Split Self Affair

[Mr. Lucky]

And he must be punished. FOREVER.

Upon disclosure, whether he would be punished or forgiven would be up to his wife. However, I would suggest that he not offer her the "devil made me do it" explanation promoted in this thread...

 

Mr. Lucky

[Anna-Belle]

It's interesting how this talk has turned to disease and diagnosis. I don't remember any such suggestion.

 

Ok, so Moper is not allowed to try and figure out what conditions within him left him vulnerable to an affair. He is not allowed to even think that such a condition could exist. The only thing that matters is he did a bad thing, and he did that bad thing because he has a dirty nasty pit where his morals should be, and that's the ONLY reason. Affairs are caused by EVIL. And evil is sui generis, apparently -- it doesn't draw strength from anything or anyone else. It spontaneously spawned in Moper's heart and turned him into A Cheater (which is also apparently the same thing as a rapist, just to really make sure I understand the logic here?) And he must be punished. FOREVER.

 

By classifying affairs as evil and as being about morality instead of trying to understand what conditions within a WS leaves them vulnerable to conduct affairs we perpetuate the existence of affairs. If we understood more about what leads up to infidelity within a person we may be able to be proactive and deal with the issues before the step is taken into infidelity.

[Owl]

By classifying affairs as evil and as being about morality instead of trying to understand what conditions within a WS leaves them vulnerable to conduct affairs we perpetuate the existence of affairs. If we understood more about what leads up to infidelity within a person we may be able to be proactive and deal with the issues before the step is taken into infidelity.

 

I'd agree that learning about them is the key to stop them from happening.

 

If you're wanting people to stop feeling hurt and betrayed by them...you're not gonna get real far.

 

If you want people to accept them without being hurt by them...if you want people to not view them as a violation of morals, as another version of broken trust and promises...you're probably going to be sorely disappointed.

 

If you don't want people to view things as "right and wrong"...you'd better start with a whole different species, 'cause we don't work that way.

[Owl]

It's interesting how this talk has turned to disease and diagnosis. I don't remember any such suggestion.

 

Ok, so Moper is not allowed to try and figure out what conditions within him left him vulnerable to an affair. He is not allowed to even think that such a condition could exist. The only thing that matters is he did a bad thing, and he did that bad thing because he has a dirty nasty pit where his morals should be, and that's the ONLY reason. Affairs are caused by EVIL. And evil is sui generis, apparently -- it doesn't draw strength from anything or anyone else. It spontaneously spawned in Moper's heart and turned him into A Cheater (which is also apparently the same thing as a rapist, just to really make sure I understand the logic here?) And he must be punished. FOREVER.

 

I don't see anyone else prior to your post here using the term "evil". I could be wrong, and I'm not going to bother to go back doing a search for it.

 

I'm also not about punishing those that have affairs...pointless.

 

I'm about solving the problems. And solving a problem STARTS with taking ownership and responsibility...and to get this back on track to the OP, using the term "split self" to make it seem like some kind of emotional/mental condition is the first step towards AVOIDING responsibility and solving the problem.

[Bittersweetie]

I'd agree that learning about them is the key to stop them from happening.

 

If you're wanting people to stop feeling hurt and betrayed by them...you're not gonna get real far.

 

If you want people to accept them without being hurt by them...if you want people to not view them as a violation of morals, as another version of broken trust and promises...you're probably going to be sorely disappointed.

 

If you don't want people to view things as "right and wrong"...you'd better start with a whole different species, 'cause we don't work that way.

 

Just a thought to add on to this...I think it's also about how a WS handles the situation after d-day. If a WW does explore and look for issues within herself that caused her to make this choice, and shows growth and understanding for her partner, that's different than a WH blaming the BS, gaslighting, then denying that he gave her an STD (which happened recently to a good friend of mine...she's divorcing him).

 

While we, as a species, we do look at things as right and wrong, we also are able to give second chances...and I imagine that most here would give the WW a second chance rather than the WH mentioned above based on their actions and choices after d-day.

[So happy together]

By classifying affairs as evil and as being about morality instead of trying to understand what conditions within a WS leaves them vulnerable to conduct affairs we perpetuate the existence of affairs. If we understood more about what leads up to infidelity within a person we may be able to be proactive and deal with the issues before the step is taken into infidelity.

 

Exactly this.

[Anna-Belle]

I'm about solving the problems. And solving a problem STARTS with taking ownership and responsibility...and to get this back on track to the OP, using the term "split self" to make it seem like some kind of emotional/mental condition is the first step towards AVOIDING responsibility and solving the problem.

 

Using your words but from my perspective, this is how I see it:

 

I'm about solving the problems. And solving a problem STARTS with taking ownership and responsibility...and to get this back on track to the OP, using the term "split self" to make it seem like some kind of emotional/mental condition is the first step towards TAKING responsibility and solving the problem.

[Owl]

Using your words but from my perspective, this is how I see it:

 

I'm about solving the problems. And solving a problem STARTS with taking ownership and responsibility...and to get this back on track to the OP, using the term "split self" to make it seem like some kind of emotional/mental condition is the first step towards TAKING responsibility and solving the problem.

 

Unsurprising that we're viewing this in exactly opposite ways.

 

But then again, we always have, have we not?

[Owl]

I'd venture to guess that the majority of people would see it conversely; that labeling a behavior as a "condition" is a step AWAY from taking personal responsibility. It's more like an excuse.

 

In fact, I would place a lot of money that the population of people who are going to be buying into the idea of this "mental condition" are those who will personally be relieved of some of their feelings of guilt or responsibility for their own actions.

 

Or they're an OW, loving how this makes their affair somehow seem much more noble...that they're somehow 'saving' their long time AP from the marriage.

 

Anything that makes them feel better about themselves, apparently. Interesting to note that this is a mindset conducive to having/maintaining an affair as well. Kind of a prerequisite mindset, in fact.

[findingnemo]

I didn't read this as a disorder. I don't read split-self.as an excuse.

 

I was most definitely never "on auto pilot." I made choices. This issue is not really what I did since I cannot undo it, ever. I don't want to undo it for whatever that is worth. I need that emotional self back and without the A I would still be stuffing it.

 

It is an awakening more than anything.

 

Going forward will be a choice as well but it will be a more informed choic.

 

Well I like how this theory explains how a person can want one thing and needs another and live in limbo not knowing what to choose or fail to find a balance because they see things in a one-sided fashion. It is a common phenomenon. That part I have no issues with and can recognize it. Is it an excuse? It's an explanation.

 

I don't think it is a disorder personally but it seems that the psychologists who subscribe to it do. They think that people with this problem are not thinking straight due to trauma suffered in their FOO and that they require treatment. They imply that this "flawed" thinking is an auto response developed for self protection and that without IC one has no way of recognizing that this is the case. So since certain decisions were made pre-IC and using the flawed thinking, they are literally saying that a Split Self MM didn't have control. Instead his old defense mechanisms kicked in. He was operating on auto pilot.

 

I wish that the promoters of this saw it as a way to simply make the MM aware of his emotional needs. As an awakening, as you have put it. Alas, that it not the case. They go further to provide solutions that for the most part point in a single direction. I disagree with the method of identifying a Split Self MM as well but that's another issue.

 

As for the solutions, if only it were to help MMs make informed or better or more balanced choices in the future. What I see is a list of choices that focus on a new start - getting rid of the M followed by A, B or C, or starting the R between H and W afresh with a view of somehow falling in love for real this time. Why would a MM who has met a OW and is in love with her pick the last option? It would be self-defeating. It would be like choosing to stay in the quagmire on purpose.

 

The solutions provided, the selection criteria, the explanations regarding why a MM is conflicted are biased against the BW and provide an "out", a way to avoid taking personal responsibility for the state of affairs in the M. They provide a means to completely erase the history of the M under the guise of calling it "unintended" by the MM. The MM is able to sleep at night knowing that all the hurt he caused wasn't on purpose and that he couldn't help but reach for the emotional needs fountain that was the OW. But we all know that an A is a R like any other. Not all OWs connect on an emotional level with the MM. Not all OWs are a better life choice for the MM. In fact, many MM don't leave because their M is not just about the love for the W. They have a lot to lose. This theory or hypothesis renders all the things that were important to MM and that made him stay M insignificant.

[Owl]

 

The solutions provided, the selection criteria, the explanations regarding why a MM is conflicted are biased against the BW and provide an "out", a way to avoid taking personal responsibility for the state of affairs in the M. They provide a means to completely erase the history of the M under the guise of calling it "unintended" by the MM. The MM is able to sleep at night knowing that all the hurt he caused wasn't on purpose and that he couldn't help but reach for the emotional needs fountain that was the OW. But we all know that an A is a R like any other. Not all OWs connect on an emotional level with the MM. Not all OWs are a better life choice for the MM. In fact, many MM don't leave because their M is not just about the love for the W. They have a lot to lose. This theory or hypothesis renders all the things that were important to MM and that made him stay M insignificant.

 

EXACTLY. Well summarized.

 

And precisely why the dividing line between those who support it and those who do not fall exactly on the sides of BS and WS/AP.

[Anna-Belle]

Unsurprising that we're viewing this in exactly opposite ways.

 

But then again, we always have, have we not?

 

True. But you must admit it is interesting we have the same goal just different ways to go about it. I'm not sure you realized that about me.

[Owl]

True. But you must admit it is interesting we have the same goal just different ways to go about it. I'm not sure you realized that about me.

 

You know what...this deserves some serious consideration on my part. No insult or play on words intended at all.

 

That might be a subject for a different thread, so we don't further T/J this one.

[Mr. Lucky]

If we understood more about what leads up to infidelity within a person we may be able to be proactive and deal with the issues before the step is taken into infidelity.

Infidelity isn't within a person, it's within a marriage. TWO people involved. So this "Split Self / Get IC / Make Decisions" course of action victimizes the BS twice:

 

1). They aren't aware of how the marital issues (assuming they are behind the decision to become a WS, another whole discussion) are affecting the WS and don't get a chance to address them.

 

2). Decisions are made about the fate of the marriage (often by the WS and AP) that the BS has no input into because they're kept in the dark. Case in point - has the split self OP told his wife about the affair ???

 

I agree this approach helps ensure things work out for the WS. How nice to be them...

 

Mr. Lucky

[Steadfast]

By classifying affairs as evil and as being about morality instead of trying to understand what conditions within a WS leaves them vulnerable to conduct affairs we perpetuate the existence of affairs. If we understood more about what leads up to infidelity within a person we may be able to be proactive and deal with the issues before the step is taken into infidelity.

 

Here's some conditions: being selfish, self-centered, low self-esteem, entitled, self absorbed, weak, needy, egotistical, envious...

 

...and in many cases a really bad dancer.

 

Anyone choosing to expose another to heartache or betrayal not of their choosing is going to love discussing the "conditions" leading to an affair. That's just another justification. Look for blame anywhere but in the mirror.

 

Good thoughts Owl.

[Moper]

I take issue with a couple of comments expressed above. First the idealized notion of the institution of marriage is ridiculous. Not that marriage shouldn't be that way, but rather tjat it never was. Back in the '50s there was plenty going on including a booming prostitution business.

 

That doesn't make it right, but let's try to be real please.

 

Second, prior to the 20th Century a man's family was largely considered to be property so that sorry state is the reality of our tradition.

 

Third the idea that one does not speak in relative terms and instead equates infidelty to rape or murder sounds rather Taliban-ish to me.

[MissBee]

Ok, call me uptight, a jerk, or whatever - but the whole idea of a "split self affair" is ludicrous.

 

Isn't this just a lame term for "conflicted"?

 

Doesn't the old image of a person with a devil on one shoulder and an angel on the other shoulder pretty much sum it up?

 

Look. I understand affairs. I hate the idea of them, yet I know that human nature takes us to places like that often in our lives, and sometimes those of us most stridently opposed find ourselves in the grips of undeniable temptations.

 

But "split self affair"? It's just a name for a person caught between what they "should" do and what they FEEL like doing.

 

If the FEEL part is the true part, the part that must be honored and followed in order to live an authentic life, a stand-up person will take the needed steps to go towards their true heart's desire even if it is painful and difficult.

 

Remaining in the middle, lying, cheating, and manipulating the situation to best serve that conflicted person is nothing more than weak. Or if it's more than weak, it might even be evil.

 

And I realize that I am capable of such weakness myself, so I'm not pointing fingers. But I don't have a nice pseudo-psyche label for it to avoid facing the reality.

 

!!!!

 

My view exactly.

 

This is giving me a headache, and for me, the reason I don't pay this theory any mind is because literally the only time I see it brought up is by OW who have been in the A for years with no plans of leaving and whose MM has no plan of leaving either....then Moper who is saying nothing matters because we'll all die one day lol and I'm like what's the point of bringing up split-self? Ultimately, what is the big revolutionary thing about it??? Seriously...what is the big breakthrough here???

 

Nothing. Same thing under the sun as it ever was. People have affairs for all kinds of reasons....after we understand the reason, then what? The then what is usually the missing link. Most OW who bring this up never talk about the then what, just want to throw it around as this revolutionary explanation where we should all say "Ohhhh! He's split-self?? Why didn't you say that all long???" And then we should all be quiet after.

 

No one is perfect. People have affairs. But then what? Do we work on doing things differently or get our split-self label like a medical alert bracelet to explain what we're doing and then act like that makes you not accountable or you can never change, just flash your split-self ID card and carry on?

 

This is all a matter of splitting hairs and splitting your brain in half trying to dissect split-self. We get what is...then what?

Edited August 15, 2013 by MissBee

[MissBee]

I think anyone can claim that psychology is pseudo science. That claim is anti-intellectual and not.particularly instructive. Is Emily Brown peer reviewed?

 

No.

 

She's a licensed social worker and counselor, but is not a psychologist or psychiatrist and doesn't write articles for psychology journals to be peer reviewed.

 

One doesn't have to be a psychologist or psychiatrist to have valuable input, however, since she is not, and since this theory is hers and mostly tied to her when you look it up, one should take into account the level of scrutiny which goes into psychologists and psychiatrists doing research articles and how many have to review and sign off on it, over a social worker writing a book

 

*to correct Owl, she is not "Dr.Brown" as she doesn't have a PhD, MD or PsyD.

[Moper]

I still don't understand the urgent need to push a moral agenda in lieu of a theory like this. I know I have no need for a sermon from stranger on an internet forum. What I need is to figure myself out and arrive at my own conclusions as to how I wish to move forward with my life.

 

As for values, these things do vary over time and location. I do not believe in a natural law but rather in the notion that we experience things over time and create our values based on that experience.

 

I have a real, real hard time equating infidelity to rape or murder.

 

I do not claim to be an expert on Emily Brown. I stumbled upon this theory in my exploration of the subject. It sounds like something I can use in my journey. I have zero interest in justifying affairs. I have seen nothing that I would interpret as being any kind of justification or rationalization of cake eating. There may be more out there to make that claim, but it sure seems to me to be more of an emotional reach.

 

I have more than enough emotion. My problem is that I have been thinking more with emotion than with my head.

[Mr. Lucky]

I still don't understand the urgent need to push a moral agenda in lieu of a theory like this. I know I have no need for a sermon from stranger on an internet forum. What I need is to figure myself out and arrive at my own conclusions as to how I wish to move forward with my life.

Moper, if you remove morals - ethics, values, honor, however you want to label it - from life in general and your marriage in particular, what's left? Absent a commitment to treat each other fairly, I'd hate to be in a marriage where prioritizing personal needs was the sole agenda. YMMV...

 

Mr. Lucky

[Anna-Belle]

I still don't understand the urgent need to push a moral agenda in lieu of a theory like this. I know I have no need for a sermon from stranger on an internet forum. What I need is to figure myself out and arrive at my own conclusions as to how I wish to move forward with my life.

 

As for values, these things do vary over time and location. I do not believe in a natural law but rather in the notion that we experience things over time and create our values based on that experience.

 

I have a real, real hard time equating infidelity to rape or murder.

 

I do not claim to be an expert on Emily Brown. I stumbled upon this theory in my exploration of the subject. It sounds like something I can use in my journey. I have zero interest in justifying affairs. I have seen nothing that I would interpret as being any kind of justification or rationalization of cake eating. There may be more out there to make that claim, but it sure seems to me to be more of an emotional reach.

 

I have more than enough emotion. My problem is that I have been thinking more with emotion than with my head.

 

Bolded is a very interesting statement, especially considering that the hypothesis here is that the MM had lost contact with his emotional self and regained it through the EMR. And here you are, Moper, saying that you have been thinking more with emotion than with your head.

 

About the same time as our EMR started my MM also lost his faith. With his faith he first lost it intellectually. It took years more for him to accept he did not believe in a God anymore emotionally.

 

With our relationship the process was the opposite. Emotionally he knew he loved me and wanted to be with me, but intellectually it took years for him to accept the changes he was going through. Among them moral stands.

 

Emily Brown has created a label (Split Self) with which we can speak of these things and intellectualize about them. Words are there to help us process what we are going through. Understanding himself gives the WS power to make choices from this understanding. I can see why society and BSs would not want the WS to be empowered and take charge of his own life. What if he chooses not to stay married? It's better to keep him in place.

Edited August 15, 2013 by Anna-Belle

[Mickey_Fitzpatrick]

Emily Brown has created a label (Split Self) with which we can speak of these things and intellectualize about them. Words are there to help us process what we are going through. Understanding himself gives the WS power to make choices from this understanding. I can see why society and BSs would not want the WS to be empowered and take charge of his own life. What if he chooses not to stay married? It's better to keep him in place.

 

Under this split self label, is it OK to lie to your spouse and cheat behind their back?

[Anna-Belle]

Under this split self label, is it OK to lie to your spouse and cheat behind their back?

 

No. Understanding why something happens is completely different from being approving of it.

[Mickey_Fitzpatrick]

No. Understanding why something happens is completely different from being approving of it.

 

Any advice on how to recognize one of these split-selfers, so I don't get involved with one of them to begin with? Do they show any signs I would be able to spot at the start of a relationship?

[PhoenixRise]

Bolded is a very interesting statement, especially considering that the hypothesis here is that the MM had lost contact with his emotional self and regained it through the EMR. And here you are, Moper, saying that you have been thinking more with emotion than with your head.

 

About the same time as our EMR started my MM also lost his faith. With his faith he first lost it intellectually. It took years more for him to accept he did not believe in a God anymore emotionally.

 

With our relationship the process was the opposite. Emotionally he knew he loved me and wanted to be with me, but intellectually it took years for him to accept the changes he was going through. Among them moral stands.

 

Emily Brown has created a label (Split Self) with which we can speak of these things and intellectualize about them. Words are there to help us process what we are going through. Understanding himself gives the WS power to make choices from this understanding. I can see why society and BSs would not want the WS to be empowered and take charge of his own life. What if he chooses not to stay married? It's better to keep him in place.

 

Amazingly, people choose not to stay married all the time. Apparently neither BS's nor society manage to keep people married who don't want to stay married.

 

Surprising tho it may be, more than 50% of marriages in the US end in divorce so it seems that most people feel pretty empowered to come and go as they please. Society doesn't keep WS's in place. BS's don't keep WS's in place either. If any BS or Society had that kind of power, there would be no affairs in the first place.

 

No, what keeps WS in "their place" is their own inability to make choices about their own lives. An inability that does not afflict the millions of other people who divorce every single year.

 

Since making the decision to be empowered enough to take charge of his own life and not stay married is a very common thing in society as evidenced by the millions of people who divorce every year, it only makes sense to look at the person who can't do it (for whatever reason) as an anomaly rather than blaming BS's or Society for their failings.

 

It is not BS's fault or Society's fault if some WS's need training wheels.