# Sarcasm and Cynicism responses



## Headspin (May 13, 2012)

Can I just say I feel the moderation in recent weeks in respect of this has gone imo over the top.

Recently there has been a sharp increase in threads where the cheater has come on and sought advice reaction etc to the point where there has been requests for a seperate forum / sub forum (probably not a bad idea)

95% of threads / posts in the CWI forum are concerning the story and help seeking from a betrayed spouse in one form or other so obviously there will be a strongish feeling against the cheating spouses and their views ethics and morality which most of us have been on the receiving end of and has caused in real life huge destruction to children and families - it IS heavy stuff.

imo there should be some leeway in respect of feeling against them although agreed it should not be just you're a **** or a **** with no qualification. I do feel if there is heavy criticism with qualification or some kind of message then it should be permissible. If it becomes meaningless anal criticism then fine ban it but if there is some message or qualified view then I can't see what's wrong with that personally

Also as in the latest thread http://talkaboutmarriage.com/coping-infidelity/54612-i-cheated-am-love.html the quickest and most direct way to get a point across to somebody submersed in the 'fog' is through some sarcasm and cynical responses.

I am all for trying to understand an help somebody with their respective problems but sometimes for a cheater in the depths of the fog understanding does not cut it, they can also need a heavy dose of reality which is in the legitimate domain of sarcasm cynicism etc

I'd also say the recent 'Collier' thread was a good example of somebody who deserved every bit that got thrown at him and in the end many of us were proved right about him 

Why so heavy handed? It's getting to the point where I feel many of us can't make a legitimate 'heavyish' point for fear of being banned 

Maybe you should consider a Cheater sub forum and ban anything other than sympathetic posts 

I don't know, just a point of view about this.


----------



## Complexity (Dec 31, 2011)

Headspin said:


> Can I just say I feel the moderation in recent weeks in respect of this has gone imo over the top.
> 
> Recently there has been a sharp increase in threads where the cheater has come on and sought advice reaction etc to the point where there has been requests for a seperate forum / sub forum (probably not a bad idea)
> 
> ...


So let me get this straight, you're upset that we're being sarcastic and not giving "legitimate" advice to cheaters. So your solution is to create a sub forum were we're all sympathetic to their "plight", essentially saying the same thing as we did when we were sarcastic......:scratchhead:

Or do you mean there should be a "say something positive or else" policy? I'm not sure that's the purpose of a discussion board....... Cheaters don't need to be coddled, it certainly won't snap them out of the fog (if you even believe in that nonsense), they're not "victims".


----------



## Headspin (May 13, 2012)

Complexity said:


> So let me get this straight, you're upset that we're being sarcastic and not giving "legitimate" advice to cheaters. So your solution is to create a sub forum were we're all sympathetic to their "plight", essentially saying the same thing as we did when we were sarcastic......:scratchhead:


Eh!?

No you're getting it wrong - completely :scratchhead:

I'm a little peeved that sarcasm and cynicism as a legitimate response to a cheater in a cheater thread results often in loads of posts being removed and bannings.

I feel that that kind of response to these kind of people is sometimes a right one to make as being 'understanding' whilst they are deep in the fog does'nt work at all 

Obviously name calling as a meaningless exercise is silly and should be dealt with accordingly.

My sub forum point is that if a cheater thread is allowed only sympathetic responses then maybe a sub forum would be better to keep out any more intense heavier responses


----------



## cledus_snow (Feb 19, 2012)

i'm with ya.

it just doesn't _feel_ the same, anymore. we as posters used to call our own BS- as in bullsh*t -and not have the mods "babysit" us.

i have no problems with the mods on a personal level, but i do agree that they've made some questionable calls. i recently vented this sentiment on another thread, only to be chastised by another poster for "insubordination." if you notice, there are some newer posters who are calling for heads to roll in these cases. makes you wonder where they're coming from.

i'm glad that we're still able to bring such a topic up for discussion, without being reprimanded. at least we can still make our plight known on an open forum in the company of our fellow posters. when that privilege goes by the wayside-- WE'RE IN TROUBLE.


----------



## survivorwife (May 15, 2012)

Headspin said:


> Eh!?
> 
> No you're getting it wrong - completely :scratchhead:
> 
> ...


:iagree:

On the thread where the OP admits to "being in love with the OM" and has only been married a year, the advise given in regards to getting a divorce is the correct advise, no sarcasm intended. One would have to assume that, during what was supposed to be the "honeymoon phase" of the marriage, she cheated. Why bother with the analysis of how that came to happen or trying to save a marriage that the OP willingly destroyed? It was over before it even had a chance.

I suppose that sometimes "sarcasm" is in the eye of the reader. An admitted cheater knows that they are cheating, and are certainly aware that this goes against the very vows they took with their spouse. Are we supposed to sympathize with the cheater? While certain name calling could be avoided, it is what it is, and advise is given (generally) in the tone by which it is sought. It's called "responding in kind" to the OP's inquiry.


----------



## YellowRoses (Jun 2, 2012)

It is very difficult to sugar coat sh*t

To respond to what I consider disgusting behaviour and remain wholly polite is a challenge. 

I don't envy the moderators but I do agree that cheaters on a marriage forum are idiots if they don't expect a rough ride.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Headspin said:


> Can I just say I feel the moderation in recent weeks in respect of this has gone imo over the top.


From your lips to God's ears. Although, I don't know if we're allowed to use the "G" word anymore. Let's just say "the Universe."



Headspin said:


> Maybe you should consider a Cheater sub forum and ban anything other than sympathetic posts


:iagree: It's kind of sad when a pro-marriage board deteriorates to the point that we can't portray fidelity as moral and infidelity as immoral. Maybe the Cheaters sub forum can just refer all posters to AM.com.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

So let me get this straight ...

You are bothered because sarcastic and cynical posts that aren't actually intended to support, assist, or simply highlight the script, the fog, magical thinking, denial, or other wayward behavior ...
but instead are meant as an in-joke, or to mock the OP are being removed?

Care to guess which forum on the boards gets moderated the most and why?

Far too many people believe that a wayward coming here and opening up about the mess their choices have made, means that it's open season to project the pain of their own circumstances and take a shot at a 'cheater'.

For perspective, some of the posters in that thread had more posts in it than the OP.

That isn't someone that wants to contribute or help. That is someone that wants to be heard.

This IS a pro-marriage forum.

Infidelity is an all too tragic fact. 

And the reality is that both parties, the betrayed and the betrayors should have the opportunity to post their circumstances or concerns here without the fear of being attacked, mocked or bullied.

What possible incentive is there for a wayward to continue posting and learning about the fallout their choices have caused, if every time they do so, there is a virtual lynch mob waiting for them?

For those who insist that tough love and a smack upside the head is what is required ... I agree. But if you believe that attacking, shaming, name calling and mockery are part of that equation, well then I'm happy to disappoint.

Edited to add:
My response isn't intended or meant to be directed solely at the OP, Headspin. It's for all y'all.


----------



## Sara8 (May 2, 2012)

> Far too many people believe that a wayward coming here and opening up about the mess their choices have made, means that it's open season to project the pain of their own circumstances and take a shot at a 'cheater'.


Hi Deejo:

Being a moderator is a tough job, so I am not trying to bash you or second guess your decisions. 

I do want to gently point out that when a BS shares their story they are not necessarily projecting. 

They are often sharing their story to show the cheater the pain their actions will cause their faithful spouse and as a way to wake the cheater up to reality. 




> For perspective, some of the posters in that thread had more posts in it than the OP.


Why would that be an issue for anyone. So someone is a prolific poster and wants to share their thoughts as a way to show the cheater the ramifications of their actions 

Maybe they feel that the cheater is on the edge and redeemable and if they can wake him up they can save his her marriage. To that end they post a lot of posts on that thread. Was that against the rules?

I will probably be on the moderators hit list for posting this post. 

But, I do agree that maybe a subforum for cheaters to get advice where a mandate that responses must be gentle would be a good idea. 

This way both cheaters and Betrayed spouses can abide by the rule or avoid that board if they feel they can't.

What do you think?


----------



## lordmayhem (Feb 7, 2011)

I'm just as guilty as anyone when it comes to sarcasm....BUT nowadays if I see a thread is just going to trigger me and cause me to post something that I'll regret, then I just leave the thread or I just ignore it entirely. 

As for having a cheater sub forum where they can be coddled and get advice like at Surviving Infidelity and Loveshack? This I will have to disagree with, seeing as how it won't actually prevent people from getting banned. I know in SI, the poster has the option of posting a stop sign, meaning no BSs are allowed to respond in the thread. All this does is piss people off. The temptation is too great and many newly betrayed will not be able to resist not going into that forum. It could set back the healing of some people to have our very own doc cool type forum in TAM. 

Just take the sudden proliferation of wayward threads as an example. Recently, there's been new members who are allegedly in the middle of their affairs posting their own threads. Then you have the influx of angry BSs posting in the thread, resulting in even long time experienced posters getting banned. Its almost as if these new threads are flame bait to get people banned...who knows. I just know I'm not falling for that trap.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

A sub-forum has been discussed. I'm comfortable sharing my perspective.

It looks good on paper.
It would make moderating a hell of a lot easier.
We don't have a mod sitting in CWI reviewing threads 24/7.
It is obviously one of the most emotional sub-forums on the board. 

However, my opinion is that a wayward subforum would be the equivalent of an online leper colony.
How does one know that is where they should be posting? More than likely because someone else, likely in an unkind fashion will tell them that's where they belong.

It's about ostracizing rather than inclusion. It would be about singling out a specific group of people that are part of the infidelity equation.

Frankly I'd rather be able to have these kinds of discussions and come to consensus on how the community chooses to address the issue without everyone feeling like they get burned or ignored.


----------



## Regret214 (Apr 22, 2012)

Don't forget, these responses aren't only to WS's. I've seen some BS's get raked over the coals as well recently. It seems that a lot of people who haven't fully healed appear to take out their frustrations and anger on anyone who doesn't agree or "listen" to their advice.

I'm with Lordmayhem and others though. I don't think having a sub section would do anything except create more moderating issues, not to mention separating BS's and WS's into respective camps and continuing a bad cycle of taunts and jabs.


----------



## Emerald (Aug 2, 2012)

I think a sub forum is a bad idea. Cheaters who come here looking for advice will benefit from all different kinds of responses. Mature people will take what they need & ignore the rest. Some of us here (myself included) are already taking a gentle approach w/o bashing.

I do not sympathize with cheaters; I do however, show empathy towards anyone who is hurting including cheaters & their families.


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

you need sarcasm detecting software

(but this post wouldn't get approved)


----------



## lordmayhem (Feb 7, 2011)

If anything, having a sub forum will create more work, just take a look at the sub forum in SI and LS. The mods there are constantly having to intervene in the threads for the simple fact that angry BSs will not be able to resist the temptation to look at the threads and post in them. 

Many BSs are hurt and angry by the actions/infidelity of their WS. This is natural. So many times when they see the thread of an unremorseful or even remorseful WS, they project that anger is projected on to the thread starter. Again, I'll admit having done this as well. Sometimes, I'll peek in on a WS and see all the anger projection going on. 

But I'm learning to just walk away from a thread if I know it's going to get me upset. There are plenty of other threads out there that need attention or people asking for help.


----------



## Chris Taylor (Jul 22, 2010)

Deejo said:


> So let me get this straight ...
> 
> You are bothered because sarcastic and cynical posts that aren't actually intended to support, assist, or simply highlight the script, the fog, magical thinking, denial, or other wayward behavior ...
> but instead are meant as an in-joke, or to mock the OP are being removed?
> ...


With all due respect, I don't think this is necessarily a "pro marriage" forum. 

The heading says it's "The Marriage Advice and Relationship Help Forum", not the get married/stay married forum. In fact, there are tons of postings telling people to separate and get divorced... how "pro marriage" is that???

But to the point of sarcasm and cynical responses, I think we would be shirking out "duty" as forum members to let someone try to throw a fastball past us... posters who are looking for a reason to cheat or physically/mentally/financially abuse their spouse. 

And if we are sarcastic or cynical, that's part of the chances one takes when posting on a public forum. No, we don't have to mean and insulting and to be honest, I rarely see that here.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

I think sarcasm and cynicism is unavoidable these days.I also think it puts people on edge and makes them fearful to share the full details of the issues they are trying to get advice about.No one wants to be on the receiving end of everyone's bitterness about their own situation even if they deserve it based on their actions.

I do not like the idea of handling cheaters with kindness and pats on the back.I think they need to be handled in a direct and honest way but without the name calling and nasty undertones.
It's easy to say we should all be able to respond without sarcasm and nastiness but doing it is really freaking hard especially when the poster is so thick and clueless about how wrong they are! 

The whole thing is a lesson in patience and at the end of the day,if we try really hard we will all learn how to be better communicators by practicing here

I also think when people start seeing their responses become more and more jaded it might be time to take a step back from CWI section.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

I also don't think a sub forum is the way to go.


----------



## Sara8 (May 2, 2012)

There seem to be a lot of accusations all the time about BS's projecting. 

Projection is a defense mechanism that can only be diagnosed by a professional and an online diagnosis is not considered standard practice. 

Telling a Cheating spouse that they are going down the wrong path because as a spouse who was cheated on such a response is enraging is not necessarily a projection. 

It is a way to share your emotional response to a given situation hoping to prevent the Cheating spouse from harming their BS further with an unthough out action. 

Cheaters follow scripts, according to the infidelity literature, and the BS's triggers also follow a script. Sharing those triggers can only help a cheating spouse to interact better with their BS when trying to reconcile.

A separate board with a warning is not the same as a board where BS's can not post at all.


----------



## mahike (Aug 16, 2011)

OK so maybe there is a tendency to react quickly and harshly to a WS that is trying to blame shift but we all acknowledge that they need to be knocked out of the fog. Recently we had Softballmom she is trying to deal with her mistake directly with her husband who seems to want to rug sweep. Most of the posts were firm but at the same time supportive of her seeming to do the right thing.

At the same time we have had BS take the I am an ostrich approach to dealing with a WS and was given verbal spankings for that as well.

What does anyone expect this forum deals with infidelity that is not a pretty topic and had really no upside. If someone does R great but it is all about pain. No one comes out of this stuff clean.
I am glad this site was here, it helped me deal with the anger and pain. I was given some great advice. Some of it I did not take and guess what it caused me more problems by not dealing with things correctly.
Everyone should just put on their big boy and girl pants. This stuff hurts


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

lordmayhem said:


> If anything, having a sub forum will create more work, just take a look at the sub forum in SI and LS. The mods there are constantly having to intervene in the threads for the simple fact that angry BSs will not be able to resist the temptation to look at the threads and post in them.
> 
> Many BSs are hurt and angry by the actions/infidelity of their WS. This is natural. So many times when they see the thread of an unremorseful or even remorseful WS, they project that anger is projected on to the thread starter. Again, I'll admit having done this as well. Sometimes, I'll peek in on a WS and see all the anger projection going on.
> 
> But I'm learning to just walk away from a thread if I know it's going to get me upset. There are plenty of other threads out there that need attention or people asking for help.


I completely agree. It would be the equivalent of a bug-light zapper ... 

I am a betrayed spouse. Wouldn't wish those feelings on anyone ... ever. But ... I also don't believe that all spouses that make the poor choice of cheating are evil, bad, heartless manipulators. My ex isn't a bad person. I don't like the choice she made, and you know what? She doesn't like the choice she made either. But it doesn't serve anyone trying to figure it out or heal by 'beating' sense into them, or never getting to the point where the betrayed can separate themselves from, forgive the behavior of a remorseful betrayor, and try to move on. Cheating in and of itself is seldom the true and only reason behind the utter collapse of a marriage. Certainly wasn't in my case.

And I sincerely wish that many others could adopt the attitude you expressed in your last few sentences.


----------



## Unsure in Seattle (Sep 6, 2011)

Some on here try to white knight WSs, which I find a little odd, especially since they will be amongst the voices telling BSs to go dark, leave, etc. Do WS have valuable things to contribute? Sure, some of them, but I honestly think that some of the folks that come on here looking for us to justify their affair are trolling, period.

I asked for a sub forum a little bit because of the above, but mostly because I was sick of BSs being attacked in these WS threads for being controlling, projecting etc. Not to mention the couple of WSs on here, yelling at us for saying that they weren't done with their affairs.... and it turned out that they weren't done with their affairs. Oops!

I dunno. When I asked for it, (the sub forum) I acknowledged that it probably wouldn't be as easy as it sounds on paper. Is it the correct solution? Beats me. I'll happily tell you tho', that my main interest here, besides the discussion of relationship issues, is to help BSs. Because I was one. As were most of us. That, to me, is what this particular forum should be... not pro (or anti) marriage/relationship, but rather pro BS. A place to get help and support.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Sara8 said:


> There seem to be a lot of accusations all the time about BS's projecting.


"Divorce your husband/wife. They deserve better, certainly better than you."

I'm paraphrasing ... but I see this post, or one just like it with more colorful language thrown in, ALL the time.

You know what I'd rather see, and believe would have greater impact on a wayward?

"I remember my wife looking at me and saying, 'it's not what you think.' I remember feeling like i wanted to throw up, because I knew it was exactly what I thought ... and she didn't know what I already did. She was counting on the fact that I loved and trusted her, that I would believe her when she looked me straight in the eye and swore to me that she wasn't sleeping with someone else. That is what betrayal is all about. It is a grotesque manipulation of the trust and faith that your partner places in you. And even knowing what I knew, I still wanted to believe her. We both knew the truth, and despite pleading for it, she was incapable of providing it, because the truth would undo everything."

That one's personal. It's sharing what happened to you. I understand the notion of wanting someone to see the light ... but we can't make that happen by holding them down, prying their eyes open and turning on a set of high beams.

There are many wayward spouses on this board who are now excellent contributors. They don't get pilloried because they didn't come here in the MIDST of their affair, it's all in the rearview mirror for them. And they got through it. And they aren't bad people. On the contrary, they are extraordinary people. They either reconciled or recognized that their marriage was broken and moved on.

No one feels compelled to insult or harass them ... and rightly so, I would like that those who do come here in the midst of trying to sort through their own personal tragedies are also not insulted or harassed.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Chris Taylor said:


> With all due respect, I don't think this is necessarily a "pro marriage" forum.
> 
> The heading says it's "The Marriage Advice and Relationship Help Forum", not the get married/stay married forum. In fact, there are tons of postings telling people to separate and get divorced... how "pro marriage" is that???


Saying that TAM is pro-marriage was easier than saying that TAM supports the notion of happy and healthy marriages and providing a setting for individuals that are wrestling with recovering a struggling marriage, or dissolving an unhealthy one.

You are correct about the heading. Also why it is not more specifically called 'Talk About Divorce' or 'Talk About Infidelity'.

Please note that the above was also posted using humorous sarcasm.

I don't mind sarcasm, but it can be difficult to determine in an online setting at times.

And if I do mind ... I ban you.

Also sarcasm.


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

Deejo said:


> And if I do mind ... I ban you.
> 
> Also sarcasm.



deejo's getting crankier than amp

and that was sarcasm too, because nobody is crankier than amp


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

I think the moderation is appropriate. The "piling on" goes way over the top sometimes.


----------



## Sara8 (May 2, 2012)

Deejo said:


> "Divorce your husband/wife. They deserve better, certainly better than you."
> 
> I'm paraphrasing ... but I see this post, or one just like it with more colorful language thrown in, ALL the time.
> 
> ...


Hi Deejo:

I am sorry for your pain. I can see you are still in pain and you make a good point about why your wife may have lied to you. 

Regarding the quote at the top of your post. I don't recall making a statement with "you" in it. 

I try to avoid You statements and focus on I statements. 

I may have said I deserved better and that's why STBEH is STBEH.

Anyway, I am sorry you are a member of the BS club. It isn't a club that one seeks to join.


----------



## Complexity (Dec 31, 2011)

Headspin said:


> Eh!?
> 
> No you're getting it wrong - completely :scratchhead:
> 
> ...


Ah, I must've misread you completely. I totally agree btw.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Sara8 said:


> Hi Deejo:
> 
> Regarding the quote at the top of your post. I don't recall making a statement with "you" in it.
> 
> ...


This is one of the downsides to online communication. I in no way meant that statement was attributable to you Sara, just a very common example that I see ... as fundamentally unproductive. Apologies if you thought that.

I am 4 years out from DDay. Neither myself nor my ex are the people we were or carrying the same feelings we did at that time.

I don't hate her. Don't avoid her, don't wish her ill. Quite the contrary.

I do not deny that there are some utterly horrific circumstances that many find themselves in with regard to a failing marriage.

But I do not believe that all waywards should be painted with the same brush. And particularly those that share the very difficult details of their infidelity should not be subject to harassment as a result.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

I would like to clarify something.

There has been no sharp up-tick in waywards coming here to flaunt their affairs in the faces of betrayed spouses.

What has changed is how the moderators now handle posting to wayward threads. There was a clearly recognized consensus amongst the mods, and many many PM's from people LEAVING the site because they felt there was a mob mentality in dealing harshly with waywards as well as betrayed's that weren't 'getting it'.

People neither felt supported nor safe.

And if that bothers some folks because they don't like MY or other mods behavior? 

We'll deal with that too.

Now c'mere and lets hug it out.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Deejo said:


> "Divorce your husband/wife. They deserve better, certainly better than you."
> 
> I'm paraphrasing ... but I see this post, or one just like it with more colorful language thrown in, ALL the time.


I see it often as well. However, there are two types of WS threads. The first type of thread is the remorseful WS who is looking for advice on repairing the marriage. The sarcasm and cynicism you dislike is rare on those threads.

The second type of WS thread is where the WS is unremorseful and is looking for advice on how to communicate with his BS that he deserves to be haaapy, reassurance that the consequences of his affair will be minimal, and/or how best to have one's cake and eat it too. Sarcasm and cynicism is plentiful on those threads.

I understand the argument that we should be inclusive of remorseful waywards in order to help them and for them to help us. I don't understand the argument that we should be inclusive of unremorseful waywards. We frequently give advice that counseling should be avoided until an affair is over. Before then, it's just wasted time. I don't know why some think that online forums follow different rules.


----------



## hookares (Dec 7, 2011)

I guess what may work best is for those of us who were made into fools for not being aware of our betrayal for decades to avoid posting on the wayward spouse's threads. In that way, they will be able to read that which they were hoping to hear.


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

umm..telling an unremorseful wayward spouse what they are doing is damaging, destructive, wrong, morally bankrupt, that they are living in a fanatasy world and such is not against the rules nor is it moderated as far as I have seen.

You guys have no sense of nuance. The browbeating, name calling and nastiness is what they are talking about.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

PHTlump said:


> I see it often as well. However, there are two types of WS threads. The first type of thread is the remorseful WS who is looking for advice on repairing the marriage. The sarcasm and cynicism you dislike is rare on those threads.
> 
> The second type of WS thread is where the WS is unremorseful and is looking for advice on how to communicate with his BS that he deserves to be haaapy, reassurance that the consequences of his affair will be minimal, and/or how best to have one's cake and eat it too. Sarcasm and cynicism is plentiful on those threads.
> 
> I understand the argument that we should be inclusive of remorseful waywards in order to help them and for them to help us. I don't understand the argument that we should be inclusive of unremorseful waywards. We frequently give advice that counseling should be avoided until an affair is over. Before then, it's just wasted time. I don't know why some think that online forums follow different rules.


All I would ask is that you (meaning anyone) be aware of what your goal with the post is.

Is it to run off the OP?

Is it for the OP's benefit, or your own because you don't like or approve of their behavior?

I'm not here to judge you, prove that I'm smarter or more justified in my thoughts and feelings.

I'm here to assure that this remains a safe, positive, and productive environment for everyone by applying the rules.

I will apply the rules with swift, remorseless and draconian efficiency until harmony is achieved whether you like it or not.


Difficult for me to be harsh on those who use sarcasm.


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

example (the way I interpret it):

acceptable:
"PosterX, I don't think you realize how much damage you are doing to your spouse, your selfish actions of cheating have led you down a path that is destructive"

unacceptable:
"PosterX, start by not spreading your legs at every opportunity"


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

Say it constructively or don't say it at all is probably the way to go.


----------



## Unsure in Seattle (Sep 6, 2011)

Whereas I would submit that suggesting that the BS is at fault in a certain WSs story recently in an attempt to white knight is just as bad as the name calling or whatever. More damaging, certainly. There're more problems here than just dogpiling on or being nasty. Is being nasty bad? Yeah, of course, but when someone comes on and wants us to justify their affair, and tells us that we're all crazy for not doing so, I think that you're going to reap what you sow.

Again, I'm not sure what the solution is. Yes, we should all be as civil as possible.


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> Whereas I would submit that suggesting that the BS is at fault in a certain WSs story recently in an attempt to white knight is just as bad as the name calling or whatever. More damaging, certainly.


there's going to be posters who don't see things your way, I get frustrated with them as well, like the people against exposure and advise to never tell. There's also the crowd who think that divorce is the ONLY option in infidelity that I disagree with as well. But as damaging as I see their opinion being, it is just that- an opinion. So I express mine and try my best to explain why my opinion is preferable and use my experience as an example.


----------



## Unsure in Seattle (Sep 6, 2011)

Sure, absolutely. I'm just saying that there are more problems than people being mean to WSs.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

There was a wayward poster here recently who got LOTS of folks fired up ... and banned.

Did I like what the poster had to say? No I did not. So I didn't post.

I knew it was a matter of time before the poster would cross the line ... and they did. I swept in to deliver sweet and righteous justice with the mighty ban-hammer ... and another mod beat me to it.

We aren't looking to coddle anyone.
We try to apply and follow the rules. Most with far more applomb and grace than myself.

But I haven't gone rogue ... yet.


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> Sure, absolutely. I'm just saying that there are more problems than people being mean to WSs.


it's a slippery slope to quantify what is deemed bad advice, it's not like that to extract poor discourse and manner


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

Deejo said:


> applomb.


only one P in aplomb, just sayin'


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Almostrecovered said:


> only one P in aplomb, just sayin'


Banned.


----------



## Almostrecovered (Jul 14, 2011)

sorry, wearin' mah banproof vest


----------



## Halien (Feb 20, 2011)

I think that one thing that can become misunderstood in a discussion like this is that the moderators are not trying to script replies so that they align with some particular agenda. We try to guard the expectation of mutual respect of members, as people, who can still have sharp disagreement about the actions of others. By saying that sarcasm isn't acceptable in a particular case, it is not saying that the member cannot vehemently disagree with the *actions* of the wayward spouse who is posting. Pronouncing some sort of judgement on the member as a person, an insulting label, however, goes beyond disagreeing with the actions of a person, and will reviewed by the moderators.

I'll give an example of how I, as a moderator, would view a thread. In a few cases involving wayward spouses, I couldn't agree more with a member who replies, "Marriage is supposed to be about committment, trust and compassion for each other. You don't even sound sorry at all. Not one thing in your post says you even care. Your husband is hurting like his best friend died, and you are only concerned about yourself." 

This is a member's opinion, and conforms to the site rules of respect for each other as people. The disagreement is with the *actions* of the wayward spouse, and even their intent. Yet it is still avoids any disrespect to them as a person. The question of what kind of person would do what they did is left up to them.

Some personal attacks are thinly veiled jabs of contempt that also serve to demean a person, instead of trying to just trying to shake some sense into them about their particular actions. Most people know exactly what is really being said about the character of a woman if they tell her to stop spreading her legs for other men. In this case, telling her that her infidelity is a betrayal speaks to her actions instead.

In short, speak to the actions of the person, and even your beliefs about what marriage should mean. We want the site to be a place where people feel that they will not be attacked as a person, but challenged freely within respectable boundaries, expressing our true feelings about the difficult challenges of marriage. But if the poster attaches a scarlett letter to the member, demoting them to a place of scorn as a person, it goes too far. Its a pretty fair assumption that if the poster says "You are ....", it will get addressed. Keep it at "What you are doing ...." and you are in much safer territory.


----------



## lordmayhem (Feb 7, 2011)

After my initial salvo, I saw where that thread was heading so I reached back....and pulled my ejection handle and bailed.


----------



## Affaircare (Jan 11, 2010)

oaksthorne said:


> I will say what I have to say, if I am banned than I will go elsewhere to say it. I agree that some of the tisk tisk comments by certain moderators are inappropriate for all the reasons you mentioned.
> *Nice does not work with a cheater,
> they interpret it as approval,
> which is why they are here in the first place.
> ...


Oak your post precisely illustrates one of my points. Selecting the words you did, the way you did, every cheater is painted with the same brush. I personally highlighted several lines: 
*Nice does not work with a cheater*--I am a former cheater, and so are EI and Regret. I'm not sure if any others have had the courage to stay, and I guarantee you that nice works better with me than mean. I do understand the concept of the 2x4 and have no problems issuing the "hollywood slap" to try to wake someone up, but not every time. A cheater is a human being just like a loyal person. Thus since I am a cheater and nice does work for me--unfortunately it looks like this statement just isn't true. Could that possibly mean that painting cheaters as entirely evil and deserving of harshness is also untrue? Hmmm?
*they interpret it as approval*--I'm sure there are some who interpret it that way, but for myself, if I express the truth to you and you attack me, the way I interpret it is "DO NOT tell him the truth again!" If a person talks to you and tells you what they truly think and feel, even if it is impossibly messed up and not near the truth, it seems to me that it would be more profitable to encourage them that it is safe to speak the truth and have a dialogue and then go with them step-by-step and show where their thinking went off-track. Did you see the thread by AnnieAsh? She was able to hear where her thinking was unrealistic because she wasn't utterly attacked as a human being and told she was just seeking approval for her affair!
*which is why they are here in the first place*--again I beg to differ! I know there are some people in the universe who process thoughts and things better by discussing it out loud with someone rather than an entirely internal thought process. So what happens when someone is an "out loud" processor and they come here to try to process where their not thinking clearly or get some folks behind them to end it (cuz all the people at work or all the bad influences in class are behind them saying to have the affair)...and instead they are brow beaten and run off? Gee at that point I would think that encourages affair-thinking by proving that telling the truth = pain and telling my spouse = being called names! I think the vast majority of cheaters who come here and post already know that TAM is a pro-marriage site ... well anti-affair let's say ... and are hoping someone will firmly but with some respect say "Well I hear what you're saying but I believe you went off track here and here and here. Further, I think you may not have considered X, Y, and Z. Now you KNOW this is wrong--go do the right thing!" 
*They come here seeking validation*-- see above  
*they want absolution; if we give them what they can misconstrue as validation we have failed them*--Again politely I disagree. May I give you an example? If a person such as myself, a cheater, were to come here onto TAM and say: "Nice does not work with a loyal spouse, they interpret our real concerns as a complaint they can blameshift onto us, which is why they are here in the first place-to blame someone else. They just come here seeking endorsement that their spouse is evil and they are fine, they want acceptance for hurting and ignoring us; and if we actually listen to their side and point out their errors we have failed them" my guess would be that there would practically be a virtual/cyber FIST FIGHT! That's because all betrayed spouses are not the same. Some are indeed abusive. Some do indeed have mental health issues. Some do avoid reality and deny what's going on. But not ALL. I can't even say that you were abusive to your disloyal spouse because I don't even know you! And I don't know your disloyal's side of the story either. Having been here as long as I have, I know that either spouse (loyal or disloyal) will come on here and say something like: "S/He stayed up screaming at me for 5 hours until 3am and I had to work in the morning! How horrible of them!" (and yeah...that is not great behavior) and yet that same person "forgets" to mention that their spouse screamed at them for 5 hours because they just found out about the affair! Ooops, now what was previously viewed as an abuser is suddenly understandable! 

Sooooo...in conclusion here's my message. When a person comes here--loyal spouse who just found out, loyal spouse who's trying to cope, disloyal spouse who is at the beginning of an emotional affair, disloyal spouse who is firmly entrenched in a physical affair--I suggest that each one be treated like "okay I'm here to help you and you may not like what I have to say but I will give you the respect of telling you the truth." Listening, not lumping everyone into the same category, and being respectful whilst not pulling punches is a far cry from personal attacks, generalizations, assuming intentions, and lashing out in anger! 

It is my observation that when a betrayed spouse reads a post from a disloyal spouse, that it often/usually triggers and hurts the betrayed spouse and thus re-injures them. But that in no way means that what the disloyal spouse can now be jumped on! Sadly, that's what I see happening--and that's why I thought a sub-forum might be wise. I don't think it would be wise to say someone "can or can not" write in the sub-forum, but here's my thought: If you're easily triggered by disloyal fog talk, don't read there. If you can't respectfully help a disloyal work through their fog, then it's too painful for you and you don't have to go there. But if you CAN help disloyals, if you can see through their foggy thinking and talking, and if you can tell hear their side and stay respectful, then come on over and help! 

I think part of the reason that AnnieAsh's thread was somewhat positive is because she WASN'T utterly trashed. Did she hear some reality? Were some posts bluntly honest? YES! But she wasn't told that SHE was a piece of doodoo or worse than the dirt on a worm...and she was strongly encouraged to do the right thing. Now we have no idea if she is following through, but in the end we aren't living with people on this forum and have no idea anyway, so we do what we can.


----------



## Emerald (Aug 2, 2012)

I haven't been here long, but have never read where a TAM member told a cheater that it is okay to cheat.

But I have seen people call women cheaters, whor*s, slu*s, leg-spreaders & other vulgar names.

What I don't see is the same vulgar names directed at men who cheat.........hmmmm

But hopefully this thread is a warning & reminder not to name-call & bash any poster.


----------



## Chris Taylor (Jul 22, 2010)

Deejo said:


> Saying that TAM is pro-marriage was easier than saying that TAM supports the notion of happy and healthy marriages and providing a setting for individuals that are wrestling with recovering a struggling marriage, or dissolving an unhealthy one.
> 
> You are correct about the heading. Also why it is not more specifically called 'Talk About Divorce' or 'Talk About Infidelity'.
> 
> ...


Point taken, without sarcasm


----------



## Harken Banks (Jun 12, 2012)

Sometimes there is not a bright line between condemnation of cheating behavior and the cheater. I think it should also be noted that the community also comes down hard, appropriately and ultimately in most cases constructively, on betrayed spouses in denial.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

oaksthorne said:


> All noted and accepted without issue, but understand that posters naturally have some concerns about a moderator who uses such words and phrases as "draconian, "righteous" and" hammer of justice" in referance to his handling of their right to post. This moderator has generated controversy by being heavy handed and that is the very thing he is objecting to from others .People don't come here to be disrespected either by posters or by moderators. He should practice what he is attempting to preach. There are ways of reminding posters about the rules without chest thumping. I realize that I am expressing this observation at the risk of being banned, but it is a valid obseration none the less.


I'm not going to ban you. Hell, I'm not even mildly annoyed.

Apparently I have sufficiently demonstrated my point ... nobody enjoys being mocked or made light of. Also a valid observation that I made at the outset prior to becoming controversial.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

In real life I swear far too much and am known for my sarcastic wit. 

I try to moderate that side of me as much as possible on TAM. 

The problem can be when a WS in the fog says something that triggers an especially hurtful memory of their own WS in another TAM user. 

The temptation to say what you could not have said at the time but perhaps never thought of, to someone else's WS on TAM must be overwhelming...


----------



## warlock07 (Oct 28, 2011)

:angel3:



:FIREdevil:


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

MattMatt said:


> In real life I swear far too much and am known for my sarcastic wit.
> 
> I try to moderate that side of me as much as possible on TAM.
> 
> ...


I also swear too much and am very sarcastic BUT, I kinda like this place. Sometimes, not so much. Therefore I try to censor myself.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

pidge70 said:


> I also swear too much and am very sarcastic BUT, I kinda like this place. Sometimes, not so much. Therefore I try to censor myself.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Pidge, you reminded me of something. When I, as a moderator, read one of my own posts on a board... and deleted it as I realised it was against board rules!:rofl:


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

ScarletBegonias said:


> Say it constructively or don't say it at all is probably the way to go.


Sometimes simple and succinct gets lost in the shuffle and tussle.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

My wife lives with tremendous guilt as a result of her affair, and it causes her a lot of pain. I honestly think she is probably just as hurt as I am by what happened. 

I think that some time on this board would help her to think through what she did and come to terms with it, as I find what I learn is helping me. 

But I just couldn't bring her here because of the treatment that is handed to wayward spouses. I'm not going to subject her to it.

I do think some posters are unconstructive in their aggression. I don't think it is our job to wander around shocking people out of the fog, and attempts to do so will just drive some posters away when they really need what this board could offer.


----------



## Badblood (Oct 27, 2011)

Headspin, perhaps the issue is that you are on the wrong website. There is a site called, "Surviving Infidelity", that is very cheater-friendly. Perhaps that is the place for you?


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

Badblood, OP is NOT cheater friendly. It would appear that he believes in a heavy-handed, sarcastic approach.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Headspin (May 13, 2012)

Deejo said:


> So let me get this straight ...
> 
> You are bothered because sarcastic and cynical posts that aren't actually intended to support, assist, or simply highlight the script, the fog, magical thinking, denial, or other wayward behavior ...
> but instead are meant as an in-joke, or to mock the OP are being removed?


Not at all. I am bothered that sarcasm cynicism that can highlight a script and can quickly get to the point of something that 'understanding' and sympathy does not do is simply wiped away with the banning stick because of the belief that all sarcasm cynicism must be bad because its based on complete humiliation or forms thereof.

There are degrees of that but frankly sarcasm cynicism can quickly get to the point and have an impact that all the mollycoddling in the world can not get close to.

Lets not forget these cheaters are in the fog! - meaning what? 

Meaning they see and accept only what they want to hear almost without exception. There's been a couple of exceptions recently and they from me were treated with respect to the point where I personally defended them rigidly when they were getting a lot of abuse.

When you were betrayed did you spend all your time trudging through the fog treacle with 'understanding' or did you eventually at some point think "well fk that that never works" cos you can't see a thing so you were then a bit more undiplomatic in how you dealt with your wife ? 

That's where 90% of us have been. I'd say it's fairly accurate that most of us realize (with the help of this place) that one of the last ways of dealing with cheating spouses is to be completely understanding about their 'plight' 

I know every case is different and every person deals with criticism differently but that fact should at least guide mods to look at every thread differently imo

My point is that "oh here come the BS sarcasm and cynicism it's all bad' lets get rid of the posts, threads, ban them is heavy handed

There have been threads where that has happened and the result in the end was that a few of us sarcasm cynicism were proved right about it about the particular traits personality of somebody who was brazenly getting off on exhibiting their zero morals about cheating.

Look, spitting our names is not good its childish and should be dealt with accordingly and direct attempts to inflict serious damage upon somebody is not on either but to cut out any form of gentle spite to make a point is also not good too.

Look at this (some from this thread)

You've committed an infidelity
You've committed adultery
You've had sex outside your marriage 
you've hurt the people around you who love you the most
You're a lying deceiving ***
You're spreading your legs for anyone outside your marriage
You're a lying deceiving pain inflicting *****

Now I'd say they amount to more or less the same thing 
Obviously how you put it sends out degrees of signals.

You want to make a point to a fog immersed cheating WS about what they have done do you choose number one?

For me not in a million years that would mean nothing to them
You want to them to have some idea of the pain they have caused then which one do you use? Cos I think any of the first four are a complete waste of words on a fog based cheating spouse

A dose of one of the last three comments _but maybe laced with some tempered_ sarcasm cynicism would imo get to them a lot better. After all what are we trying to say to them.
"Yes what a terrible situation you find yourself in .....poor you."

I understand some of them are here for help and I think many of us are open to that but that sometimes involves a dose of hard core reality that only sarcasm cynicism can hit home with not complete sympathy and understanding

just my 2pence worth


----------



## Headspin (May 13, 2012)

pidge70 said:


> Badblood, OP is NOT cheater friendly. It would appear that he believes in a heavy-handed, sarcastic approach.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


There is an element of truth there but that is what this place has taught me and thank God it has 

From what I've seen on here in the last 5 months I have been here the cheating spouse has been shown to be a particular type of 'animal' if you like , predatory, opportunistic and once in the fog, with a hide that a rhino would be proud of. A dangerous being with capability to destroy not one two three four lives but dozens without so much as a blink of the eye. A very unpleasant proposition indeed

As I see it although they are not _all_ exactly the same - a few exceptions but they are to be treated with caution and until they can show otherwise their story and belief in their story has to viewed with no little skepticism so although understanding and sympathy has its rightful place I would add there is also a place for the harder maybe more cutting truth telling as well


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

I find your description to be very ... unfortunate.

I'm sure that most recovering waywards wouldn't appreciate being referred to as animals.

I have stated, there is no core issue with sarcasm or cynicism. 

Nor have I insisted that waywards must be treated with kid gloves, kindness and understanding.

What I am saying is that waywards trying to resolve their own personal issues have the same rights to express themselves here that you, or anyone else does ... under the exact same set of rules.

Should you choose to respond to a wayward spouse, or any post for that matter, sarcastically or otherwise; with derision, disrespect, hostility, or vulgarity;

the rules will be applied, and your post is subject to removal and further action may be taken depending upon the nature of your post.

This isn't about telling people what they want to hear. It's about adhering to guidelines intended to prevent this forum from degenerating into a free for all.


----------



## Headspin (May 13, 2012)

Deejo said:


> I find your description to be very ... unfortunate.
> 
> I'm sure that most recovering waywards wouldn't appreciate being referred to as animals.
> 
> ...


Oh c'mon "animals" it's an analogy and an obvious one - it's a type of person and you know that's what I meant. 

I'll leave it there


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Headspin said:


> I'll leave it there


That would be best.


----------



## Torrivien (Aug 26, 2012)

I slipped to the sarcasm and the cynicism and regret it.
In all honesty, I did it because I was hurt and I projected my own image of my wayward spouse to the poster. I regret it now.

I'm not going to assume your dishonesty, but if you're using sarcasm and cynicism to make you feel better, or try to make feel the cheater worse because you couldn't make your own wayward spouse feel guilty enough, and you don't admit it then you slipped to the lever of the one who hurt you, big time !
What killed me about my wayward spouse is the infliction of pain, how could I live with myself if I did it in a premeditated way ? Regardless of what a person does, making them feel guilty to raise ourselves in our own eyes is pretty pathetic in my opinion and comes from a passive agressive root. It also shows the same kind of selfishness that we disdain in our wayward spouses.
Somene needs our help and we only put our need before theirs. Does this ring a bell ? 

It's not our job to be hurt of the cheater's actions, it's the role of their partners. And I could've understood the hurt if it was as a support for the poster's betrayed spouse but come on:
- Telling the poster mean and hurtfull things on several posts consecutively ?
- Assuming dishonesty with no proof in the original post ?
- Whole unecessary paragraphs that threatenly look like venting ?

Is this what we've been reduced to ? Feeling bitter and loathe ourself while insulting stragers with no ground whatsoever ?
I refuse to let my monster of a wife define who I'll be. I'm hurt, but my pain is more pure than for me to run around throwing it into the face of each and everyone.
Regardless of how you've been cheated on, it only concerns you and your wayward. It has nothing to do with someone that you've never met before.
YOU'VE NEVER MET THAT SOMEONE BEFORE.

There's a huge difference between tough love and simple revenge name calling and pain inducing.

_You effed up big time. If you really are honest about wanting to get back to your spouse, saying sorry isn't enough. You need actions. Don't do it again or else you're not worthy of your partner and this second chance. ==> _This is tough love.

_You got what you deserve. You went behind your husband/wife 's back and you now want a pat on the hand ? Now way. ==>_ This is pain projecting and unhealthy behavior.

_You have to be sure that you're not seeking for a safe harbor. What you did was vile, and you owe it to your partner to find the true reason you want to come back. ==> _This is tough love.

_Yeah, I'm sure you regret it. ==>_ This is pain projecting and unhealthy behavior.

Imagine a poster that gets overwhelmed by all these insults and free lynching and just collapse and never out him self to his spouse or decides to not try to win back his partner for fear to get the same treatment at home. What if his betrayed partner isn't sarcastic and cynical ? What if his betrayed partner would really wished he could get back.
It's not our job to save unkown people from themselves. It's our jobs to give honest experience-based advice to those who needs it.

I hope you truly understand the reason that made me post this answer. I feel for your pain, and I'm there. My pain is recent and I'm still subject to rushes of raw black anger but it's unhealthy to not seek to forsake pain. And it's both unhealthy and immoral to use strangers you never met to get a revenge that you think you didn't get.

I'm not going to dwel on this subject, this is more of a statement than my wish to join this conversation.


----------



## tears (Jul 31, 2012)

I agree with the above poster, not because i think that he's going easy on the WS but because as a person seeking help on here, I found that the people who seldom posted on it gave better advice than people who went on about how their STBEH was the worst of our kind or how projecting their pain would help a wayward spouse, all the while not giving any relevant advice on what exactly they expected from a remorseful wayward or from their own remorseless spouse. 

Some others( sad to say that they were also mostly women) went on about how they were better or how they had boundaries in place while they had their GNO's or anything else at the same time not really explaining what those boundaries were projecting their own moral superiority. Not all of us have the same character that some here do. But there are many of us who are willing to change our ways and mend these flaws but rather than giving a person any real information, people tend to go around bashing them about their wrongdoings rather than telling them exactly where they went wrong or what they can do to improve in that regard.



> Regardless of what a person does, making them feel guilty to raise ourselves in our own eyes is pretty pathetic in my opinion and comes from a passive agressive root.


I agree with this having witnessed it in my own thread. Re reading that thread again opened my eyes on where the real advice was coming from and where all the bottled up anger or resentment the posters had was showing.

Spunoh, that was one of the most mature posts I've read and that, you being a recently betrayed spouse realize that a stranger is not your wayward spouse and does not require a whiplash from your side is truly commendable, given the emotional roller-coaster that you must be going through everyday.

As I read these posts everyday, I am becoming wiser about infidelity and the mentality of BSs and WSs who come here. And I find that the kind of advice that really turns the lightbulb on in the WS or the BS is advice that goes along the lines of what deejo mentioned a few pages back.

Or people could adopt LordMayhem's policy of not commenting if they fear that they are triggering or if they have nothing constructive to offer. 

This has been discussed before in another thread, I don't seem to recall the name, but I'll repeat what I said there. i don't think that people coming here will mind the negative comments as long as they have something to offer as neutral advice. What they do mind is a comment bearing cynicism and sarcasm that really does nothing but generate a few laughs from others who read it and a lot of likes for the person who made the comment( unless they are people who are actively looking to get the title of most liked person on TAM), please remember that what you're making jokes at the expense of a real breathing human being with feelings( just because I'm a cheater doesn't mean that i can automatically switch off my emotions).

An example of what I consider excellent advice from my thread



> Here's a list she can show her husband:
> 
> 1) Full transparency - you have access to my phone, records, computer, FB....everything instantly and when asked for, from now through the rest of our marriage.
> 
> ...


An example of what I don't consider as advice



> Tears,
> Dig a little deeper....there are many attractive men out there that you HAVEN'T had sex with.


I just wanted to point out how the advice can be shaped so that its most effective(it was for me), not looking to lock horns with anyone who thinks that the latter example will help the OP more in their case.


----------



## Deejo (May 20, 2008)

Hmm ... thought I deleted that little gem from MIM. I must be slipping.

Tears, quite frankly, I'm surprised you stuck around. But very glad you have chosen to.

I don't believe that waywards or any poster for that matter, owes deference, answers, or penance to the community.

It troubles me when I see, "You don't sound remorseful enough, or sorry enough, or hurt enough, or angry enough, to satisfy a sub-section of the community.

No one here is _obligated_ to provide anything other than what they choose to provide, especially when in the doing, they are only further harassed for it.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

Deejo said:


> I don't believe that waywards or any poster for that matter, owes deference, answers, or penance to the community.


I never thought of it that way.I know I'm guilty of being harder on a person who doesn't seem like they're sorry for what they did.
Feels like the good advice is wasted if the person doesn't express regret for their actions. but looking at it from this perspective(they don't owe the community answers,penance) makes me feel like it doesn't matter if they're sorry or not,they still need to be given advice and options in a constructive way.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

Deejo said:


> Hmm ... thought I deleted that little gem from MIM. I must be slipping.
> 
> Tears, quite frankly, I'm surprised you stuck around. But very glad you have chosen to.
> 
> ...


I would understand if Tears had not stayed around, but it's consistent with how I judged her character that she did. 

The related point, to me, is that many on TAM tar all wayward spouses with the same brush. So someone who makes a one off mistake at a bad point is lumped with someone who has no intention of being faithful ever. And there is no mitigation of judgement for extenuating circumstances.

I'm not denying that cheating is always a betrayal, and I'm not saying that anything can make it right. But if we are about helping and supporting people, surely we have to understand the circumstances and thinking that led someone to cheat.


----------



## Unsure in Seattle (Sep 6, 2011)

Wazza said:


> I'm not denying that cheating is always a betrayal, and I'm not saying that anything can make it right. But if we are about helping and supporting people, surely we have to understand the circumstances and thinking that led someone to cheat.


Not sure that I agree with that at all.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

And I was a very good person who never had an affair. Who would never even think of having an affair.

Until one day I found myself, in 1989, as the AP of the woman who became my wife, we are still together.

So those who say: "I could never do that" yep. That's what I though about myself, until 1889.

What was it that helped me to cheat? I had some disastrous experiences in love, as regulars will know, so did this put a magnet near my moral compass? Who knows?

But when judgemental people say: "I would never cheat" I just smile to myself and think: "Hope you never do, because your hard attitude will come back to bite you."


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> Not sure that I agree with that at all.


Why? Why not?:scratchhead:


----------



## Unsure in Seattle (Sep 6, 2011)

MattMatt said:


> Why? Why not?:scratchhead:


Snide moderators aside, to me, "understanding" why someone was "driven" to cheat is irrelevant. We can argue about if it was calculated, or a mistake, or kismet or etc. It goes back to the whole "the issues before the affair belong to both partners, but the decision to cheat is 100% on the cheater" thing. It's a slippery slope to justifaction from there.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> Snide moderators aside, to me, "understanding" why someone was "driven" to cheat is irrelevant. We can argue about if it was calculated, or a mistake, or kismet or etc. It goes back to the whole "the issues before the affair belong to both partners, but the decision to cheat is 100% on the cheater."


It does go back to that and I agree it is 100% the cheater's decision to cheat. 

But, for example, I could reconcile because my spouse was genuinely remorseful, and I could accept that the affair was out of character. If her moral compass extended no further than "Don't get caught" reconciliation would be impossible.

My focus here is not on blame and punishment, but on understanding and resolving problems. And it's not about justification. There is no justification.

Also from her perspective. She cheated, she hurt me, but I love her, and I know the affair hurt her too. I don't want her to hurt. For her sake, and also selfishly for mine, because when she smiles my world is brighter.

There's enough pain in the world. No need to amplify it. 

Hope this helps, and totally appreciate the way you have made your point.


----------



## Unsure in Seattle (Sep 6, 2011)

Wazza said:


> It does go back to that and I agree it is 100% the cheater's decision to cheat.
> 
> But, for example, I could reconcile because my spouse was genuinely remorseful, and I could accept that the affair was out of character. If her moral compass extended no further than "Don't get caught" reconciliation would be impossible.
> 
> ...


I appreciate that, as well... I would just say that I care more about YOUR hurt, as a fellow BS than hers, if that makes sense.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> Snide moderators aside, to me, "understanding" why someone was "driven" to cheat is irrelevant. We can argue about if it was calculated, or a mistake, or kismet or etc. It goes back to the whole "the issues before the affair belong to both partners, but the decision to cheat is 100% on the cheater" thing. It's a slippery slope to justifaction from there.


Or it could be put away for future reference. "You know, I remember someone who cheated because they had x, y, or z. Is that possible in your spouse's case?"

All knowledge is useful. Eventually.


----------



## cledus_snow (Feb 19, 2012)

> the decision to cheat is 100% on the cheater


fer sho.


and the decision to cheat comes at a certain moment in time-- IN THE "NOW".....as the person you are NOW! telling me you cheated because mommy and daddy didn't buy you a pony when you were 10, doesn't sit well with me. 


i'm all for validating a person's feelings and experiences, but their explanation for cheating better include *a hell of a lot *of PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> I appreciate that, as well... I would just say that I care more about YOUR hurt, as a fellow BS than hers, if that makes sense.


Hmm. As someone who has been on both sides of the fence, do I have a different perspective, I wonder?

I have time for people who are aware they have hurt their spouse (like EI and Tears, and CSS, for example) but get irritated when a WS seem unable or unwilling to even think of their BS' heartache.


----------



## Unsure in Seattle (Sep 6, 2011)

MattMatt said:


> Hmm. As someone who has been on both sides of the fence, do I have a different perspective, I wonder?
> 
> I have time for people who are aware they have hurt their spouse (like EI and Tears, and CSS, for example) but get irritated when a WS seem unable or unwilling to even think of their BS' heartache.


Probably so, yes. I fully admit to having less empathy for the betrayers as opposed to the betrayed. Which is probably why I got so upset when I saw you, a poster who I generally agree with most of the time, start to suggest that Tears was not entirely to blame for her situation and that her husband potentially was. That upset me quite a bit. I 'm all for support if the supposedly remorseful show remorse (and again, I believe she was remorseful), but I thought that the sudden double standard you and some other posters were seemingly showing in regards to her BS was baffling and potentially harmful*. Which was one of the reasons (not the only one, and, indeed, not the main one) that I suggested two forums in the first place).



*in that saying he was wrong to go dark could begin to contribute to a twisted sort of justifaction


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> Probably so, yes. I fully admit to having less empathy for the betrayers as opposed to the betrayed. Which is probably why I got so upset when I saw you, a poster who I generally agree with most of the time, start to suggest that Tears was not entirely to blame for her situation and that her husband potentially was. That upset me quite a bit. I 'm all for support if the supposedly remorseful show remorse (and again, I believe she was remorseful), but I thought that the sudden double standard you and some other posters were seemingly showing in regards to her BS was baffling and potentially harmful*. Which was one of the reasons (not the only one, and, indeed, not the main one) that I suggested two forums in the first place).
> 
> 
> 
> *in that saying he was wrong to go dark could begin to contribute to a twisted sort of justifaction


Actually, that wasn't my intention.

I know people who are like Tears. No sense of danger.

An analogy are pigeons and crows. I see many trusting little pigeons who are run down by cars. But not many, if any, crows.

Why? Crows have street smarts, they are ever watchful.

As for the point about questioning the idea of his going dark this was to counter some of the more strident: "He should kick her to the kerb" posters.

I think I wondered if going dark 100percent would be viable as they had children and a household to deal with.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

Unsure in Seattle said:


> I appreciate that, as well... I would just say that I care more about YOUR hurt, as a fellow BS than hers, if that makes sense.


Of course it makes sense. But, in terms of what this thread is about, why should that alter your posts? Are you saying that we are entitled to give WS types a rougher ride because of what they did?

As a side comment, wife's affair was over 20 years ago. I've had a long time to think. And a tip for anyone else who wants to attempt reconciliation. Every grudge you bear, every blame you focus on, every limit you place on the relationship to protect yourself, all works against reconciliation. If you want to reconcile as a BS, you are hurting yourself as well as WS to focus on those things.

I guess it all comes down to whether TAM exists to enable retribution or redemption.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

cledus_snow said:


> fer sho.
> 
> 
> and the decision to cheat comes at a certain moment in time-- IN THE "NOW".....as the person you are NOW! telling me you cheated because mommy and daddy didn't buy you a pony when you were 10, doesn't sit well with me.
> ...


As to what you make of the reasons someone cheated...well that's case by case.

As to personal accountability, I agree with you 100%.


----------

