conscience department. Lots of NPD's and BPD's among cheaters.

Regardless, it's just too big a hit for most to get past. We just are not wired to abide this. It is proof positive that one's spouse does not love her/him to the exclusion of others and with the values put in place in our society, this desire for exclusivity is pretty entrenched.

 

I do not know what the stats are on NPD and BPD on cheaters. I suspect there are many people who are monogamous who have Psych issues as well...I can understand where you are coming from. Society does place a huge burden on us but I do not share some of what society thinks about love and marriage-to my advantage and my sanity! Sometimes I wonder what is it with exclusivity that people are obsessed with it? I was, at some point too, you know. Is it the fear of being replaced as the "love of the someone's life"? I do not have that fear, at least not yet...lol...

[jwi71]

[/b]

 

Says who?

 

Treating someone like a doormat is a form of abuse. There is no good reason to treat anyone that bad. The WS can feel like a doormat, but that would be on her/him, as long as the BS did not cause it. Of course there are reasonable things that need to be done to heal from a betrayal but being treated like a doormat, is not one of them.

 

What does humiliating a WS accomplish?

 

OK...I think I follow you now.

 

Are you saying that when a BS unilaterally treats the WS as a doormat its abuse and if the WS choose to be a doormat its "ok"?

 

If so, I simply don't believe abuse is defined by WHO starts a behavior but rather the BEHAVIOR itself. You seem to hang the abuse label only on the BS and only when the WS doesn't accept the role.

 

And that is the non-sequitor. If the WS doesn't accept the role then by definition the WS is no longer a doormat. So how then is it abuse because the very act of rejecting being a doormat (your prerequiste for abuse is for the WS to not initaite it) immediately ends said abuse by definition.

 

Am I as clear as mud?

[Reggie]

For me, I would not take any satisfaction in treating my WS poorly or like a doormat or whatever. It would have been nice to see some remorse, but, that will never happen, either.

I sincerely doubt that any BS that was a good, nice, emapthetic person, would embark on a mission to treat the Ws as a doormat. As another poster pointed out, a person's fundamental nature does not change as the result of this betrayal.

Of course there is going to be some anger and lots of insecurity. I think the anger abates faster than the insecurity.

What I do see consistently from mnay WSs is a lack of understanding that the relatively acute phase of this insecurity lasts a fairly long time.

Almost all the stuff I've read says 2-5 years before healing, and , even then, there are lasting scars.

Yet, I see a lot of folks 1-2 years out bemoaning the fact that this is not over and all is not rosy.

I think the WS has to do a boatload of really hard work, reassuring, fixing him/herself, altering lifestyle etc. for a really extended period of time without resentment.

If I'd seen any of that, I think I could have(maybe) tried to get past this. Folks do not become abusers over this. If abuse rears its head, the inclination was already there. We need to distinguish between some lashing out and real abuse, though.

[tami-chan]

For me, I would not take any satisfaction in treating my WS poorly or like a doormat or whatever. It would have been nice to see some remorse, but, that will never happen, either.

I sincerely doubt that any BS that was a good, nice, emapthetic person, would embark on a mission to treat the Ws as a doormat. As another poster pointed out, a person's fundamental nature does not change as the result of this betrayal.

 

I do not know many BSs (nor WSs) but a significant painful experience CAN change a person- some for the better and some for the worse. Nobody remains the same. I have read some stories here where the BS are on a "mission" to hurt their WS back...one wonders why they even want their marriages saved.

Of course there is going to be some anger and lots of insecurity. I think the anger abates faster than the insecurity.

I guess it's relative. For me, the anger stayed longer (less at him, but more at me for the blind faith I put on him)...still I never made life purposely difficult for my husband.

 

What I do see consistently from mnay WSs is a lack of understanding that the relatively acute phase of this insecurity lasts a fairly long time.

"Relative acute phase lasting fairly a long time"...does not sound acute, despite it being relative--sounds chronic, and by then should be manageable by the sufferer, don't you think?

 

Almost all the stuff I've read says 2-5 years before healing, and , even then, there are lasting scars.

Yet, I see a lot of folks 1-2 years out bemoaning the fact that this is not over and all is not rosy.

I think the WS has to do a boatload of really hard work, reassuring, fixing him/herself, altering lifestyle etc. for a really extended period of time without resentment.

I guess. That is not my experience. Although I can certainly understand the need for it. I did not require that from my husband.

 

If I'd seen any of that, I think I could have(maybe) tried to get past this. Folks do not become abusers over this. If abuse rears its head, the inclination was already there. We need to distinguish between some lashing out and real abuse, though.

Anger is normal when confronted with adultery. The way we get angry and the language we use in anger determines if we have crossed the line that separates abuse or not---there IS such thing as abusive language, verbal assualt, etc.---extended and extensive "lashing out" would most likely be abusive..mho.

[NewSunrise]

I do not know what the stats are on NPD and BPD on cheaters. I suspect there are many people who are monogamous who have Psych issues as well...I can understand where you are coming from. Society does place a huge burden on us but I do not share some of what society thinks about love and marriage-to my advantage and my sanity! Sometimes I wonder what is it with exclusivity that people are obsessed with it? I was, at some point too, you know. Is it the fear of being replaced as the "love of the someone's life"? I do not have that fear, at least not yet...lol...

Tami-Chan,

 

With due respect, after reading your replies, I really think you should start your own thread. You seem to have monopolized this particular poster.

 

You're searching for answers, throwing simple scenarios (answers) to "it depends" type of questions that leads to going back in circles.

 

So are you the BS or WS looking to save your marriage/relationship?

[Reggie]

I agree, it changes a person. But, I do not see it making a non abusive person an abuser. The disorders that cause abuse are longstanding, IMO.

As for acute lasting a long time, I meant a fairly high level that diminishes over time. But, I think it takes a long time.

TC, despite staying in your marriage, and not requiring all the work, wouldn't you agree that the physical intimacy is gone? So, has the marriage really been made semi-whole?

Perhaps all the work would have made no difference. For most, apparently, it does not.

[CaliforniaGirl]

I agree, it changes a person. But, I do not see it making a non abusive person an abuser. The disorders that cause abuse are longstanding, IMO.

 

That's how I see it too. In fact, in a weird sort of way, intimating that an affair (or something else) can "make" someone "turn" abusive just feeds into the "it's the victim's fault s/he's abused; s/he made the abuser do it" attitude. So I just don't believe it on any level. Abusive people are abusive often from childhood or the teenage years.

[tami-chan]

OK...I think I follow you now.

 

 

Are you trying to engage me in a discussion because you want to understand me or are you just trying to argue for the sake of argument? Honestly, you should just read my exchange with Dexter Morgan and Reggie-maybe you can glean for your answers there.

 

Are you saying that when a BS unilaterally treats the WS as a doormat its abuse and if the WS choose to be a doormat its "ok"?

 

Is it ever ok to be doormat? I think I told one WS somewhere not to be a doormat. So figure it out!

 

If so, I simply don't believe abuse is defined by WHO starts a behavior but rather the BEHAVIOR itself. You seem to hang the abuse label only on the BS and only when the WS doesn't accept the role.

 

It is not so...So therefore the rest of your statement is false.

 

And that is the non-sequitor. If the WS doesn't accept the role then by definition the WS is no longer a doormat.

 

If the WS does not take("accept") the abuse, then yes, of course the Ws is not a doormat! unless of course if she already thinks she is by self infliction!

 

A remorseful WS who sincerely realizes how much he/she loves his/her spouse and wants to save his/her marriage will most likey take ("accept", in your term) the abuse.

 

So how then is it abuse because the very act of rejecting being a doormat (your prerequiste for abuse is for the WS to not initaite it) immediately ends said abuse by definition.

 

That's all I am advocating for the abuse to stop by not taking it. What's your argument?

[tami-chan]

That's how I see it too. In fact, in a weird sort of way, intimating that an affair (or something else) can "make" someone "turn" abusive just feeds into the "it's the victim's fault s/he's abused; s/he made the abuser do it" attitude. So I just don't believe it on any level. Abusive people are abusive often from childhood or the teenage years.

 

I never said that BSs turn into abusers. I merely said for the WSs not to be doormats and for the BSs not to treat WSs as doormats(if there is real remorse and if they are committed to save the marriage)-as I believe treating people like doormats is abusive. Ugh. I am repeating myself:eek::eek:!

[jwi71]

 

That's all I am advocating for the abuse to stop by not taking it.

 

You have said that doormat equals abuse ONLY when the BS does it, not when the WS self-inflicts.

 

However being a doormat ends when the WS stops accepting the behavior. Which by definition means that being a doormat is always self-inflicted. And if it is self-inflicted it is not abuse.

 

See the problem with your position?

 

What's your argument?

I reject your premise of:

1) BS initiates doormat behavior = abuse.

This abuse would end the moment the WS decides to no longer be a doormat. Which means it is accepted or self-inflicted by the WS. So it can never be abuse as it must be accepted by the WS in order for the doormat behaviors to continue.

2) WS self-inflicts doormat behavior <> abuse.

How does one self-inflict being a doormat? It requires another actor. In this case, a BS. So if the WS "self-inflicts" (initiates and later accepts) how can it be abuse since he/she initiated and later accepts said treatment?

 

MY argument in the same format:

1) Doormat behavior <> abuse

The behavior of being a doormat is characterized by passivity. And by not accepting the doormat behavior one becomes active specifically in terms of recieving (rejecting) "doormat behavior". This means that the control is entirely in the WS hands and as such cannot be abuse at the hands of a BS.

 

And I posted to you because I did not agree with you.

That has been known to happen on public internet message boards.

[pkn06002]

donnamaybe I was with you up until the "now they can lie in the damn thing and like it" part. No one has to take abuse from anyone. Everyone is free to walk on out anytime they please, both BS and WS. Just because you cheated does not mean you become someones whipping post.

 

It is NOT the BS right to lump as much abuse as they feel they can on their WS. Using the excuse (yes the excuse) of they have been hurt. Why in the world would a WS want to stay in a relationship like that?? Pain inflicted back serves what purpose?

 

What I mean by "doormat" is some of the stuff you can see WS accepting at other sites. Where they feel it is their "due" to accept any abuse verbal, controlling etc.... to make their BS feel better. I am talking events beyond the "normal" open and transparent idea BTW.

 

If anyone has this right that is jwi71 though. It is up to the WS to accept it or not. Same goes for a BS.

[NewSunrise]

If the WS feels something as a result, well, they made their bed (or ruined it, one might say), and now they can lie in the damn thing and like it.

:D:D:D!!!!

 

Sounds fair to me!:D:D

 

I merely said for the WSs not to be doormats and for the BSs not to treat WSs as doormats(if there is real remorse and if they are committed to save the marriage)-as I believe treating people like doormats is abusive. Ugh. I am repeating myself:eek::eek:!

"Doormat" theory, literally speaking, IS part of the sucking up phase WS must endure especially in the beginning which is a requirement if the M has a shot in recovering. Even during this phase, the BS may not still be in the mental/emotional capacity to see the meaning of the WS attempts or be "convinced" that the WS is NOT lying or pretending---a slow and long process to get from discovery to recovery to which the WS must be patient. The emotional roller coaster often takes over which varies from one BS to another.

 

Tami-chan, you really do need to start your own thread. You've hijacked this one.

[pkn06002]

Where, in my post, can you point out where I said someone was abusing someone else? What I said was the WS was feeling guilty and "down" for their behavior, partly as a result of the obvious feelings emanating from the BS which CANNOT be masked, at least until the hurt and anger lessens over time. The WS's shame and guilt was of their OWN MAKING! Therefore, they'd best just suck it up, and if they can't deal with it, they are free to leave (and not let the screen door hit 'em in the arse on the way out).

 

Never claimed YOU said anything. The only thing I commented on that YOU said was the quote that I used.

 

But you go to other places and you will see BS stating to other BS that they can demand and do anything and the WS just has to take it. Up to a point i agree with that but some stories I have read go a bit to far. But it does seem that some (NOT ALL) BS would like to have a blank check to do what they want with the WS accepting it. Again why would a WS want to stay in a marriage like that.

 

Any way has the OP ever come back??

[pelicanpreacher]

You have said that doormat equals abuse ONLY when the BS does it, not when the WS self-inflicts.

 

However being a doormat ends when the WS stops accepting the behavior. Which by definition means that being a doormat is always self-inflicted. And if it is self-inflicted it is not abuse.

 

See the problem with your position?

 

 

I reject your premise of:

1) BS initiates doormat behavior = abuse.

This abuse would end the moment the WS decides to no longer be a doormat. Which means it is accepted or self-inflicted by the WS. So it can never be abuse as it must be accepted by the WS in order for the doormat behaviors to continue.

2) WS self-inflicts doormat behavior <> abuse.

How does one self-inflict being a doormat? It requires another actor. In this case, a BS. So if the WS "self-inflicts" (initiates and later accepts) how can it be abuse since he/she initiated and later accepts said treatment?

 

MY argument in the same format:

1) Doormat behavior <> abuse

The behavior of being a doormat is characterized by passivity. And by not accepting the doormat behavior one becomes active specifically in terms of recieving (rejecting) "doormat behavior". This means that the control is entirely in the WS hands and as such cannot be abuse at the hands of a BS.

 

And I posted to you because I did not agree with you.

That has been known to happen on public internet message boards.

 

I believe there are two sides to this real world argument for often is the case that the individual most invested in the relationship and becoming the candidate most vulnerable to abuse is the BS for the WS, in having an affair, has implicitly expressed their devaluation of it, ie.."I love you but I'm not in love with you"and "I want space"! These revelations often depresses the self esteem of the BS down far enough to trigger a doormat world perspective to begin whining, begging, pleading, and crying as a defense mechanism to evoke pity!

 

On the flip side, if the BS has a propensity towards violence, exhibits a quick temper, and is abusive and manipulative by nature then, through systematic physical and emotiional intimidation, can cow a WS's self esteem far enough to trigger a doormat world perspective to evoke a codependent subserviency in fear of painful retaliation or loss of the love of their tormentor. (How pimps control women)

 

It is easier said than done to tell a person not to be afraid of losing all they have or enduring frightening pain so there's an argument for both self inflicted and force imposed doormat states of being.

[tami-chan]

You have said that doormat equals abuse ONLY when the BS does it, not when the WS self-inflicts.

 

Never said that, jwi71. Jwi71, abuse is abuse whoever does it...there is self abuse (ever heard of self-mutilation?). Don't get too carried away....all I am saying is there is normal reaction from the BS from the discovery of an affair and then there is abuse. If there is abuse, my opinion for the WS to please do not take it and for the BS not to resort to it. I think I have extensively talked about it but you refuse to include that in your circle of understanding for whatever warped reason for perpetuating this silly argument.

 

However being a doormat ends when the WS stops accepting the behavior.

Which by definition means that being a doormat is always self-inflicted. And if it is self-inflicted it is not abuse.

 

See the problem with your position?

 

No. But I see the problem of YOUR position. It fallacious.

 

And I posted to you because I did not agree with you.

That has been known to happen on public internet message boards.

 

Ok. No kidding.

[tami-chan]

donnamaybe I was with you up until the "now they can lie in the damn thing and like it" part. No one has to take abuse from anyone. Everyone is free to walk on out anytime they please, both BS and WS. Just because you cheated does not mean you become someones whipping post.

 

It is NOT the BS right to lump as much abuse as they feel they can on their WS. Using the excuse (yes the excuse) of they have been hurt. Why in the world would a WS want to stay in a relationship like that?? Pain inflicted back serves what purpose?

 

What I mean by "doormat" is some of the stuff you can see WS accepting at other sites. Where they feel it is their "due" to accept any abuse verbal, controlling etc.... to make their BS feel better. I am talking events beyond the "normal" open and transparent idea BTW.

 

I agree! Apparently this concept is very difficult to understanding.

[Reggie]

I don't think it works to fight abuse(like infidelity) with abuse. But, I would not consider being transparent, trying to rebuild trust, listening to the Bs's pain and making restitution being a doormat.

Let's face it, to a BS, it seems , many times, that the WS gets off relatively scott free.

BSs often endure gaslighting, and a lengthy period of blameshifting even after discovery. Bss are often badmouthed to others before, duirng and after the affair, as the Ws tries to justify the cheating.

Rationally, one can see that subjecting the WS to similar abuse is not productive and diminishes one to the level of the WS(well, maybe not quite that far).

What amazes me is that in a fair number of cases, the WS does not want to accept any consequences. They seem to expect that the BS will just get over it and things will go back to normal.

If you have a WS like this, best to bail.

[Dexter Morgan]

For me, I would not take any satisfaction in treating my WS poorly or like a doormat or whatever.

 

You know what, I hate to admit it, but I did. I wanted to make her pay. If she said she was going to go out with a friend, I told her I'd change the locks. I wanted to make her stay home with the kids for a change and i would go out and live a little.

 

But I realized thats not the kind of life I wanted. Once the shock was over, what I wanted was for her to be gone.

 

But then again, if I would have stayed with her, I wouldn't see expecting her to act like a wife as her being a doormat.

 

 

I sincerely doubt that any BS that was a good, nice, emapthetic person, would embark on a mission to treat the Ws as a doormat.

 

Don't kid yourself. I gave my wife all the consideration in the world. She wanted to have her time to herself, so I was more than happy to stay at home with the kids while she went out and blew off steam. I thought I was being one of those husbands alot of women would kill for. I thought I was being an understanding and fair spouse. Boy was I a fool.

 

Afterwards when I found out, I was furious, and like I said, in the short phase of shock and rage, I wanted to make her pay. But then I calmed down, started thinking clearly and knew what had to be done.

 

 

As another poster pointed out, a person's fundamental nature does not change as the result of this betrayal.

 

 

I disagree...I think it can change temporarily while still in a state of shock and a high level of anger. I think there are many out there that didn't have any desire whatsoever, like me, to even think about being controlling, untrusting, etc. But once betrayal is found out and IF it is decided that the marriage will be worked on, I don't think there is anything wrong with expecting the cheater to cease the activities that more easily allowed cheating to happen....going drinking, clubbing...things like that.

 

I don't call that being a doormat of a WS. I call that being a responsible spouse.

 

You want to talk doormats? doormats are the BS that stays home with the kids while the WS is out f#cking around.