# Sticky: If you are snooping on your Disloyal, you are being controlling!!



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

*If you are snooping on your Disloyal, you are being controlling!!*

I've seen several threads lately where the affair has or is ending...for whatever reason...and the loyal spouse is snooping on the disloyal spouse's (DS's) email, cell phone, PC, chats, etc. without their disloyal's approval or sometimes even their knowledge! Sometimes even they've gone to counseling and been taken to task about "being controlling" and then come here to say "Am I really expecting too much to be able to check their ___ forever?"

There is a very thin line of distinction, and so I wanted to start this new thread to talk about it. 

*Here is an example of CONTROLLING BEHAVIOR on the part of the loyal spouse (LS): *
_"I have a keylogger on my DS's PC and the OP dumped him/her last week. After pouting for a couple days, my DS came to me and said they'd like to work on the marriage, but they want to keep their privacy and won't live being snooped on all the time. Don't I have the right to know what they're doing? I have been checking their email, cell phone records, chat logs, and Facebook with the keylogger every day and I saw yesterday that my DS called a friend who supported the A, so I'm going to confront my DS and make them block that person and demand that they unfriend them!" _

This is not transparency--it's control. Here's why. In this example, the DS is not given the opportunity to make a decision about their own life and what they do and do not want to share. They are not treated as an equal partner who has just as much right to decide what they will and will not choose to do. They are spied on, unsupported, not encouraged, not safe, forced and demanded to do what they do NOT want to do! 

How do YOU respond when someone tries to force you to do something you don't really want to do? Usually people either act defensively and try to resist and force against it...or they become passive-aggressive and agree but then "forget" or blame you. So is that what the LS wants? Do you want your DS to act defensively and try to resist? If not, then do not control them!

*Here is an example of TRANSPARENT BEHAVIOR on the part of the loyal spouse (LS):* 
_"My DS told me that the OP dumped him/her last week. After pouting for a couple days, my DS came to me and said they'd like to work on the marriage, but they want to keep their privacy and won't live being snooped on all the time. I said I completely understood that spying on each other was not the path to honesty and intimacy, but that I thought that being open with each other was the path that way. I let my DS know that I will only be with a partner whom I believe is honest with me and who wants to have some modest privacy but who doesn't keep things secret from me and hide their True Self. So since my DS used his/her email, cell phone records, chat logs, and Facebook to be dishonest--I asked how s/he would be willing to demonstrate to me that they were being honest with those things. My DS said they'd be willing to sit down together after work and go over anything on the cell phone and decide together if it should be deleted or not, they'd be willing to give me passwords so I could see cell records, they'd be willing to sit down together and show me their email, and they'd be willing to shut down our individual FB accounts and make one we can both get into and both see."_

Transparency is when a DS offers their email, passwords, chat logs and FB voluntarily to show the LS that what they say and what they do match. Transparency would be if the DS allowed the LS to see their real thoughts and feelings, even if they were not "complimentary" of the LS. Transparency is the DS deciding to do that by their own choice! So if they are not willing to offer these things, controlling them is not the way to build a healthy marriage! All that does is build a marriage where one is the parent and one is the child!!

Soooo...does anyone have any questions?


----------



## Dowjones (Sep 16, 2010)

What you described in the first paragraph is indeed controlling behavior, but I submit that after a long affair, the LS may need to feel in control for a time, as a way of regaining trust in the DS'S integrity, for his/her own self-esteem, and as a hedge against back-sliding. AS the cheater, the DS must give up privacy and control and show vulnerability, in order to prove his/her commitment. The answer is for both parties to sit down and discuss the boundaries, with regards to privacy, and outside the marriage contacts, that BOTH are willing to accept, for reconciliation. If there isn't a "meeting of the minds", then the chances of anything good happening, are slim.


----------



## Dowjones (Sep 16, 2010)

Now I realize that in my case the affair was short, and my wife had already, voluntarily done all of these things and more, but I feel that most of the "heavy lifting", should be the responsibility of the DS. There are exceptions, and conditions, of course, but they should be discussed beforehand.


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

Dow the difference I think is between "privacy" and "secrecy." As I've discussed on other threads, "privacy" is "The state of being free from unsanctioned intrusion" (think modesty--closing the door while changing, the ability to say no to a touch) whereas "secrecy" is "Operating in a hidden or confidential manner." Every person, whether disloyal or loyal, should be able to have privacy and some private time. But the concept of transparency means being see-through enough that your spouse sees the True You--in other words not operating in secrecy so that you show your spouse one image of you (I'm going to work) while hiding the True You (who is going to your lover). 

Thus I agree with you and simultaneously disagree. I agree that since the DS acted secretly and dishonestly, that if they want to rebuild a truly healthy, intimate relationship they would have to willingly do some heavy lifting and be pretty open to their LS. Yes, the fact is, it will probably feel a little like you're being watched but that is also part of the cost of the choices the DS made to be secretive! Also, since the DS has been acting secretively for a while, the act of behaving honestly and openly will just feel "different" than what the DS is used to. So on that point we agree. 

Where we disagree is on the point of "allowing the LS to be controlling." In an intimate relationship of equals, one spouse can not have Power Over another. If one has Power Over that means the other is being dominated and regulated against their will, and that does not build love or healthy trust..either one! So even though the DS was dishonest, the two build mutual respect and intimacy, not by controlling (manipulating, forcing, restraining, authoritatively preventing), but by the two parties both voluntarily reach mutual understanding. 

AND...this leads to another point I've often made in other posts: Mutual United Understanding (MUU). In order to avoid controlling each other, I recommend that both spouses reach the agreement together that they will do NOTHING until their spouse enthusiastically is united with them and they have an understanding. If they face things together, as a team, they are not opposing each other for a Power struggle, but have an ally. The trick is when you want to do something very badly and your spouse says they are not enthusiastic. That means you would discipline YOURSELF to not do it until some mutual understanding is reached!! Do nothing and keep making offers until both spouses can say, "You know...I really agree to that! YES!"


----------



## Dowjones (Sep 16, 2010)

Well, here again, I'm going to have to agree and disagree. On your first paragraph, I agree completely with the difference between secrecy and privacy. I do, however, think that the issue of which is which is one of the areas that the DS has forfeited, becausae of his/her infidelity. In your second paragraph, I agree that in a relationship of equals, controlling behavior can and , in fact, should be resisted. But, the re-conciliation period after an affair is hardly a relationship of equals, is it? In order for it to RETURN to a relationship of equals, the DS will have to relinquish some control he/she had usurped by having the affair , in the first place. By engaging in an affair, the DS took much of what should rightfully be the decision-making power of the LS, from him/her. The LS was being forced by the affair into an un-equal relationship. An analogy would be if you were a corporate worker, and had your proscribed duties and perks taken from you by your co-worker , without your knowledge. In order for the corporate relationship to return to equality, the co-worker must return to the person that which he/she took. The same applies to the marriage, the DS must as a result of their infidelity voluntatily give up his/her position as a token of their renewed comitment and as a means for the LS to be able to trust that the DS is properly remorseful.


----------



## Dowjones (Sep 16, 2010)

And, again, I agree totally that these issues must be constantly discussed and revised as the re-conciliation progresses.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Dowjones said:


> Well, here again, I'm going to have to agree and disagree. On your first paragraph, I agree completely with the difference between secrecy and privacy. I do, however, think that the issue of which is which is one of the areas that the DS has forfeited, becausae of his/her infidelity. In your second paragraph, I agree that in a relationship of equals, controlling behavior can and , in fact, should be resisted. But, the re-conciliation period after an affair is hardly a relationship of equals, is it? In order for it to RETURN to a relationship of equals, the DS will have to relinquish some control he/she had usurped by having the affair , in the first place. By engaging in an affair, the DS took much of what should rightfully be the decision-making power of the LS, from him/her. The LS was being forced by the affair into an un-equal relationship. An analogy would be if you were a corporate worker, and had your proscribed duties and perks taken from you by your co-worker , without your knowledge. In order for the corporate relationship to return to equality, the co-worker must return to the person that which he/she took. The same applies to the marriage, the DS must as a result of their infidelity voluntatily give up his/her position as a token of their renewed comitment and as a means for the LS to be able to trust that the DS is properly remorseful.


:iagree::iagree::iagree:

And also agree that there will be a time when the monitoring decreases as comfort level rises.

The trick is in figuring out that timeline.

BTW, I would have not found anything concrete about the continued affair if I hadn't snooped.


----------



## gregj123 (Dec 29, 2010)

I agree 100% not to snoop if the OP has agreed to stop the behavior & not lie about it & be open.snooping hurts more than helps because if somethings going on its going to continue to go no matter what!


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

But at least you get to limit your exposure to STDs or waste any more time with them if they've gone to deep cover.


----------



## the guy (Aug 3, 2010)

AC, the big thing that sticks out in your thread is the word "offer".

So if the DS makes that "offer" of transperantcy is this true remorse and reconcil....getting back together is worth it? 

I understand after all the BS we go through to get to that point is over with and you are at a point were DS has no secrets but LS has trust issues (always will) the snooping is not snooping on the LS end, but transperantcy and openness on th DS end so I'm not snooping when she allows me to look. Correct? 

Its forcing the issue that makes it controlling. Correct? especially after the both of you reconsill........ getting back togther?


----------



## Workingitout (Sep 27, 2010)

I agree w/ Affaircare in principal. I also agree with Dow in practice. 

I caught my wife having an EA by reading her text messages. I had never done that but "God" told me to look. The message I read was "I want you". She swore that it was just foolish, drunk behavior. I believed her. 

5 months later I found a single 1 minute call to the OM. Again she swore it was just drunken foolishness and she said she "hung up before he answered" and she "knew it was wrong". Again, I wanted to believe her.

Move forward 2 months, God told me she was cheating. I confronted her, she confessed to having an 11 month EA that ended in an hour of PA in the back of his loaner car.

Had I snooped (or thought to investigate) earlier, I would have discovered her secret pre-paid cell phone, her excessive drug & alcohol use, her severe depression and more. I could have prevented her EA from becoming a PA. I could have begun to work on improving our marriage. I could have prevented her suicide attempt. I could have kept her from going to 2.5 months of rehab at a cost of $70,000 (unisured) and away from her family, or at least gone on her terms.

Now, she's not entitled to any privacy and she acknowleges this is one of her "consequences" for her dispicable repeated infidelities. The alternative is far worse. Yes, I am being controlling. We both understand this. If it makes me feel secure to regain some of the "control" and trust that she took away by her betrayal, so be it. We both agree that it's a mental thing with me, since if she really wanted to hide her infidelity again, she could do it. While we are working towards trust, in the mean time, I need to know that she's "behaving". As time moves on, I will lessen my need to know her wearabouts as we restore the lost trust.


----------



## Dowjones (Sep 16, 2010)

For me, the bottom line is, that these steps be agreed to, beforehand, without coeorcion or deceit. In this way, the LS can regain some of the control over his/her life that the affair took away, and the DS can re-establish his/herself as a trustworthy partner. If done without angst or resentment, there is no reason that absolute transparency should be a control issue.


----------



## Dowjones (Sep 16, 2010)

In my case, my wife volunteered all of this and much more. I know all she does and almost all she thinks. It's almost too much information, but I'm very glad she does it. We communicate so much better than we ever did, it's a wonder that it's the same marriage. We have started a new thing, where we do nothing Saturday morning, but be with each other in bed. We drink coffee , read the paper together, make love and discuss issues. We call it "mattress cafe time".:smthumbup:


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

Oh man does this hit the nail on the head: 


> ...the big thing that sticks out in your thread is the word "offer"... So if the DS makes that "offer" of transperantcy is this true remorse...*you are at a point were DS has no secrets but LS has trust issues (always will) the snooping is not snooping on the LS end, but transperantcy and openness on th DS end so I'm not snooping when she allows me to look*. ...Its forcing the issue that makes it controlling. Correct?


Amen and amen you got it! :smthumbup: :smthumbup:

I was a disloyal spouse. It felt like being spied on and like you can't burp without your spouse watching you. BUT that was the cost of my own choices and I understood that in order to really repair things, I had to WILLINGLY let my LS see my emails, chats, etc. In a way that helped me to "be good" because I really wanted to rebuild trust in my honesty and every day that he looked and found nothing was a day closer to that trust! The key is the DS willingness. 

Real reconciliation comes with the DS lets you look (at which point an LS can look to their heart's content) and when both spouses are transparent with each other. That means when that little voice in your head says, "Lie--s/he can't handle the truth! S/He will freak out on you!" you need to discipline yourself to be "see-through" and say what isn't easy. 

Thus, Working and Dow, you actually have it exactly correct. When people marry they are volunteering to share themselves fully, deeply, and intimately with one other person (warts and all)--and so as a spouse you have certain rights. BUT forcing them to do it your way (or let you snoop) = controlling behavior; whereas a DS freely giving you permission to snoop = building back trust in their honesty. The term "control" doesn't mean that an LS should give their DS control of their life or vice versa, but rather it means the kind of behavior that commands and dominates (in that bad way), bullies and manipulates. Make sense?


----------



## Odee (Jan 21, 2011)

The problem I see with your proposition is three-fold: it presumes both people are equally capable of integrity and honor, and that the "decision" to be made is that of the DS regarding their affiar. It also presumes there is no other constraint on either person's ability to effect or realize a given decision.

When a DS is a personality disorder or abusive personality transparency could simply serve to train a better liar and can put a person's physical, economic, or psychological saftey at risk. In this instance the LS is struck by the tragic dual revelation of both the affiar and the DS's true self. If the discovery of the affair also reveals this light of a previously misunderstood or unknown reality - the primary decision here has to be one of the LS.

I agree that snooping is no way to live or relate - but, sometimes what the LS is "discovering" is much more than just the affair. The timing of this "transparency" is important enough that in many circumstances the watch may belong to the LS.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Odee said:


> The problem I see with your proposition is three-fold: it presumes both people are equally capable of integrity and honor, and that the "decision" to be made is that of the DS regarding their affiar. It also presumes there is no other constraint on either person's ability to effect or realize a given decision.
> 
> When a DS is a personality disorder or abusive personality transparency could simply serves to train a better liar and can put a person's physical, economic, or psychological saftey at risk. In this instance the LS is struck by the tragic dual revelation of both the affiar and the DS's true self. If the discovery of the affair also reveals this light of a previously misunderstood or unknown reality - the primary decision here has to be one of the LS.


:iagree::iagree:

Well put. My wife used my reasonableness and willingness to move forward to LIE at much deeper level than previously. Trusting but not verifying is not a good strategy with a deeply deceptive spouse who wants to cheat. Not knowing that they are that deceptive is only brought to light by snooping.


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

> The problem I see with your proposition is three-fold: it presumes both people are equally capable of integrity and honor, and that the "decision" to be made is that of the DS regarding their affiar. It also presumes there is no other constraint on either person's ability to effect or realize a given decision.
> 
> When a DS is a personality disorder or abusive personality transparency could simply serve to train a better liar and can put a person's physical, economic, or psychological saftey at risk. In this instance the LS is struck by the tragic dual revelation of both the affiar and the DS's true self. If the discovery of the affair also reveals this light of a previously misunderstood or unknown reality - the primary decision here has to be one of the LS.
> 
> I agree that snooping is no way to live or relate - but, sometimes what the LS is "discovering" is much more than just the affair. The timing of this "transparency" is important enough that in many circumstances the watch may belong to the LS.


Actually you made some fairly serious assumptions there, Odee that do indeed greatly affect the conclusions. For example, please note that I'm not saying there is never a time when it's appropriate for a Loyal to snoop. Clearly, it is our first step! (See "Seven steps you can take to end the affair") When the disloyal is actively BEING disloyal, it is the nature of that particular beast to lie, hide, deceive, deflect, throw smoke and mirrors, etc. Thus, when the affair is active...when the Loyal suspects and/or the Disloyal doesn't seem to be forthcoming...that is an appropriate time to snoop! I encourage LS to find out the electronic surveillance laws of their state, and use every means possible to obtain proof that something either *IS* or *IS NOT* going on. 

Now...while the affair is active I have often seen one spouse learn and grow from the experience enough to see that they are not a good match with the disloyal spouse and/or find that the DS has a personality disorder or other kind of avoidant behavior...or discover that this has been a pattern of their DS and their spouse will not face themselves. Making that discovery does not give the Loyal a "free pass" to become a controlling person. It's sad that the DS won't face themselves, and it may make the LS's decision to stay with the marriage or leave easier! But the wrong of one person (DS) doesn't give the LS carte blanche to do wrong too. 

Further, The snooping about which I'm talking in this thread is after the affair has ended. Several LS, at that point, feel vindicated in checking up on their spouse against the DS's will or confronting them about something they found when the DS has not volunteered transparency. There are several conditions in my discussion, you'll note: 1) IF the affair is over, and 2) IF the two decide to give it a try, THEN if there is any hope for rebuilding healthy trust both spouses would have to agree to transparency (namely, if the DS is transparent and the LS still hides his/her thoughts, feelings, and life then it's not a healthy marriage). That means the DS willingly allows the LS to check and the LS works on getting through it so it's not "held over the DS's head forever." It's a joint agreement. If either one (LS or DS) tries to force the other or "make them" give passwords lland access...then it is not healthy mutuality but controlling behavior! 

To address your issues in order and in summary: 


> The problem I see with your proposition is three-fold: it presumes both people are equally capable of integrity and honor...


To a degree, yes that's true. In order to restore trust and build a healthy, mature, intimate relationship it does require two relatively mentally healthy adults. If that is not the case, then controlling behavior does not make the unhealthy person "become" healthy or behave in a healthy way. In the instance where an LS discovers the DS is not mentally healthy, the mental health issues would need to be addresses before a healthy, mature marriage could be built. 



> ...and that the "decision" to be made is that of the DS regarding their affiar.


Actually this one is not true. There are the above noted "conditions" but even before that it is an understood given that the MOMENT a Disloyal chooses to cheat, the Loyal has the moral and ethical and legal absolute right to end it then and there and divorce. The LOYAL has that right and can walk away with a clean conscience--the disloyal does not. If the LS chooses to stay, that is their decision, and after trying to the best of their ability, if they decide to divorce, again, that is their absolute right morally, ethically and legally. 

This is for the specific instance where the LS chose to stay, the affair ended (say...the OP dumped the DS), and the DS says they'll work on the marriage but they're angry and the LS is continuing to snoop. 



> ...It also presumes there is no other constraint on either person's ability to effect or realize a given decision


Yes, this one is true also. This assumes there are not other constraints such as diagnosed personality disorders or mental illnesses. For example, if, through the course of this affair, your spouse is diagnosed bipolar and the affairs are part of the sexual acting out of mania--then clearly the bipolar has to be addressed FIRST before the transparency and rebuilding the marriage. Once the moods are stabilized then some marriage work may be done, but my guess is that during the timeframe moods are swinging wildly, the LS will at minimum separate. 

I guess to me, the real issue is that we all know that we ALL have issues! NONE of us are perfect, including our spouses. Thus, if an LS were to discover their spouse was mentally ill, does that have to automatically mean a divorce? Could the LS learn to adjust how to react to the DS and choose to stay? Could the LS learn behavior modification techniques of their own? Doesn't this presume that the LS has no mental health issues? Can the DS leave a mentally ill LS? There are lots of permutations here! This particular thread is about the specific instance where the LS chose to stay, the OP dumped the DS (or something along that line), and the DS says they'll work on the marriage but they're angry and the LS is continuing to snoop and trying to "force" the DS to end contact by being covert.


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

michzz said:


> ... Trusting but not verifying is not a good strategy with a deeply deceptive spouse who wants to cheat. Not knowing that they are that deceptive is only brought to light by snooping.


Okay let's try this. Let's take your exact example and carry it through to it's logical conclusion. The DS says she wants to reconcile but it's all a lie; she's really just going to take the contact to a more secretive level. The LS says he wants transparency and she balks. 

If you take your route, she balks or maybe shows some very minimal transparency. She doesn't share passwords, locks her cellphone, you can't see the records, her laptop is protected, and her FB is blocked to the LS. He snoops and digs and uses keyloggers...and discovers more contact. He confronts her and "MAKES" her give him her cell phone. On the phone he discovers MORE contact, and through joint fighting and threats "MAKES" her agree to no more contact...which she doesn't really want to do of her own free will. This goes on and on and they never really rebuild any trust or recover the marriage, because a) she didn't really want to end the affair and work on the marriage, and b) he was controlling. 

If you take my route, she balks or maybe shows some very minimal transparency. She doesn't share passwords, locks her cellphone, you can't see the records, her laptop is protected, and her FB is blocked to the LS. He does not snoop, but instead sets a personal boundary and says he will not live with someone who will not be transparent and honor their marriage vow to forsake all others. She hesitates, and he packs her a suitcase and calls her sister to "come get DS" because although the affair may be over, she won't commit to working on the marriage. LS gets on with his life, makes arrangements to get kids to and from school and for after-school care, and enjoys spending some family time with the kids. DS begins to see he means it, he won't be treated like that, and she could lose everything including her children. She calls and says she's willing to talk about being transparent. He says "We will both swap passwords, emails, usernames, and everything. You can see everything of mine and I can see everything of yours. We agree to not delete anything until the other sees it, and we can check the recycle bin and cookies. We agree for a while to be open to each other. Do you agree to this?" and she says "I can't give out my work email password" He says "How do you propose to prove to me OM isn't contacting you at work then?" and she says "what if the IT dept checks my work emails and they give you an okay?" He says "That works for me" and so on. They actually begin to rebuild trust and recover the marriage, because a) she didn't got to a point where she wanted to end the affair and work on the marriage, and b) he was respectful and made mutual decisions.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Affaircare said:


> Okay let's try this. Let's take your exact example and carry it through to it's logical conclusion. The DS says she wants to reconcile but it's all a lie; she's really just going to take the contact to a more secretive level. The LS says he wants transparency and she balks.
> 
> If you take your route, she balks or maybe shows some very minimal transparency.


No, in my EXACT example, she doesn't balk, she acts as though she has complied. There is no indication that the cheating has continued from any overt evidence.

I'm not talking hypotheticals here.


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

Right I understand that you are using your own life as an example. I didn't realize she acted as though she was complying--but even then, in that case, she did "supposedly" give you permission to have access. The fact that she gave you user names and passwords to 90% of her places but kept the 10% secret doesn't really change things though. You still didn't reconcile and rebuild your marriage by controlling her and forcing her. If your marriage did recover, its because eventually she agreed inside herself and began to act honestly. If your marriage didn't recover, its because she didn't really agree no matter how hard you tried to force her to be honest. 

See what I mean? 

As I see it, your wife was having an affair. She was caught and out loud, she agreed to stop, but secretly she moved it to a deeper level of deception and continued. Out loud she agreed to work on the marriage, but secretly she did nothing of the kind. 

So I guess what I'm wondering is this: are you suggesting that a Loyal Spouse can "make" a Disloyal Spouse become honest and build an trusting, mature, healthy marriage by behaving in a controlling way? That doesn't make sense to me but if you can convince me, I'm willing to listen.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Affaircare said:


> The fact that she gave you user names and passwords to 90% of her places but kept the 10% secret doesn't really change things though.


You keep wanting to reframe the situation to fit your theory. It doesn't fit it.




Affaircare said:


> As I see it, your wife was having an affair. She was caught and out loud, she agreed to stop, but secretly she moved it to a deeper level of deception and continued. Out loud she agreed to work on the marriage, but secretly she did nothing of the kind.
> 
> So I guess what I'm wondering is this: are you suggesting that a Loyal Spouse can "make" a Disloyal Spouse become honest and build an trusting, mature, healthy marriage by behaving in a controlling way? That doesn't make sense to me but if you can convince me, I'm willing to listen.


Again, you reframe the situation by labeling snooping on a liar as controlling behavior.

Or snooping as making a DS honest or in building trust.

Look at it this way.

Can you be secure in your old house when there are termites or dry rot hidden by a wall? The wall is painted a cheery color, has pretty paintings on it.

So how do you check behind the wall without wrecking the facade--unless you have to?

Only if and when you find termites or dry rot do you tear down the wall.

All concerned at the point of discovery know the facade's gotta go.

You can't really build a trusting healthy marriage until the true nature of the marriage is known.

Deceptive people actively prevent this to occur.

I will never have blind trust or wishful trusting ever again. And no, I don't snoop regularly anymore.


----------



## wifeinneedofhelp (Jan 6, 2011)

My husbands very mad at me for snooping...BUT if i hadnt snooped I would still be the dumb wife. Why? Because he was and is having an EA with several women. Hes had some with random women, i think he has one with his best friend where they talk about 2-3 times a day on the phone and constant txt messages. If i hadnt snooped I wouldnt have found this out. 
Yes I its wrong but its better to know that NOT know. at least for me.
I've asked him to let me see his phone, emails and facebook, he refused. If he refuses isnt it because hes obviously hiding something...? So even when he said not to i did check his phone and found my evidence. He tells me i act like a damn detective. Trust me im a hell of a good one. He always lies, and hes not willing to stop being friends with his best friend even though i feel its too close for comfort. What am i to do?


----------



## AFEH (May 18, 2010)

Surely it’s enough for you Affaircare to know that people lie under oath on the Bible? And don’t most of us use our own experience? You came straight when discovered. Not all people do that no matter what they say.

“Snooping is controlling!!!” sounds more like what a DS would say in order to blind side the LS and carry on getting away with the affair.


----------

