# Esther Perel



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

If you haven't already heard of her, she's made infidelity something of a specialty in her work. I'm becoming a fan because she brings to the topic the one thing that I find most persuasive - an unflinching view of the truth about infidelity, its causes, solutions, and meaning in relationships. 

There's a twenty minute Ted talk *here* that summarizes her research.

She has this heart wrenching *podcast* from counseling sessions with couples that is an absolute gut punch.

And she has a *new book* out that I have not yet read but will be adding to my reading list shortly. 

I just wanted to point her out as a resource for those who want a well researched and pragmatic view of the realities of monogamy in today's society.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Cletus said:


> If you haven't already heard of her, she's made infidelity something of a specialty in her work. I'm becoming a fan because she brings to the topic the one thing that I find most persuasive - an unflinching view of the truth about infidelity, its causes, solutions, and meaning in relationships.
> 
> There's a twenty minute Ted talk *here* that summarizes her research.
> 
> ...


I've heard bad things about her but will check her out.


----------



## blahfridge (Dec 6, 2014)

"Affairs are an act of betrayal, and they are also an expression of longing and loss. At the heart of an affair, you will often find a longing and a yearning for an emotional connection, for novelty, for freedom, for autonomy, for sexual intensity, a wish to recapture lost parts of ourselves or an attempt to bring back vitality in the face of loss and tragedy"

Very true in my case, minus the act of betrayal. My H beat me to it by six years.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

I've heard her on a podcast or two, and I read Mating in Captivity. I don't think she quite strayed into 'advocating' infidelity so much as pointing out the elephant in the room. I actually found her book to make a lot of sense.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> I've heard bad things about her but will check her out.


What have you heard? 

Some might say she's pro-affair because she deals with the problem with brutal pragmatism and honesty, but she herself says that she is not. I know some people conflate "talking honestly about" with "giving permission for", but that's not a very nuanced view of her work.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Cletus said:


> What have you heard?
> 
> Some might say she's pro-affair because she deals with the problem with brutal pragmatism and honesty, but she herself says that she is not. I know some people conflate "talking honestly about" with "giving permission for", but that's not a very nuanced view of her work.


What I've heard has been from posters on TAM and, as you have referenced, they indicated some sort of approval or justification for cheating.

I didn't really develop enough interest at the time but I am going to look up her work soon to see for myself.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

ConanHub said:


> What I've heard has been from posters on TAM and, as you have referenced, they indicated some sort of approval or justification for cheating.
> 
> I didn't really develop enough interest at the time but I am going to look up her work soon to see for myself.


She's a completely foggy, European 'intellectual', wayward apologist that "tickles the ears" of many waywards with all her cultural rationalizations and justifications for abhorrent self (and other) destructive behavior. 

IMO, normative persons in normal monogamous marriages {or seeking to rebuild or recover from cheating --back into a normative monogamous marriage}, who comprise the vast majority of the people coming through these forums as well as anyone with any religious beliefs whatsoever in traditional marriage shouldn't really consider the advice of a "Polymory Expert" such as Esther Perel. 

Here are two 2014 Perel quotes from an AARP article, of all places, entitled "New Thinking About Monogamy" LINK



PEREL said:


> Psychotherapist Esther Perel, by contrast, views monogamy as "unnatural" for both men and women. The author of Mating in Captivity: Unlocking Erotic Intelligence stops short of advocating free love, but Perel says we should be less scandalized, and more forgiving, when trespasses occur.





PEREL said:


> "Resentment is like swallowing poison and expecting the other person to die," Perel says she once heard someone say. She doesn't deny the pain inflicted by unfaithfulness, but she goes against the sex-advice grain when she says that too much intimacy can actually be anti-erotic. True eroticism lies in the unknown — the enigmatic glance, the promise of arousal — not in the mere mechanics of doing the deed. "Most people don't want more sex," says Perel. "They want better sex."



Here are some scathing reviews of her new wayward book, "The State of Affairs: Rethinking infidelity": LINK



Hannah said:


> If you've cheated, you'll love Esther's book. However, if you've ever been on the receiving end of infidelity, this book is hurtful, harmful and insensitive. There's nothing "exhilarating" about being on the receiving end of infidelity. What does infidelity look like to the betrayed? STD testing, paternity tests, financial loss, divorce and devastated children. I'd run from ANY therapists that hands this book to you if you're a cheater or the betrayed. Look into Esther's credentials and scientific research - it's lacking. Her perspective is "unique" only in that it's devoid of common sense and clear thinking in the aftermath of one of the worst betrayals in life. We should be having conversations about the CHARACTER traits of cheaters, not relationship issues. We should be writing books on how to REBUILD your life after betrayal, not focusing on what your cheater is doing. Let's be clear, you cannot force anyone to cheat - sorry, you don't have that superpower. We all have choice. The choice to leave, be honest or get clear, directive therapy from qualified, capable and compassionate therapists who do their research to guide you. The only person you control is you. Esther adds pain to an already painful life altering experience. I don't recommend this book or her work.





sher said:


> I am willing to bet that among the 5 star reviews there is not one person who has been betrayed. This is a book for armchair “ relationship” fans. Highly pretentious, throughally unqualified, excruciatingly smug, apologist for betrayers. If you’re a betrayer or the affair person, you’ll love how she justifies your selfish behavior. If you’re the betrayed spouse, don’t you dare let her make you feel like your cheater was justified. In fact save a lot of time and don’t waste your money. She’s the latest fad for PC therapists who dont want to be “ judgy”. Ps she is not a qualified psychologist.





Jacky said:


> The author is an interesting mix of highly perceptive, yet incredibly impoverished. She sees the longing in the couples seeking marriage for something divine in their union, which was so insightful...yet without an understanding of the truth of what they seek, she all but ridicules their expectations. She names the eros that is so important, but ultimately falls back to reducing it to the culturally erotic in her writing. She is excellent at defining the psychological drives behind the infidelity, but with no grasp of the spiritual drives she is left to accommodate instead of help them redirect to what they really are always looking for. She can both see the needs of the human heart for something honest and beautiful, and also the struggles and failures to live it out...she ultimately accommodates the later instead of recognizing the former is the ultimate truth of the human person and the only thing that will truly satisfy. It is a sad exposition of the results of the sexual revolution that suggests a lie regarding the human person.



Here she is speaking at a conference as a Polymory expert:


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Quality said:


> She's a completely foggy, European 'intellectual', wayward apologist that "tickles the ears" of many waywards with all her cultural rationalizations and justifications for abhorrent self (and other) destructive behavior.
> 
> IMO, normative persons in normal monogamous marriages {or seeking to rebuild or recover from cheating --back into a normative monogamous marriage}, who comprise the vast majority of the people coming through these forums as well as anyone with any religious beliefs whatsoever in traditional marriage shouldn't really consider the advice of a "Polymory Expert" such as Esther Perel.
> 
> ...


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Quality said:


> She's a completely foggy, European 'intellectual', wayward apologist that "tickles the ears" of many waywards with all her cultural rationalizations and justifications for abhorrent self (and other) destructive behavior.
> 
> IMO, normative persons in normal monogamous marriages {or seeking to rebuild or recover from cheating --back into a normative monogamous marriage}, who comprise the vast majority of the people coming through these forums as well as anyone with any religious beliefs whatsoever in traditional marriage shouldn't really consider the advice of a "Polymory Expert" such as Esther Perel.
> 
> ...


It's almost like you could say.

F' Ester Perel -

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

but don't marry her. >


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Her TED talk sounds like common sense and I didn't hear anything apologist about what she was talking about.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

As it happens, I was listening to one of her "where shall we begin" podcasts this afternoon, dealing with a couple involving infidelity. She referred to the wayward as the "transgressor" and the "guilty party", no mincing words or apologetics. She concluded the podcast by saying the wayward still "had a lot of work to do on their sense of entitlement". 

However, what she also did, which might trigger some posters here, was (a) not to advise the betrayed partner to dump the wayward - they had come to her looking for help repairing, and she accepted that frame. And (b) to consider the factors that might have led to the affair. She very clearly said "*It doesn't explain or excuse it*, but it contextualises it". And that's necessary, because often (and in this case) the betrayed is asking for an answer to exactly that question, how did this happen? 

Now, she may (I haven't read or heard her on this) be pro polyamory, and there I would probably disagree with her, but in this podcast she certainly was NOT soft on affairs. She talked a lot about the damage caused.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Laurentium said:


> As it happens, I was listening to one of her "where shall we begin" podcasts this afternoon, dealing with a couple involving infidelity. She referred to the wayward as the "transgressor" and the "guilty party", no mincing words or apologetics. She concluded the podcast by saying the wayward still "had a lot of work to do on their sense of entitlement".
> 
> However, what she also did, which might trigger some posters here, was (a) not to advise the betrayed partner to dump the wayward - they had come to her looking for help repairing, and she accepted that frame. And (b) to consider the factors that might have led to the affair. *She very clearly said "It doesn't explain or excuse it, but it contextualises it".* And that's necessary, because often (and in this case) the betrayed is asking for an answer to exactly that question, how did this happen?


And that, to me, is a balanced view. Sometimes I can tear my hair out with the 'unbalanceness' on TAM when it comes to these things.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Laurentium said:


> As it happens, I was listening to one of her "where shall we begin" podcasts this afternoon, dealing with a couple involving infidelity. She referred to the wayward as the "transgressor" and the "guilty party", no mincing words or apologetics. She concluded the podcast by saying the wayward still "had a lot of work to do on their sense of entitlement".
> 
> However, what she also did, which might trigger some posters here, was (a) not to advise the betrayed partner to dump the wayward - they had come to her looking for help repairing, and she accepted that frame. And (b) to consider the factors that might have led to the affair. She very clearly said "*It doesn't explain or excuse it*, but it contextualises it". And that's necessary, because often (and in this case) the betrayed is asking for an answer to exactly that question, how did this happen?
> 
> Now, she may (I haven't read or heard her on this) be pro polyamory, and there I would probably disagree with her, but in this podcast she certainly was NOT soft on affairs. She talked a lot about the damage caused.


This is why people dont like her. She thinks a BS might be imperfect and need to look in the mirror.

When we all know cheaters are damaged ostchis from the womb and every BS is the perfect spouse.

Oh....and I DO think cheating is a vile betrayal.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Speaking as a WS, she’s full of shat. 
It boils down to selfishness. Who cares “how it happens.”


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

katies said:


> Speaking as a WS, she’s full of shat.
> It boils down to selfishness. Who cares “how it happens.”


But you do as well: it happened (in your case I presume and very possibly in many other cases), because of selfishness. But selfishness can be complicated. Was there anything that caused or contributed one to become selfish? (rhetorical question). 
Even if it had nothing to do with BS whatsoever, it is still a useful question to ask.

Don't understand why that mens she is full of ****.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

Laurentium said:


> And (b) to consider the factors that might have led to the affair. She very clearly said "*It doesn't explain or excuse it*, but it contextualises it". And that's necessary, because often (and in this case) the betrayed is asking for an answer to exactly that question, how did this happen?


You see the twist in there??? - She is indicating that looking at the context of the marriage is necessary, because, as Esther proposes, the answer to the question "How did this happen?" is OFTEN in there.

It's NOT often in there at all.

The wayward did it because they wanted to and they lack proper boundaries - nothing in the marriage MADE them choose it.

There is no THERE there.

Further, Esther piles a lot of bullcrud into that "contextualization" like American Puritan repression of human sexuality, suppression of women, men's struggle with masculinity in this culture as well as statements like this:



Perel said:


> Among the sharp pokes Perel gives to conventional wisdom in her new book is to argue that an affair shouldn’t necessarily be singled out as the worst thing that a married person can do to a spouse. What about “neglect, indifference, intimidation, contempt, rejection, and disdain,” Perel writes. Aren’t these equally pernicious betrayals? “The victim of the affair is not always the victim of the marriage.” Elle Magazine Sept 2017 LINK



This is all fine and well stuff to have intellectual conversations and debates about with your spouse much later in recovery and others; but, all it does for still fogged out wayward spouses is FEED into their TEMPORARY, but still active, rationalizations and justifications for having {and, perhaps, continuing} the affair in the first place. 95 out of 100 times, the waywards complaints of such "pernicious betrayals" by their betrayed spouse prior to the adultery simply aren't true to anywhere near the level FELT, and, given time, the issues simply fall off the table completely. They're just deflecting.

"How did this happen?" is a question a lot of betrayed spouses ask, but, IMO it's a waste of time when "coaching" couples in early reconciliation. The wayward LOVES to "contextualize" the marriage and try to avoid responsibility and make it about their spouse ---- even under the pretense of it being EQUAL culpability (though they are often still in entitled wayward mode and holding on to it being "mostly' their __________ {neglectful, hateful, controlling, etc} spouse's fault). This blame game only serves to infuriate, confuse and frustrate the betrayed spouse who, despite the betrayal, is sitting there trying to save their marriage and family while CONSIDERING making the biggest concession of their lives - being willing to forgive their spouse. 


My wife and I aren't hammering waywards telling them (and their betrayed spouses) that they will forever be a cheater, lack character completely, are horrible people and are now unredeemable. But we will not entertain talking long about the "context" of the marriage at the expense of a devastated betrayed spouse. Dressing it up like it's to the betrayed spouses benefit is just an added insult.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

This ^^^^^


----------



## BioFury (Jul 9, 2015)

I personally do not subscribe to Esther Perel's ideas. I bought her book "Mating in Captivity", when it was recommended to another poster here. But I found the message contained therein to be far left, and effectively anti-marriage. Which I could have deduced from the very title of the book, but failed to do so.


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

People might not like affairs but to have a reasonably well researched as to why they happen, is not a reason to dislike the messenger.

Affairs happen and the more we are educated about affairs, well maybe a few affairs can be avoided or the damage minimized.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> But you do as well: it happened (in your case I presume and very possibly in many other cases), because of selfishness. But selfishness can be complicated. Was there anything that caused or contributed one to become selfish? (rhetorical question).
> Even if it had nothing to do with BS whatsoever, it is still a useful question to ask.
> 
> Don't understand why that mens she is full of ****.


Think of it like this:

Imagine a woman physically abused by her husband going to a counseling session with such husband in hopes of saving their marriage and making their marriage a safe place again for her to be, and, basically, the counselor spending the session trying to put the abuse in context and discussing with the wife what she might have done to deserve it and letting her know that the victim of the physical abuse is not always the victim of the marriage. Often, the counselor surmises, it's not just about the husband and if she wants to understand "how this happened", she needs to hear and discuss her participation in the context that precipitated such abuse.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

I thought this was so hilarious that I just had to post it. The, cough, great John Gottman himself gave Perel's book, Mating in Captivity a one-star review on Amazon along with the following comment:



John Gottman March 4 said:


> I totally disagree with the idea that closeness makes relationships non-erotic, and emotional distance is necessary for hot sex. Playfulness requires safety, and the evidence is that close friendship is an important part of great sex. In the book The Normal Bar surveying 24 countries, couples who kiss passionately on an everyday basis also cuddle together and have satisfying sex often. So the recommendations of this book do not fit empirical science. LINK



Here's a good Gottman quote I came upon about love, sex, intimacy and friendship:



> Dr. John Gottman, who studied marriage for 35 years said, "... the determining factor in whether wives feel satisfied with the sex, romance, and passion in their marriage is, by 70%, the quality of the couple's friendship... and for men, the determining factor is, by 70%, the quality of the couple's friendship..."


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Quality said:


> You see the twist in there??? - She is indicating that looking at the context of the marriage is necessary, because, as Esther proposes, the answer to the question "How did this happen?" is OFTEN in there.
> 
> It's NOT often in there at all.
> 
> The wayward did it because they wanted to and they lack proper boundaries - nothing in the marriage MADE them choose it.


That's still a context though. You are misrepresenting her POV: she is not saying that looking for context will provide an excuse for the cheating. Context doesn't equal excuse. Context is context and the cheating can still be due to poor boundaries. But realistically, there is rarely only one reason for anything.



Quality said:


> Dressing it up like it's to the betrayed spouses benefit is just an added insult.


Yeah, she is not doing it for only one person's benefit.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Quality said:


> Think of it like this:
> 
> Imagine a woman physically abused by her husband going to a counseling session with such husband in hopes of saving their marriage and making their marriage a safe place again for her to be, and, basically, the counselor spending the session trying to put the abuse in context and discussing with the wife what she might have done to deserve it and letting her know that the victim of the physical abuse is not always the victim of the marriage. Often, the counselor surmises, it's not just about the husband and if she wants to understand "how this happened", she needs to hear and discuss her participation in the context that precipitated such abuse.


Yes, that would be unproductive and insensitive. Again, that's not actually what she is advocating. If there's anywhere where she actually excuses affairs, then I disagree with her. However looking for context is not the same.
For example, if you were mugged on the street at 3am somewhere and then decided not to walk alone at 3am or at least without taking some kinds of precautions, this realisation in no way excuses the attacker. That, to me, is what contextualising means. I think it's a given that she (and most people) think that affairs are usually the BS's fault. Has she actually ever said this anywhere? If she did, then i would disagree with her for obvious reasons.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Quality said:


> I thought this was so hilarious that I just had to post it. The, cough, great John Gottman himself gave Perel's book, Mating in Captivity a one-star review on Amazon along with the following comment:
> _
> I totally disagree with the idea that closeness makes relationships non-erotic, and emotional distance is necessary for hot sex. Playfulness requires safety, and the evidence is that close friendship is an important part of great sex. In the book The Normal Bar surveying 24 countries, couples who kiss passionately on an everyday basis also cuddle together and have satisfying sex often. So the recommendations of this book do not fit empirical science._
> 
> ...


Did she make a generalisation about this? I think the point is that you have to find out what it is your partner and relationship needs: she is correct in saying that some partners are turned on by distance and it can fuel desire, while Gottman is correct in noting that some partners require emotional closeness to feel 'safe'. I don't see why one contradicts the other; it's just looking at different aspects. There is no one formula that works for everyone and the trick is to look at *your own* relationship and work out what it needs and where that balance lies.

I know for myself that I do like closeness but sometimes it's the 'distance' that makes me actually yearn for closeness. If I always had the closeness, i would feel a bit suffocated by it.

My wife seems to have wilder desires when I come back from a trip. I don't see her advice as useless in this respect: I actually had not considered it from her angle before. I think it was MEM who once brought it up and it made me think about it in a new light (and made sense). Again, it's not 'one way over the other'; it's just one approach that works really well in some instances and with some people.


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

I noticed.....

Many on TAM would not comment on this thread.

Why is that?

Does not the naughty Genie lives in all of us?

Few, have the nerve to be honest about this.
Those that do, spew the culturally accepted view.

Which is fine. That is their view.

To spew the other view {Perel's, etal} will elicit the 2 x 4's from the majority on TAM.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

inmyprime said:


> Was there anything that caused or contributed one to become selfish? (rhetorical question).
> Even if it had nothing to do with BS whatsoever, it is still a useful question to ask.


sure but not in the context of my BS or marriage. It's purely a personal problem.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

katies said:


> sure but not in the context of my BS or marriage. It's purely a personal problem.


What was your affair partner like? Did he like you as an individual or did he get off on the fact that he was getting NSA sex?


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

katies said:


> sure but not in the context of my BS or marriage. It's purely a personal problem.


I don’t know your story, but I have spent a lot of time understanding why my wife had an affair. 

She has good and bad in her. The bad needs addressing, but much of the good is outstanding. The affair was over quarter century ago and we reconciled. I wouldn’t have done that if she was just irredeemably broken and it was a matter of time till she did it again. And we’ve had enough time to get a good idea whether she was going to be a repeat offender.

Perel, in what I have read and heard, talks about the nature of attraction. Understanding what can happen seems to me useful in defining appropriate boundaries.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> Speaking as a WS, she’s full of shat.
> It boils down to selfishness. Who cares “how it happens.”


 Oh I don't know… if i was in a marriage that was already crapy when the cheating happened, i might want to, after the cheating has been dealt with, know what made it crapy and fix it. But then again, my life is not driven by pride and the allusion that i don't have any work to do.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

And yes, I know that word has 2 letter p's in it. I'm using talk to text, so get over it.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Wazza said:


> I don’t know your story, but I have spent a lot of time understanding why my wife had an affair.


my husband also had an affair. Why he did is his thing to figure out.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

katies said:


> my husband also had an affair. Why he did is his thing to figure out.


I felt a need to figure out my wife as part of deciding whether to stay or go.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

katies said:


> my husband also had an affair. Why he did is his thing to figure out.


If it were *me*, I would want to understand, reconciliation or not. Is he just a jerk? Would that inform my future picker? On TAM we often talk about communication being the most important thing in a marriage. In my marriage, verbal communication often is inadequate. Is there something I can learn about communication.

I agree that fault and blame lie entirely with the cheater. But I like to find the peals of wisdom hidden in the worst situations. Maybe it is my daffy Polyanna complex. Not only do I get said wisdom, hopefully, it is a means of trying to make lemonade out of lemons... 

But I can see how one would not want this. Pain sucks. I had a therapist tell me that when you cut your knee, you don't pick it open to see what is inside. Her metaphor for emotional pain...


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

katies said:


> sure but not in the context of my BS or marriage. It's purely a personal problem.




Yes but it’s still a CONTEXT! 

Other couples may have a different or same context. To say that it NEVER makes sense to look at context seems narrow minded to me. That’s how I understood her. If she has some other ‘hidden message’, then I didn’t get it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> And yes, I know that word has 2 letter p's in it. I'm using talk to text, so get over it.



Haha, you are in a crapy mood aren’t you 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> personofinterest said:
> 
> 
> > And yes, I know that word has 2 letter p's in it. I'm using talk to text, so get over it.
> ...


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

personofinterest said:


> This is why people dont like her. She thinks a BS might be imperfect and need to look in the mirror.
> 
> When we all know cheaters are damaged ostchis from the womb and every BS is the perfect spouse.
> 
> Oh....and I DO think cheating is a vile betrayal.





katies said:


> Speaking as a WS, she’s full of shat.
> It boils down to selfishness. Who cares “how it happens.”


You see here are two posters that get it. And this is where she (Ester) goes wrong. This is the problem that most, almost every, counselor goes wrong. 

There is never and excuse of any kind for cheating. If the marriage is that bad, file for divorce, end of story. 

Even though she says that "it is not an excuse" the fact that you are "contextualizing" it fact makes it an excuse. 

I am not saying that there will never be a time to discuss issues in the marriage, of course not, but never, ever early on in the recovery process. In fact, I think you need to be pretty far along in the healing process before you START to look at the issues in the marriage. 

I will share a story from my past... When I caught me Ex wife and we went to the first counselor, (MC) the MC said, well lets look at what led to the affair. 

Now the MC was a female, so I just said, "You are completely out of your F****** mind", and I got up and left the room. My Ex had to take a taxi home. 

Had it been a male counselor, I would have punched him in the mouth and then left.

This thinking has no place in infidelity and any man or woman that allows their self to a part of it is a fool.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

BluesPower said:


> the fact that you are "contextualizing" it fact makes it an excuse.
> 
> .


Yep. I had a ****ty childhood I never dealt with, had a kid at war and kids were leaving the nest left and right. <<<< all excuses.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

My counselor recommended her book "mating in captivity" to me after my XW's affair. I needed to understand the psychology of what was going on to help me move forward and I thought her book accomplished that. I don't see why people are so down on her. She's not advocating for cheaters, just trying to go through the psychology of what led them to do that. And in honesty, any relationship has two sides that influence the course of the relationship so it's good to understand the role each side had in the ultimate path that was taken; and that is regardless of the cheating being the sole fault of the cheater. I also used some of the advice in her book for dating post-divorce by consciously thinking about maintaining the excitement and have had great results.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Bananapeel said:


> it's good to understand the role each side had in the ultimate path that was taken; and that is regardless of the cheating being the sole fault of the cheater. .


See, in my head, these things can't coexist. If the BS had a role in the "ultimate path," then how is the cheating the sole responsibility of the cheater?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Bananapeel said:


> My counselor recommended her book "mating in captivity" to me after my XW's affair. I needed to understand the psychology of what was going on to help me move forward and I thought her book accomplished that. I don't see why people are so down on her. She's not advocating for cheaters, just trying to go through the psychology of what led them to do that. And in honesty, any relationship has two sides that influence the course of the relationship so it's good to understand the role each side had in the ultimate path that was taken; and that is regardless of the cheating being the sole fault of the cheater. I also used some of the advice in her book for dating post-divorce by consciously thinking about maintaining the excitement and have had great results.




The problem is that some people lack the objectivity to understand that there is never an excuse for an affair - ever - AND the truth that there ARE certain factors that CAN make one more vulnerable to the choice to cheat. A starving person might be more vulnerable to stealing, even though stealing is still wrong and a crime.

Either people are not smart enough to see that these fact can coexist....or they just don't want to.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

katies said:


> See, in my head, these things can't coexist. If the BS had a role in the "ultimate path," then how is the cheating the sole responsibility of the cheater?


It is not about who is responsible. The cheater is responsible. The idea is about learning. Particularly if reconciliation is the goal, getting honest with feelings and experience is critical. We have a marriage counselor. She is very helpful to us. We had recommended her to friends of ours. The friends got fired by the counselor largely (per said friends) they were more interested in blame assignment and designating who was at fault than understanding. Responsibility and blame are not the same.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

Bananapeel said:


> My counselor recommended her book "mating in captivity" to me after my XW's affair. I needed to understand the psychology of what was going on to help me move forward and I thought her book accomplished that. I don't see why people are so down on her. She's not advocating for cheaters, just trying to go through the psychology of what led them to do that. And in honesty, any relationship has two sides that influence the course of the relationship so it's good to understand the role each side had in the ultimate path that was taken; and that is regardless of the cheating being the sole fault of the cheater. I also used some of the advice in her book for dating post-divorce by consciously thinking about maintaining the excitement and have had great results.





katies said:


> See, in my head, these things can't coexist. If the BS had a role in the "ultimate path," then how is the cheating the sole responsibility of the cheater?





personofinterest said:


> The problem is that some people lack the objectivity to understand that there is never an excuse for an affair - ever - AND the truth that there ARE certain factors that CAN make one more vulnerable to the choice to cheat. A starving person might be more vulnerable to stealing, even though stealing is still wrong and a crime.
> 
> Either people are not smart enough to see that these fact can coexist....or they just don't want to.





NobodySpecial said:


> It is not about who is responsible. The cheater is responsible. The idea is about learning. Particularly if reconciliation is the goal, getting honest with feelings and experience is critical. We have a marriage counselor. She is very helpful to us. We had recommended her to friends of ours. The friends got fired by the counselor largely (per said friends) they were more interested in blame assignment and designating who was at fault than understanding. Responsibility and blame are not the same.


You see, these are some of the varying thought process about infidelity. 

But really it is all very simple. If you cheat you are wrong, you do not deserve to be taken back, ever. Now, if the BS decides to give the GIFT of reconciliation, or even to try it our for size with no promises, then the WS MUST bust A$$ to learn and change and frankly, take all of the crap that the BS dishes out. As the WS, you have to choice to leave and file for divorce, or stay, that about ends your decision making process. 

And at anytime the BS, has the right to end it when they think it is the thing to do for them. Many, if not most, WS cannot do this, or won't or their pride is too strong, so the marriage is over. 

As a WS, you have no say, and you should not. Sorry folks it is that black and white. This is what a lot of WS's refuse to accept, refuse to see and THIS is what ultimately ends the marriage. 

We can all go back an forth about all the nuances of infidelity. For me, the fact of the matter is that once this happens it is just easier to move on.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

I'm guessing the excuses I listed previously did nothing for my husband's pain, humiliation and emasculation of my affair. 
I do not see your point. The WS must take the blame and bear the responsiblity of betrayal. The BS understanding it? For what purpose? So he understands I had a crappy childhood and may have been going through a MLC. Is that supposed to ease his pain? It made him furious. Rightly so.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> It is not about who is responsible. The cheater is responsible. The idea is about learning. Particularly if reconciliation is the goal, getting honest with feelings and experience is critical. We have a marriage counselor. She is very helpful to us. We had recommended her to friends of ours. The friends got fired by the counselor largely (per said friends) they were more interested in blame assignment and designating who was at fault than understanding. Responsibility and blame are not the same.


if your friends were going through infidelity, what exactly was the BS responsible for?


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

@katies - It's not that the BS is responsible for the affair (that is solely on the WS for their choice), it is that the course of the relationship requires both people's participation. There is a difference between responsibility for a choice another person makes and having a role in them making that choice. For example, if my kids decide to do something irresponsible it is their sole choice and their sole consequences, but their upbringing that I gave them had an influence on whether they made that choice. I wouldn't claim responsibility but to claim that my lifetime of interactions didn't influence what they did would be incorrect. It's the same thing for Esther Perel. She explains contributing factors on both sides that led to the decision to cheat, but that does not excuse the action by the WS.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Bananapeel said:


> [MENTION=194354] but to claim that my lifetime of interactions didn't influence what they did would be incorrect. It's the same thing for Esther Perel. She explains contributing factors on both sides that led to the decision to cheat, but that does not excuse the action by the WS.


I disagree. 

I'm sure it would go over really well if I said to WS, Hey if you would have been home on time, or you would have paid more attention to me, I wouldn't have made the decision to cheat. That is exactly what you're saying.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

That's not what I'm saying at all.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

"contributing factors on both sides that led to the decision to cheat,

Then what are you saying? How did the BS contribute?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> The problem is that some people lack the objectivity to understand that there is never an excuse for an affair - ever - AND the truth that there ARE certain factors that CAN make one more vulnerable to the choice to cheat. A starving person might be more vulnerable to stealing, even though stealing is still wrong and a crime.
> 
> Either people are not smart enough to see that these fact can coexist....or they just don't want to.



It’s the black or white thinking versus discerning shades of grey. Some minds are wired like that. Which makes discussions on forums basically an unforgiving experience.
Unfortunately it’s not only the forums.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

My thing with all this justification crap is if a bad marriage is an understandable for the WS to cheat why should the BS cheat moving forward after all there is nothing worse that your spouse can do to you then cheat. Following that logic cheating can just go on in perpetuity. Logically it doesn't hold up.

I would suggest to anyone marry a person whose thinking about infidelity is purely black and white. Gray people make iffy spouses.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Quality said:


> You see the twist in there??? - She is indicating that looking at the context of the marriage is necessary, because, as Esther proposes, the answer to the question "How did this happen?" is OFTEN in there.
> 
> It's NOT often in there at all.


I'm sorry, but that is just too simplistic.

I can assure you that the circumstances of marrying a sexually incompatible spouse set in motion MY choice to have an affair. 

I take full responsibility for how I handled the situation. The choice was mine. The blame is mine, Mine, all MINE.

And I can say with equal conviction that I would not have had the affair if my marriage wasn't in sexual disarray. This is the conversation that Perel is trying to have. 

If someone cannot grapple with the complexity of those two things simultaneously coexisting, then that is a failure of their imagination. It doesn't change the reality. Simple answers to complex problems are, without surprise, rarely adequate.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Bananapeel said:


> @katies - It's not that the BS is responsible for the affair (that is solely on the WS for their choice), it is that the course of the relationship requires both people's participation. There is a difference between responsibility for a choice another person makes and having a role in them making that choice. For example, if my kids decide to do something irresponsible it is their sole choice and their sole consequences, but their upbringing that I gave them had an influence on whether they made that choice. I wouldn't claim responsibility but to claim that my lifetime of interactions didn't influence what they did would be incorrect. It's the same thing for Esther Perel. She explains contributing factors on both sides that led to the decision to cheat, but that does not excuse the action by the WS.


Like I said in my last post, using your logic why should the person being cheated on return the favor? After all what their spouse did to them was pretty much one of the worst things anyone can do in a marriage or to another human being. Now they are dealing with a lot of insecurity and hurt from being treated terribly. If poor dynamics is a reason to cheat, then you can't have worse ones after an affair. I just don't by it. No one is saying you can push for divorce if you are unhappy. Cheating is a selfish action that is really only the responsibility of the cheater. The problems in the marriage may be entirely the fault of the BS but cheating by it's very nature is an action outside of the marriage. 

Esther Perel isn't even a trained physiologist by the way.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> I'm sorry, but that is just too simplistic.
> 
> I can assure you that the circumstances of marrying a sexually incompatible spouse set in motion MY choice to have an affair.
> 
> ...


And I'm saying there was nothing wrong with my marriage and no blame to be assigned to my husband. 

You also had other options, Cletus, like divorce.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> See, in my head, these things can't coexist. If the BS had a role in the "ultimate path," then how is the cheating the sole responsibility of the cheater?


Because the "ultimate path" are the preconditions to the affair. The choice of what to do when faced with those conditions are fully the responsibility of the cheater. 

The forces that act on our life are not all in our control. The choices we make as a consequence of those forces are. There is nothing contradictory about the two.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> And I'm saying there was nothing wrong with my marriage and no blame to be assigned to my husband.
> 
> You also had other options, Cletus, like divorce.


Yes I did. So f'ing what?

The CONDITIONS that set up my needing to make a choice AT ALL came from my marriage - a system by definition requiring two people.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> And I'm saying there was nothing wrong with my marriage and no blame to be assigned to my husband.


And that entitles you to speak for all marriages for all time?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> I would suggest to anyone marry a person whose thinking about infidelity is purely black and white. Gray people make iffy spouses.


I'd rather have a spouse capable of complex thinking, all other things being equal.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> The CONDITIONS that set up my needing to make a choice AT ALL came from my marriage - a system by definition requiring two people.


not in mine.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> And that entitles you to speak for all marriages for all time?


or you? 
I think you'll find most people who have affairs are not in bad marriages.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> I'm sure it would go over really well if I said to WS, Hey if you would have been home on time, or you would have paid more attention to me, I wouldn't have made the decision to cheat. That is exactly what you're saying.


And I'm saying exactly that, for my marriage.

If we hadn't been so far apart on the sexual spectrum, I would never have cheated. In another universe, I could be making the statement "if we hadn't been so far apart on the sexual spectrum, I never would have divorced"

And you would have no argument with that position, and in fact would probably agree with it and fully support my saying it. You cannot have it both ways.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> I'm sorry, but that is just too simplistic.
> 
> I can assure you that the circumstances of marrying a sexually incompatible spouse set in motion MY choice to have an affair.
> 
> ...


This assumes that people only have affairs when they are in bad marriages. This is just not true. Most marriages have things in them that could justify any number of bad behaviors. When is any abuse justifiable or even discussed. You are not entitled to have sex with someone else when you made vows not to, that is. In these situations where the person steps outside of the marriage the real problem is the cheaters inability to be assertive and leave the marriage if they are unhappy, at that point. Or at least tell the spouse that they are opening the marriage. That's completely on them. Emotionally mature people confront problems in their marriage they don't go **** someone. This like of argument is like if someone said, will I get it it's not right that the guy hits his wife, but look at how she talks to him. I call bullcrap on that. 

Besides that most people have affairs because they are entitled *******s. Lots of times the BS is trying really hard, and the WS is just terribly emotionally arrested. Ester Perel argument is intellectually lazy in my mind. Besides that I doubt her advice works for the BS.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Yes I did. So f'ing what?
> 
> The CONDITIONS that set up my needing to make a choice AT ALL came from my marriage - a system by definition requiring two people.


You are in a bad marriage because you choose to stay in a bad marriage.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> This assumes that people only have affairs when they are in bad marriages.


Look, I'm not trying to make some Grand Unified Theory of Infidelity here that applies to everyone on the planet. I'm speaking for myself, about myself, my marriage, my affair.

And Perel is, in that context, spot on.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> You are in a bad marriage because you choose to stay in a bad marriage.


No ****.

Now put on your Big Boy Thinking Hat and try to figure out how I got in a bad marriage in the first place.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> No ****.
> 
> Now put on your Big Boy Thinking Hat and try to figure out how I got in a bad marriage in the first place.


The real question is if you are so far apart that you are in a different universe why do you stay, not why did you cheat. If you get to the point where you are going to cheat it's too late. But it's still your fault for allowing yourself to get to that point without asserting yourself and changing your circumstances. That is not the marriages fault, it's your life you have agency in it, you are responsible for it. You are not a victim to circumstance.

This is my point Ester Perel's argument doesn't deal with the problem and is lazy. The problem is the WS feels entitled and doesn't take agency in their own life, their decisions. Their thinking is they deserve anything. Let's humor her argument, say they married bad so they are unhappy (their fault), now they cheat and their marriage is worse. Until they learn to take agency in their choices they will never have a better life, they will always be victims of imaginary slights. Life sucks lots of things make us unhappy. OK now get to work and make your life better with honor. Besides unless it's an arranged marriage if your marriage sucks ultimately it's your own fault.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Her take on things doesn't bother me.

Binary thinking helps us in knowing where our line in the sand is located.

Nuanced explanations of human behavior, such as hers, help us in the finding of those locations.

That said, her conclusions are her own. Mine are mine.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> The real question is if you are so far apart that you are in a different universe why do you stay, not why did you cheat.


Because of another "character flaw" - I consider marriage, especially one with children, to be worth some effort and not to be dissolved on a whim. You never know that the effort isn't going to be worth it until _after_ it fails. 

No one walks around with the kind of prescience your position requires. Divorce at the first argument about which way the toilet paper goes on the dispenser seems to be the only safe way to ensure continued marital success (or failure). 

No doubt you're quick to heap the blame on me for the affair. Are you equally adept at praising those who try to make their marriage work? The marriage I am still in, post affair, BTW. I wonder.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus, did you having the affair solve the marital problems?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> Cletus, did you having the affair solve the marital problems?


"Solve" is a strong word when two people are so dissimilar in a core piece of their marriage. It did improve some of the underlying issues in a way that discussing, fighting, crying, and arguing about them never did. It also made it clear to me that I had to either accept things more-or-less as they were or go. I chose the former. 

I don't run around telling anyone that an affair is a good way to work on marriage problem. In fact, I try pretty hard not to speak for anyone but myself, especially on this topic. Unlike those who apparently have Tablets from On High that allow them to do just that.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

ok but you're touting her view as truth (an unflinching view of the truth about infidelity, its causes, solutions, and meaning in relationships.) 

And you're also saying she's well researched. She calls herself psychologist (which is against the law when you're not) The highest degree she holds is an MA in expressive art therapy.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> ok but you're touting her view as truth (an unflinching view of the truth about infidelity, its causes, solutions, and meaning in relationships.)


There is no "truth" about infidelity. I find her approach useful. I find anyone who doesn't consider any subject holistically to be engaging in overly simplistic thinking. If her approach doesn't work for you, then move on and find one that does. 



> And you're also saying she's well researched. She calls herself psychologist (which is against the law when you're not) The highest degree she holds is an MA in expressive art therapy.


"Esther is an AASECT certified sex therapy supervisor, a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist and a member of the American Family Therapy Academy as well as the International Society for Sex Therapy and Research. She has run her private practice in New York City for over three decades."

She also holds a bachelor's degree in Educational Psychology from The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Now can we dispense with the character assassination?


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

katies said:


> ok but you're touting her view as truth (an unflinching view of the truth about infidelity, its causes, solutions, and meaning in relationships.)
> 
> And you're also saying she's well researched. She calls herself psychologist (which is against the law when you're not) The highest degree she holds is an MA in expressive art therapy.


On her website she refers to herself as a psychotherapist. 

Splitting hairs here, but that is not against the law.

Also, her Linkedin profile addresses her credentials:

"Trained and supervised by Dr. Salvador Minuchin, she has served on the faculty of the family studies unit, department of psychiatry, New York University Medical Center, the International Trauma Studies Program, and the Ackerman Institute for the Family.

Esther is an AASECT certified sex therapy supervisor, a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist and a member of the American Family Therapy Academy as well as the International Society for Sex Therapy and Research. She has run her private practice in New York City for over three decades."


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

katies said:


> See, in my head, these things can't coexist. If the BS had a role in the "ultimate path," then how is the cheating the sole responsibility of the cheater?


If having sex with another man is so acceptable / ok / whatever, why didn't let your husband know that you were doing that?

why didn't you propose having n open marriage?


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

katies said:


> "contributing factors on both sides that led to the decision to cheat,
> 
> Then what are you saying? How did the BS contribute?


See below.



Cletus said:


> Because the "ultimate path" are the preconditions to the affair. The choice of what to do when faced with those conditions are fully the responsibility of the cheater.
> 
> The forces that act on our life are not all in our control. The choices we make as a consequence of those forces are. There is nothing contradictory about the two.


This is 100% what I was trying to articulate, but maybe not in as succinct and clear a manner as this. Both participants in a marriage are forces that act on the marriage and lead to whatever the eventual conclusion is.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

NextTimeAround said:


> If having sex with another man is so acceptable / ok / whatever, why didn't let your husband know that you were doing that?
> 
> why didn't you propose having n open marriage?


It was absolutely wrong/not ok and I was solely responsible for that choice.
It had nothing to do with something my BS did (or didn't do) in the marriage either. He did not contribute to that eventual conclusion in any way.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

katies said:


> It was absolutely wrong/not ok and I was solely responsible for that choice.
> It had nothing to do with something my BS did (or didn't do) in the marriage either. He did not contribute to that eventual conclusion in any way.


 @katies it completely right in everything she is saying. Everyone can talk about shades of gray and whatever you want to. 

And this thread could go on for 1000 pages and it will not change a thing. She will still be right at the end of the day. 

Now all of you WS can continue to tell her and me that, "Oh, it is too simplistic to think about it that way...". or whatever else helps you sleep at night. That is fine, do your thing. 

In life, there are things that are gray, and there are things that are black and white, infidelity is black and white. There may be reasons, there may be rationalizations be at the end of the day, it does not change anything. 

IF YOU CHEAT you are wrong, no if, not ands, not buts. 

Ester may have some good thoughts, she may be an expert at a lot of things, and she may know a lot about infidelity, and she may know a lot about the polygamous life style... 

But when she talks about "contextualization" of the affair, nope sorry, she is wrong.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> I disagree.
> 
> I'm sure it would go over really well if I said to WS, Hey if you would have been home on time, or you would have paid more attention to me, I wouldn't have made the decision to cheat. That is exactly what you're saying.


You cannot possibly be this obtuse.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

BluesPower said:


> [MENTION=194354]
> IF YOU CHEAT you are wrong, no if, not ands, not buts.


No one in this discussion is trying to say otherwise. That's your strawman. 



> Ester may have some good thoughts, she may be an expert at a lot of things, and she may know a lot about infidelity, and she may know a lot about the polygamous life style...
> 
> But when she talks about "contextualization" of the affair, nope sorry, she is wrong.


She is of course not wrong if her goal is to help people understand how to better keep affairs out of their marriages in the first place. Properly placing the blame after the horse leaves the barn doesn't do a damned thing to help others figure out how to keep the barn door closed.

I'm going to invoke Godwin's law on my own thread. Just about everyone agrees that exterminating Jews was a bad thing. Just about no one thinks that understanding the socio-political conditions that permitted Hitler to rise to power is an asinine "contextualization". It is important to understand how and why things happen.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> It is important to understand how and why things happen.


Again, my husband could have understood how I got to the point of having an affair. Did nothing to ease his pain. Did nothing to calm the rage. The understanding of it led to nothing. So, what is the point?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> or you?
> I think you'll find most people who have affairs are not in bad marriages.


Jesus Geronimo Christ, I'm not saying anything about your marriage. If nothing she says is of any value to you, then please find another thread and another poster to argue with. 

Why do you think I'll find that?

From what database of relationship studies do you draw such a conclusion? From what body of work? What are YOUR credentials, since you brought it up? 

Or are you just projecting?

FTR, I also don't consider myself to have been in nor to now be in a bad marriage. Neither of us would have worked so hard to keep it. It was a decent marriage with a gaping flaw.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> You cannot possibly be this obtuse.



or you. look at Bluespower's response. He nailed it.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> Again, my husband could have understood how I got to the point of having an affair. Did nothing to ease his pain. Did nothing to calm the rage. The understanding of it led to nothing. So, what is the point?


The point is you and your marriage are not the entire sum of all marriages on the planet. 

Why do some people have so much difficulty understanding that something which does not apply to them can still be of great benefit to others?


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Because I think Perel's advice is very dangerous and doesn't really apply to anyone. Anyone who wants to take responsibility for all of their actions at least.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> or you. look at Bluespower's response. He nailed it.


There is never an excuse for infidelity. It is absolutely and irrefutably wrong, and unless one has had a gun held to the head, the choice is 100% on the cheater. Cheating is a choice, and it is ALWAYS the wrong choice.

This isn't about blame for choices. It is about vulnerability.

Let's say you live with someone who locks all of cabinets, the pantry, and the fridge. He gives you no money. You are starving.

Are you hungry? Yes. Does your hunger make you vulnerable to stealing? Yes.

Is it still wrong to steal? YES

The deal is this: even if we believe the paradigm that marriage with infidelity were blissful beforehand....some weren't. NONE of it justifies cheating.

But if you cannot fathom how a terrible, lonely marriage might not make a person VULNERABLE to attention from someone else....then yeah, you are pretty obtuse. That doesn't make cheating right. It doesn't make the cheating the fault of the BS at all.

But if a spouse has neglected, mistreated, or deprived their partner...then yeah, they ARE responsible for that behavior.

Period.

Like I said, people who able or willing to entertain complex thought can understand that nothing justifies cheating while understanding the idea of being VULNERABLE to cheating.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> Let's say you live with someone who locks all of cabinets, the pantry, and the fridge. He gives you no money. You are starving.
> 
> Are you hungry? Yes. Does your hunger make you vulnerable to stealing? Yes.
> 
> .


THIS is your analogy?

You walk out the door and never have anything to do with someone who purposely starves you, especially if doing so means you can feed yourself.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> Because I think Perel's advice is very dangerous and doesn't really apply to anyone. Anyone who wants to take responsibility for all of their actions at least.


Well then, make your case. Be specific. What advice is she giving that is dangerous? Why do you find it dangerous?

It is hard for me to comprehend how understanding human nature as it is, not as we would wish it to be, does anyone a disservice. Particularly those who want the insights needed to keep their marriage fresh and compelling. 

Have you actually read "Mating in Captivity"? The entire premise of the book is to understand why we want to stray and what we can do to mitigate it. AFAIK, she never advocates going outside of your marriage to scratch an itch. 

So again I ask - what _specifically_ is she promoting that you find dangerous?


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

personofinterest said:


> But if a spouse has neglected, mistreated, or deprived their partner...then yeah, they ARE responsible for that behavior.


Yes but the other spouse could file for divorce. Again, if you want to look at vulnerability, and context, go ahead. 

It will never change the fact that when you cheated, you were wrong. And looking at other factors does nothing to change that. And if a MC, or whoever (Ester) talks about this in the same context as the affair, sorry, wrong answer. 

POI, I don't know your story, but if you cheated, you were wrong. There is no other context needed, just wrong. 

And who ever used the Nazi example, please... I don't care about all of the geo political reasons that allowed it or caused it. 

You kill 6 million innocent people, you are wrong, and I don't care why you thought you should do it, you get hanged from the neck until dead.

A better question is why do some people have such a difficult time with black and white. 

Now, lets say that POI cheated, just say, does it make that person feel better knowing or thinking that because her/his husband/wife withheld sex from the relationship, that issue made them vulnerable to make the decision to cheat? Maybe. and does it make the BS feel better knowing that the BS made them vulnerable to cheat, well not so much. 

This is a question of people being obtuse, and everyone is welcome to get all sociological and intellectual about it. It does not matter. 

You see, a BS does not care why they were betrayed, they could care less. What they know is that the one person that was supposed to love them above all others, did the most unloving thing you can do to another person. 

They don't care why and regardless of what ester says, they never will...


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

BluesPower said:


> And who ever used the Nazi example, please... I don't care about all of the geo political reasons that allowed it or caused it.


True enough, if you're so mind-bogglingly short sighted as to not care if it ever happens again. 

A Holocaust prevented requires a lot less rope than one prosecuted after the fact.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

BluesPower said:


> You see, a BS does not care why they were betrayed, they could care less. What they know is that the one person that was supposed to love them above all others, did the most unloving thing you can do to another person.
> 
> They don't care why and regardless of what ester says, they never will...


OK, if I've learned anything since being cheated upon in a most horrible way, is that nobody speaks for anyone else.

Depending upon how close to the offensive behavior someone is, there is bound to be much more expression of pain than later.

My perspective changes over time. I have a better understanding of what went on -- now. I still have my line in the sand. But finding out information from professionals AND people who have walked this path has helped me to move forward.

Some do not want or need any perspective beyond the basics, others do.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

Cletus said:


> True enough, if you're so mind-bogglingly short sighted as to not care if it ever happens again.
> 
> A Holocaust prevented requires a lot less rope than one prosecuted after the fact.


That is why I support candidates that support that special country in the middle east. 

Further, even though I am not Jewish, even at my age I would try to get there and serve is something serious ever started for them again.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> Well then, make your case. Be specific. What advice is she giving that is dangerous? Why do you find it dangerous?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, I've read it. I threw it against the wall. 

Specifically? All of these quotes are attributed to her:

“Monogamy has nothing to do with love.”

“We are relying on our partner’s fidelity with a unique fervor.”

“Today, choosing to stay when you can leave, is the new shame”

“What if passion has a finite shelf life? What if there are things even a good relationship can never provide?”

“Affairs... are an expression of longing and loss.”

“At the heart of an affair you will often find a yearning and a longing for an emotional connection for novelty, for freedom, for autonomy, for sexual intensity, a wish to recapture lost parts of ourselves, or an attempt to bring back vitality in the face of loss and tragedy.”

“When we seek the gaze of another, it isn’t always our partner that we are turning away from, it is from the person that we have become. And it’s not so much we are looking for another person as we are looking for another self.”

“Some Affairs are to beat back deadness and are an antidote to death.”

This is all bull****. So so much about some sort of existential crisis the WS is having and not about how terribly hurtful, humiliating and debilitiating it is for the BS. 
Nothing about mature love.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

or, you can read what CHumplady says about her, with more quotes thrown in:

https://www.chumplady.com/2014/11/esther-perel-can-stfu/


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

I am a BS and found her book quite useful because I wanted to know the "why" and she helped answer that in a way my WS couldn't. I'm not sure why that is such a hard concept to understand. I still don't accept any blame for my XW's affair but I do now know better ways to approach a relationship so that some of the factors that can predispose to an affair, even in a healthy and happy marriage, don't happen in my future relationships.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

katies said:


> Yes, I've read it. I threw it against the wall.
> 
> Specifically? All of these quotes are attributed to her:
> 
> ...


Amen girl (@katies) preach on. All of those quotes a total horse crap and I feel sorry for any BS who's WS tried any of that "Understanding" crap on them, or any that took it. 

Let me model a healthy relationship for you, basically because I just want to tell this story. 

This weekend GF and I went to a pool party at some really close friends of ours. Some of them were, a lot of them, were from the over 50 singles group that our friends met at, and now they are married. 

Now my GF, was the hottest women there, and the most fun. So over the course of the day this creep hit on her. But she handled it like a pro. 

She said, "You see this ring, my BF has one just like it, it is our commitment ring. I am his and he is mine. Now, I want you to look out over this crowd, and I want you to look at my man. He is the best looking, man here. And I can tell you he is the best lover that any women here could ever have. Now look at you, you are not half the man he is, why do you think you even have a chance with me?" 

He left with his tale between his legs. The point of the story is, that is how it is supposed to be, and if it is not, or if you cannot make it that way, then get a freaking divorce, don't cheat...


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Because of another "character flaw" - I consider marriage, especially one with children, to be worth some effort and not to be dissolved on a whim. You never know that the effort isn't going to be worth it until _after_ it fails.
> 
> No one walks around with the kind of prescience your position requires. Divorce at the first argument about which way the toilet paper goes on the dispenser seems to be the only safe way to ensure continued marital success (or failure).
> 
> No doubt you're quick to heap the blame on me for the affair. Are you equally adept at praising those who try to make their marriage work? The marriage I am still in, post affair, BTW. I wonder.


You're not to blame for your affair? If not then who is? I mean you make my point with that statement. 

You say "I would not have had the affair if my marriage wasn't in sexual disarray", OK but the problem was how you handled that. You are to blame and only you for how you handled it. Yours is not a unique dynamic, but not everyone cheats. 

If you want to have a discussion about lack of sex in marriage I am all for it, but that to me has no bearing on infidelity. Once we have infidelity we are now having a different discussion in my book. 

Again it's not like you don't have choices. The answer If that is the case is, you are ready to cheat you have to find a different answer. I would hope this would be the advice. See EP and people like that still offer hope that things can get better. I'm saying probably not if you are at that point, it's just better to accept it isn't going to work. This is just better advice then to make excuses for cheating. I get it cheating doesn't happen in a vacuum. My response is so? Lots of bad **** people do happens in totally dysfunctional situations. The excuses aren't going to make the marriage better. I am sure once being cheated on the last thing anyone's partner wants to hear is, this wouldn't have happened if we had more sex. My biggest issue is that EP's advice is just too late at that point. What does she expect the BS to be like, yeah I know it's all my fault. Besides that half the time people have affairs because they are bored, that's just not good enough. Have some dignity. 

I also have a problem with the whole monogamy isn't normal crowd. Mostly because they consistently only want to bring that up after they have vowed to it, doesn't put them in the best light in my mind. They pretend like they want monogamy to have a better pool of options then they show their true nature after they got a chance to pick from the larger pool.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Bananapeel said:


> some of the factors that can predispose to an affair


would totally rest with the cheater themselves and have nothing to do with the BS. So, if in a subsequent relationship, you saw red flags like selfishness, impulsiveness, entitlement - those would indicate the person would have issues with maturity and an understanding of mature love.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> There is no "truth" about infidelity.


The truth about infidelity is it's cruel and wrong.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

Blues - That might work for someone that has healthy boundaries but a lot of people don't do that and end up liking the attention and start cheating. If you read the statistics, nearly half of all marriages have someone cheating so why not read a book that explores the question of why it happens. 

For those quotes, I don't see your objection to them. Everything looks factually correct to me. Also, nothing is an excuse for the affair rather they are just explanations. I'll address them individually. 
1. Monogamy is a modern social construct, as is marriage for love. Other countries still have arranged marriages and in some places multiple wives are permitted. So the statement is factual. 
2. As modern first world society have changed their definition and reason for marriage the concept of fidelity has also changed.
3. People have the choice to leave which wasn't so freely available in the past and there is shame in staying with a cheater. 
4. Passion does decrease as relationships mature and is replaced by other things such as security and comfort. Even good relationships can be lacking in some arenas. 
5. Affairs are often an expression of longing for passion and loss of the excitement that you traded for stability. 
6. Affairs are full of excitement, freedom, self interest, etc. which is why a WS often is in the fog. 
7. Basically, this part says affairs are a fantasy. 
8. Again, this is about the excitement that affairs bring. That's why WS will say their BS is boring and their AP is exciting. 

I can't fault her book for not focusing on the hurt it causes to a BS (which is actually in there in several areas) because that isn't the focus.


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

Cletus said:


> It also made it clear to me that I had to either accept things more-or-less as they were or go. I chose the former.


Did you ever figure out why it took an affair for you to come to that conclusion? Most marriages have issues, including sexual issues, where they realize that they have to either accept it or leave, and it doesn't take them having an affair to realize that.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> Yes, I've read it. I threw it against the wall.


The same reaction my wife had to "50 Shades".



> This is all bull****. So so much about some sort of existential crisis the WS is having and not about how terribly hurtful, humiliating and debilitiating it is for the BS.
> Nothing about mature love.


I'm having a hard time seeing the danger in these quotes, even if you disagree with them. Are they going to cause more infidelity? Not according to you, since there is no possible exterior cause for infidelity beyond "****ty spouses", and since the study of the topic is of no valid concern nor applicable to anyone. 

Who is harmed by someone examining the question "Why is there infidelity" and coming back with an answer more nuanced than "****ty spouse?"

It sounds a little like asking the question "why is the sky blue" and getting told "because it isn't green".


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> She is of course not wrong if her goal is to help people understand how to better keep affairs out of their marriages in the first place. Properly placing the blame after the horse leaves the barn doesn't do a damned thing to help others figure out how to keep the barn door closed.


And this would be where she fails the most, because shes assumes that the BS has any power to help keep the WS from cheating. The only person who can keep you from cheating is you. If you get in your head that if my partner would only do this I wouldn't feel the way I do, or worse that if they don't do this it's OK for me to cheat then that is a recipes for disaster. Besides it also follows the idea that marriage is supposed to complete you. It's not. I have no control over my wife's reaction to me. I can only control myself. That should be everyone's thinking. Not, if only she made me feel this way I would be happy. Happiness doesn't work like that. Happiness is a choice. Frankly EP's way of thinking is a dangerous way to think for both partners. 

The whole idea really misses the point of marriage and love anyway. She doesn't get it. Love is about giving, it has nothing to do with getting. Marriage maybe not as much but if you understand it as a gift you feel like you have much more control over it so you can say, this isn't working for me. I don't feel like giving this anymore. This is why I think my advice is hard for some to take. I believe in agency, but if that is the case you are within your rights to say, you need to do better if you still want this gift. If you are only thinking about your marriage like what am I getting, then you have a tendency to think I need to have this from my spouse or really the only place for me to ever get this is from my spouse, I'm trapped. Your marriage is going to eventually fall apart probably more quickly. People put way to much care into the till death do us part, and way to little in happiness part. If you thing of it as a gift then you can say to your spouse need to work on this. 

In a sense that is what you did except instead of saying, this isn't working for me I am thinking about ending it, you had an affair. You tell me which way is better? In my mind having an affair as a response to being unhappy in a relationship is really the ultimate passive aggressive act. Does EP say this? Instead of saying how you feel, you cheat to confront a problem. That just bull****. So any advice that legitimizes that to me does real damage and doesn't even deal with the passive aggressive way of confrontation that is just going to continue to contribute to a bad marriage. It doesn't deal with the problem. Sorry people who cheat because they are not happy are just the same type of people as the passive people who stay with cheaters. It's all about not taking agency in your life. About avoiding confrontation. It has nothing to do with being unhappy. You are unhappy because you have yet to take responsibly for your life.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Bananapeel said:


> Blues - That might work for someone that has healthy boundaries but a lot of people don't do that and end up liking the attention and start cheating. If you read the statistics, nearly half of all marriages have someone cheating so why not read a book that explores the question of why it happens.
> 
> For those quotes, I don't see your objection to them. Everything looks factually correct to me. Also, nothing is an excuse for the affair rather they are just explanations. I'll address them individually.
> 1. Monogamy is a modern social construct, as is marriage for love. Other countries still have arranged marriages and in some places multiple wives are permitted. So the statement is factual.
> ...


I have no problem with this except that no one wants to say that before they say their vows, only after.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Bananapeel said:


> <<snip>>Everything looks factually correct to me. Also, nothing is an excuse for the affair rather they are just explanations. <<snip>>


I agree. Explanations, not justifications or excuses.

It is easy to see that.

BTW, if anyone reading my answers thinks I am an apologist for cheating behavior, please surf my comments of the last decade or so. I think I have enough skin in the game to make this observation.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Araucaria said:


> Did you ever figure out why it took an affair for you to come to that conclusion? Most marriages have issues, including sexual issues, where they realize that they have to either accept it or leave, and it doesn't take them having an affair to realize that.


It's not about coming to a conclusion it's about not having to face a problem.


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

Cletus said:


> Because of another "character flaw" -* I consider marriage, especially one with children, to be worth some effort and not to be dissolved on a whim.* You never know that the effort isn't going to be worth it until _after_ it fails.


Doesn't cheating do just that....dissolve the marriage with the children's betrayed parent....on a whim?


----------



## Randy2 (Jul 19, 2016)

WOW, 7 pages of posts in ONE day. Infidelity and Ms. Perel certainly generate some back and forth!


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

BluesPower said:


> [MENTION=194354]
> 
> But when she talks about "contextualization" of the affair, nope sorry, she is wrong.


Maybe she should reword it: "Contextualization of the disconnect in the WS regarding their marriage vows that allowed them to justify cheating."


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Araucaria said:


> Did you ever figure out why it took an affair for you to come to that conclusion? Most marriages have issues, including sexual issues, where they realize that they have to either accept it or leave, and it doesn't take them having an affair to realize that.


Hubris, I suppose. I didn't really think I would have an affair. When I did, I was disgusted enough with myself to take a hard look and realize that the only person who could manage my dissatisfaction was me, and that the only rational means of doing that was to quit hoping it would get better and accept reality. That's also a topic for another post, one that I have made here as well. 

Yes, I had to overcome that sense of entitlement. That I had followed the imposed courtship rules that would have uncovered this before the ring went on, that I deserved more, and the fear that I would spend 50 years of my life without sexual fulfillment. I had to stop blaming my wife for being what she was. 

I don't know why it took a ONS to crystallize it, or if it was just time. Slow learner, apparently. 

We took a mandatory pre-marriage course with a mentor couple, required by our church. They spent exactly no time on sexuality. If I were that couple, I would make sure that anyone I gave advice to would get a resource to help them avoid the same outcome. Maybe Perel's book, maybe something else, but SOMETHING.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Araucaria said:


> Doesn't cheating do just that....dissolve the marriage with the children's betrayed parent....on a whim?


The question was why did I not divorce her years previous, and that is the answer. If you're asking was I perfect in the execution of my own ideals, I think the answer is a pretty obvious "no".


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

Cletus said:


> She is of course not wrong if her goal is to help people understand how to better keep affairs out of their marriages in the first place. Properly placing the blame after the horse leaves the barn doesn't do a damned thing to help others *figure out how to keep the barn door closed.*
> 
> I'm going to invoke Godwin's law on my own thread. Just about everyone agrees that exterminating Jews was a bad thing. Just about no one thinks that understanding the* socio-political conditions that permitted Hitler to rise to power is an asinine "contextualization". * It is important to understand how and why things happen.


I honest don't see any connection between the two bolded parts.

In your own marriage, after you had an affair, you realized that you had to either accept the sexlessness of your marriage or divorce if you wanted a change in that area.

Your marriage was sexually unsatisfactory before the affair, and it is still unsatisfactory after the affair. The only difference is YOU: you have decided to refrain from extramarital sex, even though you are just as miserable as you were before you had the affair.

In the Hitler example, a narcissistic madman blamed all the country's socioeconomic problems on a group of people (Jews) while he used the chaos (much of it created by him and his followers via clandestine acts against the established government) to unify and distract the blinded masses from recognizing what was really going on so he could place himself in the position of supreme leader and savior after destabilizing the government.

What the heck does Hitler have to do with your infidelity choice?????? Are you equating yourself with Hitler, the German people, or the Jews? Who is the equivalent of your wife in the Hitler scenario?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

BluesPower said:


> Yes but the other spouse could file for divorce. Again, if you want to look at vulnerability, and context, go ahead.
> 
> It will never change the fact that when you cheated, you were wrong. And looking at other factors does nothing to change that. And if a MC, or whoever (Ester) talks about this in the same context as the affair, sorry, wrong answer.
> 
> ...


I'm gonna say this one. More. Time.

*I am not justifying cheating. Cheating is wrong. No one can blame another for their choice to cheat*

A spouse CAN, however, contribute to someone's VULNERBABILITY to the attention of others.

Look, I stopped teaching early childhood years ago. This should not be that hard.

Question dear Blues: Would you say your wife's illness and neglect made you more VULNERABLE to the attention of other women?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Bananapeel said:


> I am a BS and found her book quite useful because I wanted to know the "why" and she helped answer that in a way my WS couldn't. I'm not sure why that is such a hard concept to understand. I still don't accept any blame for my XW's affair but I do now know better ways to approach a relationship so that some of the factors that can predispose to an affair, even in a healthy and happy marriage, don't happen in my future relationships.


It is hard to understand because the BS's who choose not to understand it do not want to look at their own marital behavior. End of story. It taints their victim narrative


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

BluesPower said:


> Amen girl (@katies) preach on. All of those quotes a total horse crap and I feel sorry for any BS who's WS tried any of that "Understanding" crap on them, or any that took it.
> 
> Let me model a healthy relationship for you, basically because I just want to tell this story.
> 
> ...


Blues, while I really like how your GF was loyal to you, I have one issue with the last part of what she said.

What if you were not the hottest man at the party, and the guy hitting on her was? Her last statement was shallow, IMO. Would she have been loyal to you had he been hotter than you?

A guy hit on me when my husband was away for many months. He was physically and financially "more" than my husband. However, I rebuffed him because 1. I would never cheat on my husband with anyone, no matter how lonely I am, or how hot the man is. 2. I was insulted that he disrespected me to even think I might be a ***** and would cheat on my husband.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

BluesPower said:


> [MENTION=194354]
> But when she talks about "contextualization" of the affair, nope sorry, she is wrong.


This is the motivation for the original response.



Araucaria said:


> I honest don't see any connection between the two bolded parts.


Don't overthink it. It's a metaphor. Simply saying something is bad after the fact does absolutely nothing to prevent it. If you want to prevent it in the future, you must understand the context in which it happened. A dictator's rise to power was just an over-the-top example of why contextualizing even the abhorrent is necessary.

When you contextualize, you learn from history and end the second world war with the Marshall plan instead of the Treaty of Versailles.

And this is precisely what Perel does.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

This whole conversation reminds me of the groups who think that abstinence only sex ed is the only correct choice, since scientifically sound education would be misconstrued as advocating fornication. 

The questions of the morality of infidelity vs. its underlying causes are orthogonal. Answering one tells you almost nothing about the other.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

Bananapeel said:


> I am a BS and found her book quite useful because I wanted to know the "why" and she helped answer that in a way my WS couldn't. I'm not sure why that is such a hard concept to understand. I still don't accept any blame for my XW's affair but I do now know better ways to approach a relationship so that some of the factors that can predispose to an affair, even in a healthy and happy marriage, don't happen in my future relationships.


I agree with this, whether you get that knowledge out of a book or from other sources.

When my first marriage collapsed, my husband mentioned that he grew tired of my always wanting to talk things out. Sadly, maybe I misread the relationship books, but I thought that was the right thing to do, gain agreement, compromise, so on.

In the book Not Just Friends, the author posits that someone whose partner has cheated on them could be doing too much for the relationship bad or good, or well intentioned in any case.

I was glad than when my courtship for my second marriage had a crisis that I was able to read messaging and piece together a profile my future husband's socalled friend since what people say can be different from what they do or feel. The lesson that I drew was that i was falling back on that negotiator tool, trying to be too nice and too predictable. From looking at the way this woman behaved, I learned to say and mean it when needed STFU and other things like it.

So yes, for those who are open new ideas, shall we say, it's good to try to draw a picture of what happened.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> It is hard to understand because the BS's who choose not to understand it do not want to look at their own marital behavior. End of story. It taints their victim narrative


Overall I was a really good husband but what I learned about my marital behavior was:

1. I provided too much security and not enough excitement
2. I wasn't open enough emotionally to really connect with her and understand her completely
3. She learned to hide things from me because of an uneven power dynamic where she was worried about disappointing me 

When my XW had the affair she was able to get all her holes filled (pun intended) that I wasn't addressing in our relationship, albeit for a brief time and at a very high cost. These things were pointed out in Perel's book and I now know to prevent them from happening in future relationships.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Cletus said:


> This whole conversation reminds me of the groups who think that abstinence only sex ed is the only correct choice, since scientifically sound education would be misconstrued as advocating fornication.
> 
> The questions of the morality of infidelity vs. its underlying causes are orthogonal. Answering one tells you almost nothing about the other.


 This is a very good analogy. And in the case of sex education the faulty premise is just as stupid.


----------



## Mr. Nail (Apr 26, 2011)

I'm an oddity on this board. My relationship is still in the pre divorce and pre affair or at least pre discovery stage. I've had some serious doubt about the relationships ability to survive. I'm in the very frustrating (at least to those willing to advise me) position of not seeing enough advantage to separate. 

I was strongly recommended Mating in captivity. I'm still working through it. My greatest complaint isn't the cheater apologism , It's the vocabulary. I can barely keep my head above water. I am picking up some interesting ideas. What I am not getting is things to try. I guess I'm more interested in How, than why. One thing that I have to constantly remind myself is that she only talks about clients who have decided to reconcile. Everything she does (and some of it is pretty radical) is to save a seriously damaged relationship. Constantly I'm thinking this will not work unless both people are firmly committed to fixing the problem. 

In my life only one person thinks there is a problem.


----------



## Adelais (Oct 23, 2013)

Listening to Perle reminds me of what my husband said about why he cheated. He said he "wasn't feeling validated at home, and the OW said all the right things." He sticks to that story.

So if I had made him feel better, he would not have had an affair.

I couldn't believe my ears when he told me that. My response to him was, "What do you think your secret porn addiction (for years before the actual affair) was doing to me and to our family dynamic? Do you think that your disconnect and failure to do chores while I was running errands was going to illicit warm feelings, affection and praises from me?"

Countless times I would come home after running errands for hours (I saved them all for a once a week marathon) while he supposedly stayed home with our small children and took care of chores at home. When I would get home, very little was done. I would be very frustrated and he acted indignant that I dared to question what he had done during all those hours.

The truth came out after the affair when he wanted to start being honest with me. He would put the younger children to nap and send the older children out to play within minutes of my leaving, and then he would hop on the computer to watch porn for hours. Then he would get off in time to mow the lawn before I got home.

While he acknowledges that having an affair and looking at porn were wrong, and he admits he had a porn addiction before he had the affair, he fails to acknowledge that he is also responsible for the lack of "validation" he received from me before the affair because he didn't deserve it! He also fails to apologize for all the anxiety, arguments, put downs (he said I was unreasonable, crazy, controlling) I endured while he covered up his porn use.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

personofinterest said:


> I'm gonna say this one. More. Time.
> 
> *I am not justifying cheating. Cheating is wrong. No one can blame another for their choice to cheat*
> 
> ...


No, the things I did were wrong, the decisions that I made were wrong. End of story. Her drug addiction, hidden of course, was not an excuse to cheat. Her cheating was not an excuse. What I should have done was divorce her and let her die if that was want was going to happen. 

As harsh as that sounds, it is what I should have done. 

Even though she cheated first, even though, she cheated more than once, even though she was a drug addict and lied to me for years, it was wrong for me to cheat. I offer no excuse, I offer no rationalizations for my behavior. 

I was a D*** for what I did. Even worse, at that time in my life, I was D*** for hurting the women that I hurt at different times. 

There were no reasons or justification for anything I did, I was a bad person. 

And for me, if I had not been so stupid, I would have divorced her and let her sink or swim on her own. Who knows maybe I would have been doing her a favor in the long run. 

I actually am afraid that she is using again, because she looks like she is dying. But you know what, not my issue, sorry. 

So no, there is now justification or understanding vulnerabilities for me or her. For my part I did not care. And for the record, she had no reason to cheat, ever. She was always taken care of in every way, and she never got it. She was just a bad person, in many ways, and it does not justify it in anyway. 

I use the same measuring stick for my behavior as I do for anyone else's, to do other wise is to be a hypocrite...


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Blues, I didn't ask you if you were wrong. What I asked was do you think her behavior contributed to your vulnerability. So what you are saying to me is that you would have made the exact same wrong choices and would have been just as vulnerable had she been an amazing spouse. What you are telling me is that no matter what had happened or not happened in your marriage, your emotional state would have been exactly the same. So basically what you are saying is that no one should ever come to a marriage forum and Complain about anything. Because what my spouse does or does not do should not affect me at all.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

katies said:


> if your friends were going through infidelity, what exactly was the BS responsible for?


I have no idea. I am not in their relationship. But that was not my point. Blame focus is counter productive for responsibility acceptance on the part of WS. How does one get to remorse and forgiveness if the focus is on blame?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Oh well, I guess I am finished with this period I don't do the magical disappearing act thing.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> A better question is why do some people have such a difficult time with black and white.


Because life is not b&w and b&w thinking can be highly destructive.

_"Dichotomies impose a false and sharp (knife-edge discrimination) polarization on the world and allow no middle ground or spectrum . . . It is not difficult to see how this tradition in thinking has led to persecution, wars, conflicts, etc. When we add this to our beliefs in dialectic, argument and evolutionary clash we end up with a thinking system that is almost designed to create problems."_

https://lonerwolf.com/language-ignorance/



BluesPower said:


> They don't care why and regardless of what ester says, they never will...


Some do, some don't.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

Cletus said:


> True enough, if you're so mind-bogglingly short sighted as to not care if it ever happens again.
> 
> A Holocaust prevented requires a lot less rope than one prosecuted after the fact.


But Perel isn't trying to prevent the next affair. She's contextualizing the relationship prior to the adultery, on the words of the wayward spouse and, most likely, a desperate and hurting betrayed spouse willing to say or do anything to save their marriage and family, on Perel's very first session with a couple so she and they can figure out "how the affair happened" in the first place.

The results are pretty clear....It gives wayward license to say things like "but-for my/our lack of sexual compatibility, I would have never cheated" which is completely illogically considering that nearly every relationship has peaks, valleys and crisises, which, having been a person that CHOSE to cheat in one circumstance could never truly claim that another circumstance, crisis, lull in another universe with this wife or some other wife wouldn't have resulted in the same grievous mistake.

I also hope to God you don't ever tell your wife your "butt-for" rationalization. Even if you believe it to be true, there is no reason to be so hurtful as telling her that and heaping insult upon injury. 


In my first posts I mentioned that Perel's contentions are fine to have as intellectual conversations way down the road in recovery should a mostly healed couple choose to really dive into such matters. It's just upfront, it's harmful because it feeds the continuation of and rumination upon all those rationalizations and justifications that are, FAR MORE OFTEN THAN NOT, utter bullcrud. 

The discussion may also be relevant moving forward in recovery with implementing mutual strategies, concepts and tools to reduce the risk of future infidelity by either partner. Certainly holding each other accountable requires conversations about marital risks that may or may not have been present pre-affair but, again, that is a completely separate conversation than "how did this happen" in the first place and on day one of counseling.


Another way to recognize hurtful information is the enthusiasm placed upon it by waywards. This isn't a matter of betrayed spouses avoiding the pain of taking responsibility themselves for their contribution to the marital woes pre-affair. 95% of the time they are more than willing to own their behavior as well as everything they are being or have been gaslighted into owning. Instead Waywards like it because it keeps the focus and attention on THEIR pain....as their betrayed spouse bleeds out on the floor.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> Because life is not b&w and b&w thinking can be highly destructive.
> 
> _"Dichotomies impose a false and sharp (knife-edge discrimination) polarization on the world and allow no middle ground or spectrum . . . It is not difficult to see how this tradition in thinking has led to persecution, wars, conflicts, etc. When we add this to our beliefs in dialectic, argument and evolutionary clash we end up with a thinking system that is almost designed to create problems."_
> 
> ...


I won't argue with you because you like it too much. But I will say this. Some things are black and white. You and whoever can try and add grey, it won't matter, some thing will be Black and White. 

Infidelity, is black and right.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

personofinterest said:


> Blues, I didn't ask you if you were wrong. What I asked was do you think her behavior contributed to your vulnerability. So what you are saying to me is that you would have made the exact same wrong choices and would have been just as vulnerable had she been an amazing spouse. What you are telling me is that no matter what had happened or not happened in your marriage, your emotional state would have been exactly the same. So basically what you are saying is that no one should ever come to a marriage forum and Complain about anything. Because what my spouse does or does not do should not affect me at all.


I am going to acquiesce to this point. If my wife, what not who she was, I would not have wanted to leave my marriage, or cheat.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Is there actually a single quote from her where she explicitly excuses the behaviour of a WS? I am genuinely curious if there is one.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Quality said:


> The results are pretty clear....It gives wayward license to say things like "but-for my/our lack of sexual compatibility, I would have never cheated" which is completely illogically considering that nearly every relationship has peaks, valleys and crisises, which, having been a person that CHOSE to cheat in one circumstance could never truly claim that another circumstance, crisis, lull in another universe with this wife or some other wife wouldn't have resulted in the same grievous mistake.


Not much I can say since you won't take my position as stated, even if you are too polite to call me a liar to my face.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

inmyprime said:


> Is there actually a single quote from her where she explicitly excuses the behaviour of a WS? I am genuinely curious if there is one.


I don't think one is necessary. She is clearly getting derided here for the sin of any explanation that doesn't begin and end with "Cheaters are bad, M'kay?"


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> Blues, I didn't ask you if you were wrong. What I asked was do you think her behavior contributed to your vulnerability. So what you are saying to me is that you would have made the exact same wrong choices and would have been just as vulnerable had she been an amazing spouse. What you are telling me is that no matter what had happened or not happened in your marriage, your emotional state would have been exactly the same. So basically what you are saying is that no one should ever come to a marriage forum and Complain about anything. Because what my spouse does or does not do should not affect me at all.


But nobody is a perfect spouse and MAYBE the reason they aren't or weren't perfect was the wayward spouse's fault. Where does the "contextualizing" end?


If Cletus can say butt-for his wife not having sex with him he wouldn't have ever cheated, then can't she say "butt-for" if Cletus were more attractive, made more moeny, helped out more at home or with the kids or been better in bed, more gentle and affectionate with her or more understanding of her aversions and history of XYZ she might have had more sex with him and averted him feeling so desperate, then butt-for this and butt-for that.

This thread is another demonstration of why Perel's discussions are hurtful to couples reconciling. "How the affair happened" is a circular discussion that is always going to result in hurt feelings.

The conversations are just destructive and pointless and do nothing for the then tremendously hurting spouse. Perels is a terrible advisor to newly recovering couples (wayward or betrayed) seeking to work on marital reconciliation (even if the waywards like it).


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Quality said:


> This thread is another demonstration of why Perel's discussions are hurtful to couples reconciling. "How the affair happened" is a circular discussion that is always going to result in hurt feelings.


Hurt feelings are a necessary component of resolution. You cannot fix a problem of the magnitude of infidelity without breaking some eggs. You sure as hell cannot fix it by avoiding the truth to save hurt feelings.

The root statement that applies to my marriage would be "I should have never married you in the first place without sex before marriage". I have never had to say those words directly, but funny thing - she too is now a believer in premarital relations.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Not much I can say since you won't take my position as stated, even if you are too polite to call me a liar to my face.


A liar???

I simply do not believe your FEELINGS are truth. That is all. 

I believe you feel that way. 

I'm in the camp of NOBODY can say they are impervious to infidelity (and people that think they are impervious have just added another risk factor upon themselves - why be careful at all if one is so sure they would never go _there_}


As I contextualize this thread, I'm getting the feeling that you might feel your wife was fortunate that YOU decided to stay with her instead of the other way around.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"I'm in the camp of NOBODY can say they are impervious to infidelity (and people that think they are impervious have just added another risk factor upon themselves - why be careful at all if one is so sure they would never go there}"

Yep. Pride goes before the fall. Be careful when you think you stand...lest you fall.

Arrogance is a poor boundary waiting to happen.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Quality said:


> A liar???
> 
> I simply do not believe your FEELINGS are truth. That is all.
> 
> I believe you feel that way.


Ok, fair enough.



> As I contextualize this thread, I'm getting the feeling that you might feel your wife was fortunate that YOU decided to stay with her instead of the other way around.


She was fortunate. So was I. It was a win-win. Just the other day she remarked that the older I get, the more she likes me. That's EXACTLY why some marriages, rocked by infidelity, are still worth salvaging. Even when you don't get every jot and tittle of what you desire.

I am fundamentally a good husband with a nearly unforgivable black mark on my record.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Hurt feelings are a necessary component of resolution. You cannot fix a problem of the magnitude of infidelity without breaking some eggs. You sure as hell cannot fix it by avoiding the truth to save hurt feelings.
> 
> The root statement that applies to my marriage would be "I should have never married you in the first place without sex before marriage". I have never had to say those words directly, but funny thing - she too is now a believer in premarital relations.


{I'm not classifying you or anyone as an active wayward here}


Active unrepentant wayward spouse aren't exactly the best sources for anything resembling "truth".

Entertaining wayward truth is a waste of time and, FAR more often than not, near complete hurtful fabrications.

My wife is utterly embarrassed by some of the things she said and did way back then. There's just no sense to the exercise until both spouses are stabilized and consciously decide they both want to go _there_


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus, just curious, did your wife read Perel and agree with your thoughts on her?


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

Cletus said:


> She was fortunate.


But, I'm guessing that is one egg or truth you don't share with her so directly. Telling her she's lucky you didn't just leave her back then for more favorable sexual possibilities probably doesn't earn you a lot of those "new liking you" points. 


Freshly active unrepentant waywards don't exercise such discretion, empathy or concern. It's GENERALLY all about them and they TEND TO LOVE Mrs. Perel because she expresses the waywards truths and hurts for them so they don't need or have to feel more like crap bringing up their hurtful rationalizations and justifications. As long as the professional wants to talk about it...let's "contextualize" away.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> I won't argue with you because you like it too much.


Most of the time, it's just not worth the time to be honest. Especially when people keep breaking rules and resort to personal smart ass comments such as the above instead of addressing a point with a valid argument.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> "I'm in the camp of NOBODY can say they are impervious to infidelity (and people that think they are impervious have just added another risk factor upon themselves - why be careful at all if one is so sure they would never go there}"
> 
> Yep. Pride goes before the fall. Be careful when you think you stand...lest you fall.
> 
> Arrogance is a poor boundary waiting to happen.


I am impervious to infidelity by the same person more then once. It's not about pride it's just about common sense. I think the folks who follow EP advice will be more susceptible to be cheated on and to cheating. I would bet money on it. 

With all these conversations I am reminded that Reconciliation is about people working SO HARD for SO LITTLE. And yet there are people who's cheating spouse tells them they cheated because they weren't getting what they wanted and still the BS stays. I will ever understand that not in a million years. 

Chumplady is the one who gets it the best, follow her advice and you have a better shot of not getting cheated on again.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

The example of how Hitler rose to power is a good one. Understanding the history and the *context *how he rose to power does not suddenly *excuse* him or his actions.

'But he did very bad things and learning history is just an excuse for someone like Hitler to keep rising to power!' 

I mean...how do you argue with that. :scratchhead:


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Quality said:


> But, I'm guessing that is one egg or truth you don't share with her so directly. Telling her she's lucky you didn't just leave her back then for more favorable sexual possibilities probably doesn't earn you a lot of those "new liking you" points.


Of course not, I don't go out of my way to cause unnecessary pain. 

It is sufficient to know that we both know the truth, even if it is left unsaid.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Bananapeel said:


> When my XW had the affair she was able to get all her holes filled (pun intended) that I wasn't addressing in our relationship, *albeit for a brief time and at a very high cost.*


The bolded is a particularly nice turn of phrase.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"
I am impervious to infidelity by the same person more then once"

Lol

Quality and I were referring to those people who are arrogant enough to believe they are above cheating no matter what.

Even the toughest infidelity psychologist out there knows that's crap.

"I would never" are the famous last words of the foolish.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> Most of the time, it's just not worth the time to be honest. Especially when people keep breaking rules and resort to personal smart ass comments such as the above instead of addressing a point with a valid argument.


Wow, I never took you for such a sensitive snowflake. Gee golly sorry for upsetting you. 

I answered the questions, in other posts. I think her (ester's) take on infidelity is wrong. I see it as black and white. And I don't choose to go back and forth with you about it. 

You are as entrenched in your opinion as I am, what is the point?


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> Wow, I never took you for such a sensitive snowflake. Gee golly sorry for upsetting you.
> 
> I answered the questions, in other posts. I think her (ester's) take on infidelity is wrong. I see it as black and white. And I don't choose to go back and forth with you about it.
> 
> You are as entrenched in your opinion as I am, what is the point?


Not upset in the slightest. Sometimes running low on patience though. There's nothing wrong with being 'entrenched' in an opinion, as long as it is not based on a misunderstanding of the facts. Your position is that there is (generally) no excuse for cheating. It is the same position I hold and it is the same position most people hold, including Perel.
But if we keep arguing about something she didn't say (excusing cheating), then I agree, there is no point.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> Not upset in the slightest. Sometimes running low on patience though. There's nothing wrong with being 'entrenched' in an opinion, as long as it is not based on a misunderstanding of the facts. Your position is that there is (generally) no excuse for cheating. It is the same position I hold and it is the same position most people hold, including Perel.
> But if we keep arguing about something she didn't say (excusing cheating), then I agree, there is no point.


My point is this about Perel... When you start contextualizing infidelity, that is in fact, by the sheer fact that you are "looking" at the context, is a justification. You can call it understanding, you can call it a duck. 

That process, has to be a justification if you are doing type of thinking. Therefore, I think it is wrong. 

There is no justification, there is no rationalization there is no understanding... It is wrong, it does not matter why it happened, it is just wrong. 

You can read in interpret that anyway that you want. I read it the way I stated. Therefore, her thought process is flawed, it is wrong, and I will bet that, like all modern counselors, her thinking has eventually caused more divorces than it will ever prevent. 

It is ok to call me obtuse, but that is my point and it is where I stand...


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

personofinterest said:


> "I'm in the camp of NOBODY can say they are impervious to infidelity (and people that think they are impervious have just added another risk factor upon themselves - why be careful at all if one is so sure they would never go there}"
> 
> Yep. Pride goes before the fall. Be careful when you think you stand...lest you fall.
> 
> Arrogance is a poor boundary waiting to happen.


Honor is not arrogance.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> "
> I am impervious to infidelity by the same person more then once"
> 
> Lol
> ...


While I generally agree with the concept you are espousing, I will never cheat because I am on guard against it, knowing the pitfalls that can ensnare me.

I won't because I have understanding and, barring some form of illness or trauma of some sort, I will always choose to guard against infidelity.

I know what you are talking about though. There were a whole lot of women in certain church congregations that were taught they weren't sexual creatures and that sexual sin was a males only club.

These women were not forewarned and not prepared for when they were vulnerable and tempted.

Many of them destroyed their families by cheating.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

^^^ yep! ( bohannons response) I’m betting there are ppl who are ironclad in their convictions. They’ll never cheat and they know it.


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

There are people who will not kill. People who will not steal. Those who will not eat meat or harm a animal. There are plenty that would give someone their last dime.

And believe it or not, there are some that can love forever.

Why is it so hard to believe that plenty of people would not cheat on some one they loved?

We really dont get the fatalistic thought pattern.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

I don't think I will cheat because I know I am susceptible to the temptation like anyone. But I purposely take myself out of situations where that might happen. I agree with @ConanHub if you never think about it and guard against it you are susceptible to it. 

Also cheating is obviously great fun while it is happening. It's exciting and makes you feel attractive. I think people are not prepared for that feeling as well. 

Finally then there are broken people who were going to cheat because they just do whatever they want.

I find people who say everyone can cheat are people who stay with cheaters or who cheated themselves. It's just not true. There are cheaters and non cheaters.


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

* Katies
I think you'll find most people who have affairs are not in bad marriages. *

I beg to differ. I read several forums where the sex and affection only happens a few times a year up to nothing for the last 15 years.

Up to 25% of marriages have one partner that is low drive and one partner that is high drive, along with other marital issues.
Forum | ILIASM Forum
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/sexlessmarriage/
I could list more but here are two examples of relationship forums where people struggle because there are miss matches in the relationship. Even on TAM you read about people surviving on starvation rations of affection and desire.

You are correct (cheaters are not in bad marriages) if you only consider players and people with entitlement attitudes.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Handy said:


> * Katies
> I think you'll find most people who have affairs are not in bad marriages. *
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sure there are many marriages like this. It has nothing to do with cheating though. 
I maintain that most of the cheating goes on in relatively good marriages because it has nothing to do with the marriage and everything to do with the selfishness, immaturity and entitlement of the WS.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> ^^^ yep! ( bohannons response) I’m betting there are ppl who are ironclad in their convictions. They’ll never cheat and they know it.


 Did you think you were one of those people before you chose to cheat?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

"I don't think I will cheat because I know I am susceptible to the temptation like anyone. But I purposely take myself out of situations where that might happen. I agree with @ConanHubif you never think about it and guard against it you are susceptible to it. "

Now see, this makes absolute sense to me. You know that you are human, and so you have very strong boundaries to keep yourself from ever be in close to that line. That is what a wise person does. The fool is the one who says I am so morally superior that I don't even have to think about this terrible thing that I shall never do. That's the kind of foolishness I am referring to. Guarding yourself is actually saying I know I am human and imperfect, so I'm going to be very careful.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> Did you think you were one of those people before you chose to cheat?


I did not. I never thought about it. I went through life with not many convictions.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheBohannons said:


> Honor is not arrogance.


It definitely can be. It's all about attitude (see above).

I think I have clarified what I meant by this, so I won't go down this particular rabbit hole again.


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

Why is someone who stands by his/her word/vows, a fool or considered "morally superior"? 

My definition of a fool is getting into a LTR with anyone who thinks "everyone can cheat". I would find that statement coming from a love interest, a huge red flag. And if they did cheat, who would be the fool?

I do not consider myself morally superior. I had my bad boy days where I hurt/disappointed quite a few women, some I deeply regret. Understanding that sex in a relationship means a whole lot more than casual sex, doesn't make me better than anyone, or a fool. 

There is another group of folks who would not cheat. Those who have had their hearts ripped out, left for dead, but rose to live another day. Those who have lived in the darkness that shreds you, makes you questions your very existence, your worthiness of love and happiness. I would dare say the majority of those who were afflicted, have no desire to inflict.

People have very different definitions of a fool.


----------



## Randy2 (Jul 19, 2016)

I haven't read this entire thread but can see the clearly different positions. I am currently reading short stories and novels by John Updike. He writes about couples and coupling in the 1960's and 1970's and later, looking back on the 60's and 70's. He was a best selling author and included a LOT of extra marital affairs by men and women. While he acknowledges positives AND negatives of those affairs, there is not much judgment, guilt, or blame. Lots of people bought his books and now lots of people buy various "shades of grey". As a species, we seem to like to comment on this topic... A LOT, 11 pages here of comment in 2 days.


----------



## TheGoodGuy (Apr 22, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> "I don't think I will cheat because I know I am susceptible to the temptation like anyone. But I purposely take myself out of situations where that might happen. I agree with @ConanHubif you never think about it and guard against it you are susceptible to it. "
> 
> Now see, this makes absolute sense to me. You know that you are human, and so you have very strong boundaries to keep yourself from ever be in close to that line. That is what a wise person does. The fool is the one who says I am so morally superior that I don't even have to think about this terrible thing that I shall never do. That's the kind of foolishness I am referring to. Guarding yourself is actually saying *I know I am human and imperfect, so I'm going to be very careful.*


To add to this, I put a very high importance, *indeed a crucial differentiation for me*, on integrity and honesty. Not that it makes me morally superior, it's just what I hold as* my most valuable quality/core value*. Guarding myself also says "I care enough and respect my partner enough keep myself out of situations that could get me in trouble, even if it's just the perception of misconduct."


----------



## TheGoodGuy (Apr 22, 2013)

TheBohannons said:


> Why is someone who stands by his/her word/vows, a fool or considered "morally superior"?
> 
> My definition of a fool is getting into a LTR with anyone who thinks "everyone can cheat". I would find that statement coming from a love interest, a huge red flag. And if they did cheat, who would be the fool?
> 
> ...


Agreed.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I value integrity is well. I am going to make darn sure I am never even in a position to entertain any thought of inappropriateness with my husband. I don't even think about anyone else, and I'm going to make sure it stays that way. I respect people who have integrity when their integrity is across-the-board. The integrity someone carries into their marriage should also be the integrity that they carry into their personal interactions and their professional lives, especially if they happen to be a member of a state bar association. Not breaking the law and not breaking about are both very very important.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> I don't even think about anyone else, and I'm going to make sure it stays that way.


The key really is to have a plan when you do think that way. You have no control over who you are attracted to.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

katies said:


> I'm guessing the excuses I listed previously did nothing for my husband's pain, humiliation and emasculation of my affair.
> I do not see your point. The WS must take the blame and bear the responsiblity of betrayal. The BS understanding it? For what purpose? So he understands I had a crappy childhood and may have been going through a MLC. Is that supposed to ease his pain? It made him furious. Rightly so.


A cheater has broken trust. I agree with what you say if the BS decides to leave. But if they consider reconciliation, part of that is deciding how likely there is to be another episode, and whether you can live with that. That's where understanding comes in.

It doesn't make cheating right or acceptable in any way. It just gives a feel for future risk, and maybe to paths for reducing it.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

katies said:


> THIS is your analogy?
> 
> You walk out the door and never have anything to do with someone who purposely starves you, especially if doing so means you can feed yourself.


Depends on your definition of marriage. You might have a religious aspect, you might feel a responsibility to the children you raised with your spouse, you might not be in a financial position to leave. And so on.

You can do something about the financial position. The other two are harder....if those are your values.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

BluesPower said:


> IF YOU CHEAT you are wrong, no if, not ands, not buts.
> .


Who disagreed with this?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Wazza said:


> Who disagreed with this?


Absolutely. No. One.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

sokillme said:


> The key really is to have a plan when you do think that way. You have no control over who you are attracted to.


Yes, but sometimes you don't see your own failure coming. Thinking about it beforehand allows you to prepare. Makes it more likely you will have a plan.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Wazza said:


> Yes, but sometimes you don't see your own failure coming. Thinking about it beforehand allows you to prepare. Makes it more likely you will have a plan.


Yeah that was my point, have a plan ahead of time, even if you are sure you will never be tempted.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Esther and other recent researchers bring up new ideas for us to consider.

A big one is that for women, stats seem to show that their desire for their long term partner declines much sooner than their man's desire for them does. 

This is information that can be used to your advantage if you want to view it that way.

The whole thing about keeping her interested and "on fire" really makes sense in that light. Women may be less able to stay desirous for a long term partner, but she is more likely to stay desirous of him if there is more intrigue, more mystery, and more novelty per Ester Perel.

I've been in a partnership where there was always that mystery element. And it kept my fires stoked eternally, it seemed. The mystery was about when and where he was going to take me. Or about what he might inspect on me this time...my panties? My bra? Or it was about what sexually intriguing thing he might say or do next. He kept the fun and excitement alive and I responded with eternal desire for him.

Granted this may not work with other couples, we had mad chemistry and sexual compatibility from the start. But I just know that if he hadn't been the type to constantly stokes my coals, I would not have been so sexually into him for the duration of our relationship (13 years).

Also, I'm very GGG so that matters too.

I guess my point is just that if you start off with a good, well matched hand, you should be able to stay in the game as long as you are both GGG and if the male partner is able to keep adding mystery to their sex life. She can certainly add mystery to it too, but it would seem that isn't required for him to stay desirous, whereas it is required for her to stay desirous.

Never once in my relationship with him did I even fantasize about another man. I did not have even a crush, nor think twice about any man during our relationship. I noticed if a man was attractive, but I never once considered him in a fantasy sense. I was completely sexually faithful to my ex. In large part because he understood how his own sexual desires could feed mine.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

sokillme said:


> Yeah that was my point, have a plan ahead of time, even if you are sure you will never be tempted.


We are in violent agreement


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

A woman needs to feel she’s desired, a man needs to feel he is respected (with various exceptions and variations on this).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

BluesPower said:


> When you start contextualizing infidelity, that is in fact, by the sheer fact that you are "looking" at the context, is a justification. You can call it understanding, you can call it a duck.
> 
> That process, has to be a justification if you are doing type of thinking. Therefore, I think it is wrong.
> 
> There is no justification, there is no rationalization there is no understanding... It is wrong, it does not matter why it happened, it is just wrong.


Well, that states and defines, admirably clearly, the point of view I disagree with. Except that I agree with "it is wrong", of course, but I disagree with the overall viewpoint: it is not *"just"* wrong.

I remember going to a long lecture by the lead of a jet aerobatic display flying team, about how they debriefed after EVERY display or rehearsal, without blame. Everything that went "not as intended" would be carefully analysed, with no stigma or reprisals. "What can we learn?" And none of that attitude means they think "it's perfectly okay to have a crash", of course! 


My first wife was one of those women, I believe, who are way up the scale towards instinctive fidelity. I never felt any doubt with her. People vary in this regard. And I don't think it's that she was necessarily a "more moral" person. I may be wrong, but I suspect she would have been like that with any husband. 


On the other hand, I was once dating a woman who tended the other way. She said to me, in all seriousness, that she was going to meet "that guy" for dinner, "_but he's just a friend_", and "_okay I know that he will want to sleep with me_", but "_nothing's going to happen, because I don't intend it to_"! And of course, that guy was the man she had already cheated on her (now ex) husband with. She was puzzled that I saw this as what we'd call a "red flag", although this was long ago and I was much less clued-up then. Even then, my frustration was not that she was "immoral" but that she seemed a bit stupid in this area. 

Let me clarify that this was a woman who was extremely intelligent in terms of IQ, and of many fine moral qualities, kind, socially responsible, lots of volunteering work, free of drugs and that kind of stuff, conscientious with money, not an abuser or a liar. She sincerely believed the rubbish she was saying. 

And it seemed to me, even then, that there was something inside herself that she was unwilling to look at, and so she closed her eyes. A specific fear, which more or less directed her life. I guess if someone could have helped her unpack the failure of her marriage, her life might have changed. On the other hand, I'm sure she would have been most unwilling to look at it. She, too, was very very resistant to thinking about why people do the things they do. I don't know the details of what had happened to her. But these days I'd hear a phrase like "people are basically simple" as a big red flag from a potential date.


----------



## RWB (Feb 6, 2010)

She plays both sides of the fence depending on her target audience. I still contend... no one can drive their partner to cheat. Unless you pack-em into the car and drop them off at the AP house. >


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Just watched her TED talk you posted a link to @Cletus

I support some of her ideas and think they are healthy.

Some of her ideas are simply opinion or point of view and she is only looking at infidelity from a certain foundation that doesn't consider fundamental, core or primal issues.

I'm sure she covers more ground than is displayed in this video so I will continue to research.

Bottom line though, once all the over thinking and fancy talking is done, people cheat for shi**Y, selfish, weak and desperate reasons.

People have always had the ability to crap on the dinner table. Nothing spectacular or revealing or new about the core of why people cheat.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

Laurentium said:


> Well, that states and defines, admirably clearly, the point of view I disagree with. Except that I agree with "it is wrong", of course, but I disagree with the overall viewpoint: it is not *"just"* wrong.
> 
> I remember going to a long lecture by the lead of a jet aerobatic display flying team, about how they debriefed after EVERY display or rehearsal, without blame. Everything that went "not as intended" would be carefully analysed, with no stigma or reprisals. "What can we learn?" And none of that attitude means they think "it's perfectly okay to have a crash", of course!
> 
> ...



Some women really need lots of male attention. They can otherwise be great people, but they need regular validation from men. 

This is the same type of woman that has mostly men friends because she "has more in common with men". The truth is that she likes the attention and doesn't want to compete with other women for it. 

It's often the same woman that keeps her exes as "friends" and gets upset when they move on because she needs to feel like she was so special they just couldn't move on. 

Such women make poor partners.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

You make an excellent point, life is too short. It sounds cheesy and like a bunch of pop psychology, but we really need to learn to validate ourselves. Relying on any outside source for the core of our validation is just dangerous. And precarious.

I also agree with you about these women who say they like men better because other women have so much drama. Honestly, those women have more drama than any regular women I have ever met. Plus, let's get real. Either they like the male ego strokes or they just don't feel romantic attraction to the opposite sex.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

It's pretty simple you need a partner who believes in loyalty and honor, and whose personal integrity is more important then their feelings. You may not have a marriage that last forever but you will most likely avoid infidelity. 

I protect myself from temptation but I do that because at the end of the day I am not a cheater, and I never will be. If I find that I am tempted too much then there is something wrong in my marriage that I will address with my wife, if we can fix it then I will divorce. My personal integrity is more important then my immediate need for gratification. Priorities.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> Bottom line though, once all the over thinking and fancy talking is done, people cheat for shi**Y, selfish, weak and desperate reasons.


I'm so tired of seeing this statement.

Not because it isn't true. It is. But because it's like having to read a dozen posts a day by people saying "Guess what! The sky is blue!"

People cheat for ****ty, selfish, weak, and desperate reasons. But they typically don't cheat out of malicious intent to hurt their partner. Some of those ****ty, selfish, weak, and desperate reasons could be mitigated if both partners were aware of what creates them in the first place. Neglect your wife? Her selfish need for comfort and attachment might lead to an affair. Cut off your husband? His desperate need for sex opens the door to an affair. 

You've inoculated yourself against infidelity by being constantly vigilant. But that vigilance requires knowledge. You cannot reasonably protect yourself against a threat you do not understand or do not even recognize exists. That's the benefit to someone putting out Ted talks, books, and lectures that contextualize affairs - so that others can learn. 

Being diligent against infidelity comes in two flavors - what you do to keep yourself out of harm's way, and what you do to protect your spouse. You may fail at both, but you ignore either at your own peril.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

You might be as tired of seeing that statement as I am of hearing bull**** excuses, justifications and rationalizations.

I only made that statement, again, in part of my answer to Esther's video because she ignored it mostly.

There are also a lot of cheaters that have good marriages and spouses but have the self discipline of a goat in heat.

Like I also said, she has some healthy advice that I advocate.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

personofinterest said:


> You make an excellent point, life is too short. It sounds cheesy and like a bunch of pop psychology, but we really need to learn to validate ourselves. Relying on any outside source for the core of our validation is just dangerous. And precarious.
> 
> I also agree with you about these women who say they like men better because other women have so much drama. Honestly, those women have more drama than any regular women I have ever met. Plus, let's get real. Either they like the male ego strokes or they just don't feel romantic attraction to the opposite sex.


Right?

This idea that somehow, as a woman, you have nothing in common with any other women is ridiculous. Not you personally of course..... I'm speaking to this woman that has nothing in common with other women.

Find women friends that share your interests. I'm an introverted actuary with a bachelor's degree in physics who runs, has a black belt, likes to fight, and doesn't do drama. 

Yet somehow I have a pretty big group of women friends that I have things in common with. 

I do run with mostly men, but that's because I'm fast enough that there aren't so many women who keep up. But there are some badass women runners out there and I'm friends with some, so we meet up when we can. And afterwards I socialize with mostly women. 

It can be done.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

> what you do to keep yourself out of harm's way, and *what you do to protect your spouse*


For some reason the latter is insulting to a particular type of spouse....I guess the type that doesn't want the aggravation of meeting the needs of the person they, at some point, claimed to love.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> Some of those ****ty, selfish, weak, and desperate reasons could be mitigated if both partners were aware of what creates them in the first place. Neglect your wife? Her selfish need for comfort and attachment might lead to an affair. Cut off your husband? His desperate need for sex opens the door to an affair.
> 
> .


^^still blaming the marriage or the partner, IMO.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> You might be as tired of seeing that statement as I am of hearing bull**** excuses, justifications and rationalizations.
> 
> I only made that statement, again, in part of my answer to Esther's video because she ignored it mostly.
> 
> ...


Yes, I wasn't picking on you personally. 

I understand fully why people want to ensure that cheaters are held accountable for their choices.

I do not understand (and you are not suggesting) why studying the context of their bad behavior is considered a bad thing. It doesn't happen in a vacuum. 

As I said earlier, and I want to repeat for emphasis -

If a spouse divorces, absolutely no one in this forum or anywhere else would suggest that in most cases both parties didn't play some part in the dissolution of the marriage. If instead the spouse cheats, it's as if there's some magically retroactive time machine that undoes anything the BS might have contributed to the situation and wipes her slate as clean as a freshly baptized sinner. 

That some cannot differentiate between what makes a person want to cheat and acting on that desire baffles me. No BS _makes_ a WS cheat - but they can sure as hell put a bat in your hand, helmet on your head, and stand you up in front of the plate. Human nature being what it is - and ignoring it or deriding it doesn't make it go away - if you neglect your spouse enough, you're nearly begging for that to happen. 

How can anyone reconcile those two viewpoints? The choice the WS makes at the moment of cheating does not change the past. As for contextualizing, we do that for the worst crimes for which we have laws against. That's why we have "Self defense", "Crime of passion", and "In cold blood" variations on the homicide theme. Context ALWAYS matters.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> ^^still blaming the marriage or the partner, IMO.


Yes, for the conditions that made cheating attractive.

No, for the choice to act on that attraction.

It's really not that hard to grasp.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

personofinterest said:


> For some reason the latter is insulting to a particular type of spouse....I guess the type that doesn't want the aggravation of meeting the needs of the person they, at some point, claimed to love.


I guess if the position that "I put a ring on your finger, now I get to treat you any damned way I like and expect your continued fidelity" works for you, then good luck.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Sure, if you divorce someone because of all of those reasons that caused the divorce.
But cheating for those kinds of reasons doesnt' make sense. You aren't getting something from the marriage then leave. How is cheating going to make that better? 
There is a time right before the cheater cheats where he says to himself, "I deserve this. I'm entitled this." because of X, Y, Z. But the moment he gives himself the green light THAT is the issue I have. Giving themselves the green light has nothing to do with the situation they are in. It has to do with their lack of integrity, moral compass, and maturity. 
You can still divorce and have integrity, morality and maturity.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Cletus said:


> I guess if the position that "I put a ring on your finger, now I get to treat you any damned way I like and expect your continued fidelity" works for you, then good luck.


Which is funny, because a very famous psychologist wrote a book called His needs, Her Needs: *How to Affair-Proof Your Marriage*

So...um....maybe it actually IS a good idea to try to take care of your spouse. Not because ANY mistreatment justifies an affair (it doesn't), but because...I dunno....you want to be a good spouse?


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

of course it's a good idea to treat your spouse well. 
If not, you should expect a plea for MC, IC, or divorce, not an affair.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

What I find interesting in reading this thread is the people who seem resonate with Perel's thinking, which I interpret as being, if their are problems in the marriage it's understandable but not acceptable to have an affair, are the same people in many cases who are dead set against divorce. I wonder if the correlation is if you are terribly against divorce then you feel trapped, so maybe you feel that infidelity is understandable. In a sense an affair is much less of a crime then getting a divorce is. 

This kind of is in keeping with my other post, my thinking being if you are not happy, say something and if that still doesn't fix it get a divorce. Seems a sad but reasonable response to a relational impasse. Lots of times, in my mind infidelity if you are unhappy seems as unreasonable as raping someone if you are horny (disgustingly unreasonable, hence my distaste for EP) This doesn't seem to be the case if you think divorce is just not reasonable though. It's also in keeping with my thinking that marriage for marriage sake is really a terrible way of thinking, especially if it leaves you feeling trapped enough that having an affair is at any point a seeming reasonable response to your unhappiness. I still have to go back to the fact that all these things are really the end result of not being assertive in your life. Infidelity as described by Perel is the ultimate form of passive aggression.

I would never want to be married to someone who cares more about the marriage then me. That is really a selfish way of thinking because they care about the marriage because of how it makes them think about themselves. Again the marriage is about receiving not giving. Not a good way to think in any relationship.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> of course it's a good idea to treat your spouse well.
> If not, you should expect a plea for MC, IC, or divorce, not an affair.


I definitely agree with this.

Now, I am not an advocate of divorcing willy-nilly, especially with children. I think divorce should be an option after all means of fixing the marriage have been exhausted. HOWEVER, I DO think that some of the anti-divorce mantras - especially in the church - creates more problems. For example, one of the main reasons I stayed in such a horrible marriage for so long was because "God hates divorce." Yeah, I get that. I was dying inside and out. My grown children hate the institution of marriage. I should have divorced YEARS before I did.

I do think sokillme is onto something. When a person is at the end of their rope and know there is no hope, they are very vulnerable. Maybe if they considered the option of divorce rather than marriage at all costs, they would choose THAT instead of an affair.

It's like when your house is on fire. You GET OUT. You don't try to put out the fire with gasoline!


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

sokillme said:


> I still have to go back to the fact that all these things are really the end result of not being assertive in your life. Infidelity as described by Perel is the ultimate form of passive aggression.


truth right here.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

sokillme said:


> What I find interesting in reading this thread is the people who seem resonate with Perel's thinking, which I interpret as being, if their are problems in the marriage it's understandable but not acceptable to have an affair, are the same people in many cases who are dead set against divorce. I wonder if the correlation is if you are terribly against divorce then you feel trapped, so maybe you feel that infidelity is understandable. In a sense an affair is much less of a crime then getting a divorce is.


I don't know if this is true as a whole, and I know it's certainly not true in my case. I think it is more about personality type than anything else. I'm highly analytical and like to know reasons behind things so I can understand how they happened and whether I need to do things to improve how I function in life.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Bananapeel said:


> I don't know if this is true as a whole, and I know it's certainly not true in my case. I think it is more about personality type than anything else. I'm highly analytical and like to know reasons behind things so I can understand how they happened and whether I need to do things to improve how I function in life.


I confess for me there is an element of control. Like, if I could just figure out exactly WHY my exh was so neglectful and hurtful, and I could analyze it, then I could form a plan, execute some sort of action, and make it better.

I finally realized that even if I found a why, it didn't excuse the kind of husband he was, and I was basically spending a lot of time trying to be "good enough" for him to step up. Screw that BS lol


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> Sure, if you divorce someone because of all of those reasons that caused the divorce.
> But cheating for those kinds of reasons doesnt' make sense. You aren't getting something from the marriage then leave. How is cheating going to make that better?
> There is a time right before the cheater cheats where he says to himself, "I deserve this. I'm entitled this." because of X, Y, Z. But the moment he gives himself the green light THAT is the issue I have. Giving themselves the green light has nothing to do with the situation they are in. It has to do with their lack of integrity, moral compass, and maturity.
> You can still divorce and have integrity, morality and maturity.


I give up. Because I do not disagree with anything in the above paragraph.

"You aren't getting something from the marriage then leave". What Perel et. al. are trying to do is to identify why it is that we "don't get something from the marriage" long before it gets to the point of "leave". And the only way to do THAT is to post-mortem relationships that ended for just such a reason, including the ones where integrity, morality, and maturity were lacking.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> What I find interesting in reading this thread is the people who seem resonate with Perel's thinking, which I interpret as being, if their are problems in the marriage it's understandable but not acceptable to have an affair, are the same people in many cases who are dead set against divorce.


This I think might be a useful insight. Given the choice of two evils, which do you consider the worst? The widespread acceptance of divorce is a recent phenomenon - perhaps the people who are most inclined to see marriage as "permanent" have not yet caught up.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

katies said:


> truth right here.


Yep, and my problem with that is she doesn't really address the true problem. She seems to be saying fix the things that cause the difficult feelings in the marriage so there is no reason to be passive aggressive. Better advice would be passive aggressiveness is not a way to behave as it is going to cause problems in your life. Or to be really specific as it relates to marriages with this type of infidelity, WS the problems in your marriage really stem from the way you react to problems in general, specifically in a passive aggressive way, this really has nothing to do with your BS or your marriage and all to do with you. 

My feeling is fix that and then see if the same problems are still in the marriage after that point. I suspect the marriage will be much better and a lot of the problems will be gone. Being assertive in your life is usually a much more successful way to get what you want one way or another. This is true for relationships as well. Going to my last post I also suspect the passive part of people who are passive aggressive is the same reason they are so dead set against divorce a lot of the times. Divorce really requires a level of agency in ones life that someone who is passive would just be to fearful of. It's still a better choice then infidelity. Though if you marry a person who is also passive enough to never consider divorce no matter what, infidelity may be a very successful strategy to change the dynamics in the relationship. Lord knows we have read lots of post and even people on this very thread seem to attest to that. My thinking is don't sell your soul for a small bit of gratification. 

Besides that though the dynamics change but I am not sure it fixes the true problems in the relationship. It also seems unsustainable, because the underlying problems remain, again the problems aren't going to get fixed until you address the true problem. Which again is usually passive aggression which is really on you personally and not your spouse. Passive aggressive people want to view the problems as being external as to not have the responsibility of fixing themselves. In that way you can say that EP kind of reinforces bad behavior, because she allows cheaters to avoid looking at themselves as the cause of their marital problems. 

Because of all that I say she sucks, follow her at your own risk. Again I wold bet money that the cheating will continue because she doesn't effectively address the problems. At least the dysfunction in the marriage will continue. I doubt you will be happily married of it comes to it your life, like you would be if you learn to be assertive. It's like trying to keep alcohol away from an alcoholic. Will that work? Maybe for a while, but unless you deal with why they are an alcoholic eventually they are going to find a way to drink.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> This I think might be a useful insight. Given the choice of two evils, which do you consider the worst? The widespread acceptance of divorce is a recent phenomenon - perhaps the people who are most inclined to see marriage as "permanent" have not yet caught up.


Any thoughts on this part. 



> I would never want to be married to someone who cares more about the marriage then me. That is really a selfish way of thinking because they care about the marriage because of how it makes them think about themselves. Again the marriage is about receiving not giving. Not a good way to think in any relationship.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Bananapeel said:


> I don't know if this is true as a whole, and I know it's certainly not true in my case. I think it is more about personality type than anything else. I'm highly analytical and like to know reasons behind things so I can understand how they happened and whether I need to do things to improve how I function in life.


I tend towards that way too. My wife on the other hand does not. She is not a fan of dissecting our relationship. She would rather stick her head down and plow through the difficulties as they arise. So when I specifically ask questions about what I should do to be a better spouse, I often get the sense that even asking the question is a little offensive - like I should be able to just intuit the answer.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Bananapeel said:


> I don't know if this is true as a whole, and I know it's certainly not true in my case. I think it is more about personality type than anything else. I'm highly analytical and like to know reasons behind things so I can understand how they happened and whether I need to do things to improve how I function in life.


It's part of why I read and post here too. :smile2:


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> Yep, and my problem with that is she doesn't really address the true problem. She seems to be saying fix the things that cause the difficult feelings in the marriage so there is no reason to be passive aggressive. Better advice would be passive aggressiveness is not a way to behave as it is going to cause problems in your life.


No doubt, but why limit your problem solving approaches to only one? 

Phone use in cars right now is causing all kinds of accidents. We tell people "Don't use your phone in the car!". Yet that will not stop everyone from using the phone in the car because that solution ignores human nature, so we look for alternatives. 

"Don't be passive aggressive" is undoubtedly good advice, and where it works, it's the best solution. Where it does not, or where it only works imperfectly, employ other means. As upstanding a person as you no doubt are, I'm sure there's a personality quirk or two that you should probably eliminate but which you will never be able to do so. I certainly know there is for me. I'm a flawed human.

So there's nothing impure about tackling the problem by saying "Don't be passive aggressive, and BTW I will do my best to not give you any reason to want to be". My approach to my engineering career has always been "The right tool for the job". It's not "when all you have is a hammer, every job looks like a nail". 

Marriages are not individuals, they are systems, larger than the sum of their parts.  They require solutions that go beyond what you would discover from individual counseling.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

ok, but I maintain that most affairs happen in mostly happy marriages where the cause for resentment is no where near what you have to tell yourself to have an affair. That entitlement comes from within, not outside.


----------



## BarbedFenceRider (Mar 30, 2018)

^^^I agree. And EP doesn't address other areas of infidelity as well either. The emotional one that I could see.... Most of her exoneration of BS concerning sexual activity was aimed at the BS. Purely. "Get over yourself, it's just a penis going into a vagina." Nothing about the betrayal of fidelity and honor. To which the pro free sexual tint she gives is quite limiting.

I can see where she examines the WS and the gratification they get from cheating, but to knock aside the BS feelings and moral compass as to being antiquated, seems not my cup of tea.

Like others have said...Not my first book or listen to, when first dealing with infidelity. But when properly informed, it's just another view or aspect to which I can look at. Not necessarily take anything from.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> ok, but I maintain that most affairs happen in mostly happy marriages where the cause for resentment is no where near what you have to tell yourself to have an affair. That entitlement comes from within, not outside.


I have no idea whether or not this is true, or from where you get the data from which to draw that conclusion.

Nor of course do I say you are necessarily wrong. I just don't know that and would not project from my own experience to anyone else's.


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

Cletus, did your wife read Pearls book, and does she agree with what EP is trying to convey. Which is the root cause of your affair was your wife denying you sex?.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> I have no idea whether or not this is true, or from where you get the data from which to draw that conclusion.
> 
> Nor of course do I say you are necessarily wrong. I just don't know that and would not project from my own experience to anyone else's.


I'm not projecting. This is from years of reading on SI, LS, and here. I've been reading about this for 8 years. 
This is what I have read about and compiled in my head. And yes, this was my experience. 
I dont' agree that you're not projecting but whatever. 
What does your wife think of Perel's premise? Does she agree with you?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> I'm not projecting. This is from years of reading on SI, LS, and here. I've been reading about this for 8 years.
> This is what I have read about and compiled in my head. And yes, this was my experience.


I would never take the self-selected one-sided opinions to be found in internet forums to be anything close to unbiased data.



> I dont' gree that you're not projecting but whatever.


Projecting what, exactly? The notion that studying causality is a good thing? If that's what I'm projecting, then so be it. If the answer to that study is a simple "All waywards are pieces of crap, there's nothing you the potential BS can possibly do to reduce the likelihood of marital infidelity", then so be it. That has certainly not been proven to my satisfaction yet, nor apparently Perel's, who knows a lot more about it than I do.



> What does your wife think of Perel's premise? Does she agree with you?


It is not a topic we discuss together.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> I'm not projecting. This is from years of reading on SI, LS, and here. I've been reading about this for 8 years.
> This is what I have read about and compiled in my head. And yes, this was my experience.
> I dont' agree that you're not projecting but whatever.
> What does your wife think of Perel's premise? Does she agree with you?


So basically, your view comes from reading marriage forums where people post about having been cheated on.

No wonder you believe all marriages with infidelity were blissfully happy.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> Projecting what, exactly? .


You're implying that you should be let off the hook a little because the state of your marriage caused you to cheat. And you found someone quasi qualified to back up your point. 
I'm arguing against your premise and hers.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

TheBohannons said:


> Cletus, did your wife read Pearls book, and does she agree with what EP is trying to convey. Which is the root cause of your affair was your wife denying you sex?.


No, she is not the type to study these things in any depth. 

The root cause of my affair was my dissatisfaction with our incompatible sex life. I wasn't denied sex, but the sex was so vanilla, constrained, and lacking in eroticism that we could not find a sustainable compromise. I'll spare you the long form that will sound like pleading for understanding - it's all way back in the archives here if you are exceptionally bored one day. 

But I will say that I had it not been an issue, I am 110% certain I would have never been unfaithful.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> You're implying that you should be let off the hook a little because the state of your marriage caused you to cheat. And you found someone quasi qualified to back up your point.
> I'm arguing against your premise and hers.


Well *I* don't think there is ever an excuse to cheat. I think even if your marriage is hell on earth you shouldn't cheat. I just think the belief that how you treat your spouse has no effect on their well-being or vulnerability is...willfully blind.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> No wonder you believe all marriages with infidelity were blissfully happy.


never ever said this. 
never said all, never said blissfully. 

read what your own Ms. Perel says about cheating in happy marriages then. 
This is what I've observed, and I took into account all sides. Read a little at SI. Most of the folks (BS and WS) posting were in (I'll spell it out to you what I said) MOSTLY happy marriages where there weren't big enough resentments to cause people to cheat.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

personofinterest said:


> Well *I* don't think there is ever an excuse to cheat. I think even if your marriage is hell on earth you shouldn't cheat. I just think the belief that how you treat your spouse has no effect on their well-being or vulnerability is...willfully blind.


I agree. But being vulnerable doesn't mean you jump off the cliff. You just don't. IF that was the case then boy I better be nice and treat him well or he'll cheat. I better control him with my actions because for sure he can't control himself. Just... no. I mean, we all feel vulnerable from time to time. Sometimes our spouses contribute to that. But that has nothing to do with cheating.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> You're implying that you should be let off the hook a little because the state of your marriage caused you to cheat. And you found someone quasi qualified to back up your point.
> I'm arguing against your premise and hers.


No, that is what you want me to be saying. 

I should not be let off the hook. I am not asking to be let off the hook. 

You want the entire story, from start to finish, to consist of 

"Happy marriage -> ****ty spouse -> infidelity". It just isn't that simple.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> I agree. But being vulnerable doesn't mean you jump off the cliff. You just don't. IF that was the case then boy I better be nice and treat him well or he'll cheat. I better control him with my actions because for sure he can't control himself. Just... no. I mean, we all feel vulnerable from time to time. Sometimes our spouses contribute to that. But that has nothing to do with cheating.


 Oh. My. Gosh.

WHOOOOOO is saying you should?

I have a high IQ, but I am not THAT smart. Surely the distinction cannot be THAT hard for people to grasp.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> No, she is not the type to study these things in any depth.
> 
> The root cause of my affair was my dissatisfaction with our incompatible sex life. I wasn't denied sex, but the sex was so vanilla, constrained, and lacking in eroticism that we could not find a sustainable compromise. I'll spare you the long form that will sound like pleading for understanding - it's all way back in the archives here if you are exceptionally bored one day.
> 
> But I will say that I had it not been an issue, I am 110% certain I would have never been unfaithful.


well then, she better do it your way or else. Jeez. 
Does she know this about you? That you think it's her fault for your affair for not giving you this? 
You are so copping responsibility here. 
What a flipping catch you must be. 
Jesus.


----------



## BarbedFenceRider (Mar 30, 2018)

katies said:


> I agree. But being vulnerable doesn't mean you jump off the cliff. You just don't. IF that was the case then boy I better be nice and treat him well or he'll cheat. I better control him with my actions because for sure he can't control himself. Just... no. I mean, we all feel vulnerable from time to time. Sometimes our spouses contribute to that. But that has nothing to do with cheating.


I agree. My bro-in-law supposedly had therapy that went the same way! It made the BW look like the problem to the infidelity and that "boys will be boys." Now, I admit...This was THEIR supposed therapy, but I wonder where the influence came from? Also, the wife my sis-in-law was made to look like a conservative prude that didn't bend over backwards for hubby. Therefore, he went and found some strange....I call BS. It makes me cringe when I look at the two of them. But whatever. It's not for me....


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I think really there are two separate issues.

The primary issue is the cheating, once D-Day happens. That is the gaping, acute wound. Getting the bleeding to stop so the patient doesn't die is THE priority.

And until the patient has had sufficient time to become stable, nothing else matters.

Eventually, if there is a chronic condition in the marriage (neglect, dishonesty, sexual starvation, etc), it WILL have to be treated. Because NORMAL people don't want to be unhealthy.

BUT the chronic condition does NOT justify the gaping wound.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

katies said:


> well then, she better do it your way or else. Jeez.
> Does she know this about you? That you think it's her fault for your affair for not giving you this?
> You are so copping responsibility here.
> What a flipping catch you must be.
> Jesus.


Where did he say it was her fault? He said they couldn’t find the right compromise. That’s a joint problem they couldn’t solve. And it’s an explanation of the affair, not an allocation of blame.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> No doubt, but why limit your problem solving approaches to only one?


Because when there is a marriage were one partner is dysfunctional enough to think cheating is an answer to a problem there is probably a good chance that the perception of the problems are not accurate. Sometimes you got to cure the disease before you try to fix the symptoms, if you cure the disease the symptoms usually go away.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> well then, she better do it your way or else. Jeez.
> Does she know this about you? That you think it's her fault for your affair for not giving you this?
> You are so copping responsibility here.
> What a flipping catch you must be.
> Jesus.


If your need to be right on this topic has reduced you to this level of hostility, maybe you're holding on to your position too tightly.

As to my catchworthiness, that is not for me to decide. Nor you, for that matter.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

katies said:


> ok, but I maintain that most affairs happen in mostly happy marriages where the cause for resentment is no where near what you have to tell yourself to have an affair. That entitlement comes from within, not outside.


I would like to know the wherefores of that just as much. What DOES prompt a happy person to cheat? What did or does happiness mean? Successful cohabitation? I love being married to the housekeeper and am happy with that but want my hot, romantic bootie to come from elsewhere?


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

All you have to do is read SI's wayward section and you will find many examples of the WS after some IC growing to understand their perceptions of issues inside their marriage were really more to do with their own perception and less to do with their marriage itself.

A common example of this would be the WS that blames a lack of attention for why they cheated. It's not uncommon that after time and IC the WS comes to see that their need for attention is really an unhealthy reaction to a childhood where they were neglected. The level of attention and actually the use of the attention to temperately prop up their unhealthy lack of self esteem is something that no spouse could provide. Also they seek unhealthy attention usually from the opposite sex, this being the most vapid kind. Like sugar candy to someone who hasn't eaten in days. The only way they will have a happy life is to start to address this unhealthy need or finding healthy ways to address their poor self image. 

Following EP's advice in this case would not solve the problem and would probably only exacerbate it. The idea being that it's the BS's responsibility to solve an unsolvable problem. Frankly in this case it's unhealthy and unsustainable, if anything it will end the marriage sooner. I find most times this kind of very shallow level of thinking and problem solving doesn't do anything but set both parties up for failure. 

Now this is different then say a sexless marriage for instance. Many times the answer for that, assuming the person withholding is not willing to change, is divorce. In most cases the BS has to either learn to live with it, try to open the marriage, or divorce. Cheating in any of those cases is not going to solve the problem, and telling a now BS that they need to have more sex is probably not going to find the most receptive audience. Even if you get over the cheating it's unlikely that the now cheated on spouse is going to change but in many cases the now WS feels guilty enough to stay. It's just bad strategy. 

And like I said in the previous post the advice also never addresses the passive aggressive nature of someone who cheats on their spouse instead of telling them that they can't stay in the sexless marriage. That is just a bad way to handle problems, and in my mind probably contributes to the marriage being sexless in the first place. Especially when it comes to men, women just don't find passive men attractive. If you are passive in this case you are probably passive in a lot of other areas. Maybe that is why your wife doesn't want to be with you.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> Well *I* don't think there is ever an excuse to cheat. I think even if your marriage is hell on earth you shouldn't cheat. I just think the belief that how you treat your spouse has no effect on their well-being or vulnerability is...willfully blind.


It's really the perception of why the marriage is happy or not. The marriage may not be happy but the perception of what is the cause of that unhappiness is usually due to problems that have nothing to do with the marriage. I am not talking about an issue were say a spouse is abusive in that case I think most reasonable people agree that the abused spouse should leave if it doesn't get better.

An example would be a man who is married to a wife who doesn't make an effort to be sexy anymore. Let's say she has 3 kids she is taking care of. Now in his mind he deserves to have a wife who tries as he works hard to put food on the table. However as is usually the case he probably does the minimum around the house and they probably both work. The fact is she is just exhausted and his lack of effort isn't going to make her any more enthusiastic about being sexy for him, when after all that effort he probably will roll over, get up and go play Fortnite for the rest of the evening. 

Let's take the case where the husband works all the time. Well is this something they agreed upon? How about passively agreeing because the wife wanted to stay at home with the kids? Is this a temperately situation for say 5 years while he is building up his business where they both agreed for their future? Again when you weigh all those factor the answer is usually not as simplistic as all he does is work and more like, one party understood that this was the agreement based on mutually desired goals. Or what generally happens is they both agreed but one of the parties looses sight of that or is just not introspective enough to understand that that was what was going to be required to achieve those goals. So that party cheats.

I just have never seen a WS whose complains ever really measure up to their poor behavioral response. The only case were I can at least understand is when their is prior cheating, and in that case it's because I feel like the vows don't exist anymore. At least the outcome is just. In the other cases usually I am left feeling like the WS is an ******* and lucky to be married in the first place. There in lies another reason why EP is full of crap. After you cheat the only thing you deserve from your cheated on partner is divorce. That is the natural fair response to cheating. So starting at how can we fix the problems is just stupid.

EP's thinking is just too intellectually flaccid to get to the heart of the problem. It's typical of most trendy self help gurus in that it's like fast food, in that it may taste good at least to the WS but there is no real substance or nourishment. It's basically, you didn't make me feel good enough so I ****ed someone, next time let's agree that you need to make me feel good. 

Finally what I really think the truth is, is that the most common affair that happens now a days is one that starts with a co-worker. Usually in this case it's just basically about new sex or lust. This also seems to be one that EP talks about a lot. Affairs are a response to the WS wanting something new and exciting about themselves. Well my response to that is **** you. If you are married part of the deal is you don't get new. That's the agreed upon deal. Besides that why does that have anything to do with me as the BS? I can't make you feel that way anyway? You have to deal with that issue on your own, preferably without ****ing someone else. Again EP missing the point. 

Then we get into what I really think she is which is an open marriage apologist, she just doesn't have the decency to admit it. In that case I also say **** you, if you want an open marriage don't make vows to be monogamous. I have such disdain for people who think this way, I have no problem with the lifestyle in general (though kids can be a problem), but they always hide that fact, lie to marry people who don't think this way and their partner only finds out when they have ****ed someone else.

The bottom line is if you need new sex have the decency to tell your spouse before you **** someone. I don't want to hear excuses. EP is full of them.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

sokillme said:


> All you have to do is read SI's wayward section and you will find many examples of the WS after some IC growing to understand their perceptions of issues inside their marriage were really more to do with their own perception and less to do with their marriage itself.
> 
> A common example of this would be the WS that blames a lack of attention for why they cheated. It's not uncommon that after time and IC the WS comes to see that their need for attention is really an unhealthy reaction to a childhood where they were neglected. The level of attention and actually the use of the attention to temperately prop up their unhealthy lack of self esteem is something that no spouse could provide. Also they seek unhealthy attention usually from the opposite sex, this being the most vapid kind. Like sugar candy to someone who hasn't eaten in days. The only way they will have a happy life is to start to address this unhealthy need or finding healthy ways to address their poor self image.
> 
> ...


 There is no marital Strife that merits or justifies cheating. Let me just say that for the one billionth time before I proceed. It would be interesting to know if counseling would change history. Let's say someone who has tried for years to meet a spouse's needs only has sex with said spouse once every 2 years because said spouse deprives them. In other words, Judy is trying to be the best spouse she can, but Albert absolutely refuses to touch her or be intimate with her. If Judy gets counseling well her perception of that problem change and will she suddenly remembered that she had a lot of sex? It sounds to me like what you are saying is that once a wayward spouse has some counseling they realize they imagined all the miracle problems.

Like I said, no matter how real or badd the problems are, it is absolutely no excuse to cheat. But this assumption that all marital Strife has been imagined or made up out of thin air is ridiculous.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> There is no marital Strife that merits or justifies cheating. Let me just say that for the one billionth time before I proceed. It would be interesting to know if counseling would change history. Let's say someone who has tried for years to meet a spouse's needs only has sex with said spouse once every 2 years because said spouse deprives them. In other words, Judy is trying to be the best spouse she can, but Albert absolutely refuses to touch her or be intimate with her. If Judy gets counseling well her perception of that problem change and will she suddenly remembered that she had a lot of sex? It sounds to me like what you are saying is that once a wayward spouse has some counseling they realize they imagined all the miracle problems.
> 
> Like I said, no matter how real or badd the problems are, it is absolutely no excuse to cheat. But this assumption that all marital Strife has been imagined or made up out of thin air is ridiculous.


Not saying that, but in that case you divorce, you don't cheat it's pretty simple. Preserve both of your dignities, that's good advice. Cheating is a dysfunctional response to a possible problem. A ted talk at that point which basically says cheating is a natural response to problems is just missing the point and is in the end going to do more damage. A natural response to being cheated on by many would be violence but NO ONE, most of all me is saying that is OK. That is the point. 

My perception is that EP point is these feelings are natural. My response to that is who cares, where would we be if we all acted on our feelings. Again look at my violence example. As a part of modern society where there are other people present, and much more so a marriage why does that even matter? Most likely acting on feelings is what got you here in the first place. At least acting on them in an unhealthy manor. She doesn't say that part, it's just this is just how it is and we should accept that. I don't agree with the line of thinking. Animals act on instincts and feelings, we have a much higher standard. 

Even if that is the case and it's natural to feel this way in the marriage, assuming you cheat with someone who is married which at the least is probably half of all affairs, what about your AP's partner? They are not even in the marriage with you, what is your excuse for how you treated them? Or are you one of those people who thinks you have no responsibility to those folks? I guess EP is, another reason why she sucks. She never even mentions that person. It's like they don't exist in her world. Not to mention kids, extended family, friends, your spouse's work, society in general, future generations.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

I absolutely agree that when a marriage cannot be fixed because one or both partners refused to work at it, the best answer is divorce. Cheating is actually not an answer at all. It's just another problem.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> I absolutely agree that when a marriage cannot be fixed because one or both partners refused to work at it, the best answer is divorce. Cheating is actually not an answer at all. It's just another problem.


I would go further and say emotionally healthy people don't cheat.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> There is no marital Strife that merits or justifies cheating. Let me just say that for the one billionth time before I proceed. It would be interesting to know if counseling would change history. Let's say someone who has tried for years to meet a spouse's needs only has sex with said spouse once every 2 years because said spouse deprives them. In other words, Judy is trying to be the best spouse she can, but Albert absolutely refuses to touch her or be intimate with her. If Judy gets counseling well her perception of that problem change and will she suddenly remembered that she had a lot of sex? It sounds to me like what you are saying is that once a wayward spouse has some counseling they realize they imagined all the miracle problems.


Let's follow this example using EP's ideas. So it was wrong what Albert did to cheat on her, even EP agrees with that. EP however says Judy you have some responsibility in his cheating because he was desperately unhappy and YOU didn't help him with that. Let's follow this logic. Now I'm Judy and my response is well now I am desperately unhappy I was cheated on and I am going to run up $100,000 in credit card dept because dude cheated on me. Is that response OK with EP? When does bad behavior as a response to being unhappy become wrong? See, didn't really address or fix the problem. Also I am curious is it just sex where this is OK? How about my example of spending? Is it understandable to yell at your spouse and verbally abuse them? It's awful convenient as a proponent of open marriage that she only allows for sex to have the mulligan. 

Judy is wrong yes and maybe she didn't deserve to be married, but Albert is more wrong in my mind after he cheats. He was wrong to stay in the marriage if he was unhappy enough to cheat, get some balls dude!, and he is also wrong to cheat. He needs to fix himself first. Say he does he will probably just leave at that point. However if he stays I doubt Judy is going to change either way in the long run, not in the way Albert wants. She may give him pity sex but he will probably still be unhappy. This only answer was really to leave or learn to live with it.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

This is why I said I think it is 2 separate issues. One issue is that no matter what the marriage was like, cheating was a selfish and immoral choice and cannot be justified. The other issue is the state of the marriage Kama and it is obvious that it is it just the way words problems that caused marriage problems. The cheating needs to be dealt with 1st and dealt with well. However, if they want to actually be reconciled and not just not divorced, eventually someone will have to let go of the cheating as some get out of jail free card and look at the prior problems in the marriage honestly. What I see is that once someone has cheated, the other spouse believes that for ever absolves them of any contribution they may have made to the marital problems.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> Let's follow this example using EP's ideas...


What you are fundamentally saying is that people shouldn't behave badly, regardless.

And you are correct. But you are tilting at a windmill. 

People have a way of not always being that introspective. If you don't take reasonable measures before bad things happen, you are always in reactive mode instead of proactive mode. You can't make people not have personality flaws, but you can identify the ones that are common. Some are not even flaws - they are simply the nature of the beast that is mankind. 

Perel's notions are not just some limited simplistic notion that "you are responsible for your spouse's happiness". "Mating in Captivity" is all about why we get unhappy in the first place, especially with our sexual partner, and what we can do to mitigate those nearly universal tendencies to find the "strange" attractive. Would you rather spend some time affair proofing your marriage or signing divorce papers? 

And yes, it takes two to tangle. If you want a sexually fulfilled spouse who only comes home with eyes hungry for you, you need to do your part. You can spit on a couple million years of evolutionary behavior that we don't seem to be able to eradicate, or you can understand it and work with it.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

sokillme said:


> Affairs are a response to the WS wanting something new and exciting about themselves. Well my response to that is **** you. If you are married part of the deal is you don't get new. That's the agreed upon deal. Besides that why does that have anything to do with me as the BS? I can't make you feel that way anyway? You have to deal with that issue on your own, preferably without ****ing someone else. Again EP missing the point.
> 
> Then we get into what I really think she is which is an open marriage apologist, she just doesn't have the decency to admit it. In that case I also say **** you, if you want an open marriage don't make vows to be monogamous. I have such disdain for people who think this way, I have no problem with the lifestyle in general (though kids can be a problem), but they always hide that fact, lie to marry people who don't think this way and their partner only finds out when they have ****ed someone else.
> 
> The bottom line is if you need new sex have the decency to tell your spouse before you **** someone. I don't want to hear excuses. EP is full of them.


I really don't understand the point of erecting straw men like that.

All she is saying is that that it is natural to feel that kind of desire for new things but have you heard her *endorsing* it anywhere? Because that's quite a leap. She actually talks about ways and techniques how to make *the existing relationship* full of new adventures and *look at your partner* with new eyes.

You yourself seem to have finally understood the concept (that I have been going on about for ages) that we cannot control our thoughts, feelings and emotions. 
Yet we have the ability (usually) to control how and whether we act on them. Even that is sometimes difficult and you (IMO correctly) decided that it's best to not even to subject yourself to such situations.
So just by trying to understand *why* we have those thoughts, where they might come from and talking about them openly, are you not able to also understand that it actually might be useful at *preventing* cheating, rather than* excusing* it?

I am still waiting for someone to come up with a quote where she is actually excusing and endorsing infidelity.

I think the courteous thing to do is to simply quote what she *actually* says rather than what you *think* she means. It's the same principle as quoting someone in a forum when you argue against something.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

lifeistooshort said:


> Some women really need lots of male attention. They can otherwise be great people, but they need regular validation from men.
> 
> This is the same type of woman that has mostly men friends because she "has more in common with men". The truth is that she likes the attention and doesn't want to compete with other women for it.
> 
> ...


That's very true. I was always very put off by this trait. I felt there was something very 'unreliable' about this. Other traits often go hand in hand with this: such as high impressionability, changeable personality (changing your mind about things constantly), insecurities etc.

Those women can make great lovers though as being with them is almost like escapism, since nothing seems real, yet very intense and 'in the moment'.

When I met my wife I was dating another girl who was a bit like the above. In stark contrast to my gf, my wife never said or did anything to deliberately try and impress anyone, was confident from the inside and down to earth. She felt like a real challenge. The downside (which is not really a downside) was that occasionally, it felt like the passion was perhaps not always radiating at full blast (I felt she was cold sometimes), but when it was, it felt much more special because it felt real, even if rare. 

It depends what one wants: a few moments of unforgetful bliss and overblown passion with no/hardly any work or a lifetime of reality but hard work. At that time, I chose reality. I cannot know for sure but I am relatively sure I would be divorced by know had I chosen differently.

Anyway - with women who are just looking for male attention...what I don't understand is why so many men 'play along' when they know that the woman is just doing it for attention and for herself (not because she actually is in love with the guys). It must be some kind of biological lemming-type behaviour, similar to moths being attracted to a flame, to give it to her in hope that maybe she will change and realise that they are the special one. Or maybe they really don't know that's what she is doing. My instinct has always been the opposite (mostly irritation).


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

inmyprime said:


> I think the courteous thing to do is to simply quote what she *actually* says rather than what you *think* she means. It's the same principle as quoting someone in a forum when you argue against something.


she never does. No one ever said that. Her attitude is more take it with a grain of salt kind of thing, ("As a European, I can testify that in other culture, the betrayal is no less painful, but the response is more philosophical and pragmatic") and the why of the affair is problems in the marriage. Listen to her podcasts on Where Should We Begin. They focus on how the couple didn't listen to each other's needs. So? They both had needs. One cheated. the other did not. She really grills the BS in those. I wanted to throw my computer listening.


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

* Katies
ok, but I maintain that most affairs happen in mostly happy marriages where the cause for resentment is no where near what you have to tell yourself to have an affair.*
So everyone is the same and all relationships are the same and mostly good and or happy? I have been reading relationship forums for 10+ years and saw how bad relationships can get before someone bails or steps outside the marriage. I don't read about too many good relationships where someone has an affair except people I will call players. I read how a crappy relationship destroys a person's self confidence and leads the person to become depressed. I read about no sex, not much communication, kids with special needs, no money for 2 homes, and all the reasons divorce would cause severe financial difficulties just to name a few issues that fly in the face of divorcing.

I agree with the statement that "some people are old school when divorce was a BIG no-no. I am in that group. Then there are people that stay married way too long. Yes, BTDT too.

I think your posts are very rigid and if there was a "dislike button" I would press it

I appreciate Personofinterest and Cletus views.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

sokillme said:


> I would go further and say emotionally healthy people don't cheat.


Not sure about that. I don't think emotional health is all or nothing. 

I suspect most people have ****** in their armour. Part of the trick is to have boundaries where, when something is becoming unhealthy, you catch it and take action before it becomes a problem. And that's not always easy.


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

A truly twisted thread.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Being a single person who is not in the midst of a relationship crisis like infidelity, I can see Esther's message for what it is. She is merely saying "woe be to you spouses who believe that love is enough to keep the spark alive, for you're going to have to work at the sex stuff for your whole relationship, the same or even more than you did when you were dating".

And also speaking as a single person, in a LTR I would have to partner with someone who wants to work at it as much or more than he did while dating me and ultimately that's what I'm looking for. Eroticism is something that takes time and effort, when done correctly with a well matched partner.

What I don't hear from Ester is what couples who are mismatched or not into each other should do. That's where I think she refuses to make a judgement, and that's why she comes across as neutral about infidelity or pro infidelity. Similar to Dan Savage. She's just less direct about it.


----------



## As'laDain (Nov 27, 2011)

this whole thread highlights that ironic paradox about infidelity...

the BS usually has that one burning question that they seem to need an answer to: "why?" 
but the problem with asking that question is that very few are willing to accept an answer. even if the truth were completely laid out in all of its intricate detail, they cannot accept it. 

this is probably the biggest reason i believe that infidelity causes PTSD. and, as someone who has seen a LOT of PTSD in soldiers (my wife says i have suffered it too), i can say that the symptoms are pretty much exactly the same as what combat veterans experience. their experiences were a shock, they couldn't wrap their heads around it, and random moments keep popping up all over the place to remind them of it. they couldn't process it and let it go. 

now, im not one to believe that PTSD is an eternal thing. but the trauma will keep popping back up until you address it, accept it, and process it. we see this all the time with betrayed spouses who come here completely destitute. those who work through things and take control of their lives, despite how they feel at the time, often recover the fastest. they accept that the shock and feelings are normal, even though it sucks. soldiers i have worked with through PTSD go through the same process. the ones that get stuck on that question "why?" seem to take the longest to recover. they get stuck on it because they cannot accept the answer. ANY answer. 

some people are just cheaters. people who can accept as simple an answer as that usually move on fairly quickly, but those are usually people who do not define themselves by their marriage. then there are those who want to find ways to make it work... and we have seen them. they are always looking for a "why", but they are not willing to accept the answer. perhaps their spouse never learned impulse control. perhaps their spouse cannot handle being alone. whatever the case is, if they do not learn from it and change things so as to avoid those conditions that lead to the affair, they are often doomed to suffer again. 

in my wifes case, there were a lot of things going on. i looked deep into them and started addressing them one by one. she has not cheated since. but, i was also willing to recognize and accept that she had no idea how to make those changes within herself. she did not believe that any kind of lasting character change was possible. 

i think that is mostly what Esther Pearl tries to do... get people to try find and accept a "why". the problem with it is that she tries to avoid condemning anyone while at time stating that she does not condone cheating. people have a hard time accepting that. they equate a lack of condemnation to endorsement.


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> And yes, I know that word has 2 letter p's in it. I'm using talk to text, so get over it.


Hey! That's my excuse!! :surprise: 

Nah, my mind is fine, my brother's fingers suffer dyslexia. :grin2:


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

As'laDain said:


> People have a hard time accepting that [the whys behind cheating]. They equate a lack of condemnation to be an endorsement of it. (edited)


This is a profound statement.

Tis' to ''Forgive those that trespass against you''...

Only wisdom allows this.


The Typist II-


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

As'laDain said:


> i think that is mostly what Esther Pearl tries to do... get people to try find and accept a "why". the problem with it is that she tries to avoid condemning anyone while at time stating that she does not condone cheating. people have a hard time accepting that.


I'm not a fan of her double talk. Where you can just hear the hangin "but" in the air when she qualifies her statements with words like "I don't condone cheating".....{but} often it's ...... But the bigger problem is that wayward see, hear and get referred to her harmful materials way to early in the process which tends to place way too much emphasis, weight and belief upon the temporary feelings of the wayward.

For example, the last thing Cletus's wife needed to hear on her first, second or even third marriage counseling session with her remorseful husband was how her inadequacy in bed and vanilla sex is, contextually speaking, a part of the "why'?

Plus...betrayed spouses are the ones, {mistakenly} pursuing the "why?" question. Not the wayward spouse {they don't want to talk about it buy already know why ----because their betrayed spouse made them cheat}. But the only people that enjoy and crave this line of discussion after discovery day are the waywards because it lets them air their grievances and resentments as TRUTH. Perel dressing this counseling strategy up as a favor to the betrayeds, even while qualifying it that adultery is wrong, is just insult on top of injury. 

I do agree that context DOES matter, to some extent; but, not ALWAYS and certainly not immediately. Recover for 3-9 months first, then, each get some individual counseling to discuss these matters with a trained counselor before jumping into a some foolhardy "context" conversation about how your betrayed spouse really needs to take ownership of some part of your affair.

My point is, a betrayed spouse was there too and doesn't need their wayward spouse to explain to them all the things they weren't doing particularly well in the marriage prior to the cheating. They know and usually own way more than they should be owning. But then again, it's not like immediately after the affair is a good time to pick the wayward spouse apart for their affair PLUS rail them also for everything else they did or were doing in the marriage prior to the affair. Why is the "context" always about the betrayed spouses failures in contrast and with regards to 'just' the waywards adultery? Here's your dead alley cat back.




> they equate a lack of condemnation to endorsement.


You didn't really read the whole thread. I don't recall anyone saying that. Who are "they"??? 

When I go to a hospital with a bullet or knife wound I don't need or expect any of my doctors to condemn my attacker. Maybe it was an accident --- makes no difference to them. Neutral is fine with me - I don't want them emotionally upset while considering and working on my immediate condition. They don't have to have much of any context to treat me effectively. 

But we DO have evidence that EP promotes and supports non-normative destructive lifestyles. Pretty good criteria upon which a thinking Christian may contextualize that the woman lacks character, judgment and discernment.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

sokillme said:


> All you have to do is read SI's wayward section and you will find many examples of the WS after some IC growing to understand their perceptions of issues inside their marriage were really more to do with their own perception and less to do with their marriage itself.
> 
> A common example of this would be the WS that blames a lack of attention for why they cheated. It's not uncommon that after time and IC the WS comes to see that their need for attention is really an unhealthy reaction to a childhood where they were neglected. The level of attention and actually the use of the attention to temperately prop up their unhealthy lack of self esteem is something that no spouse could provide. Also they seek unhealthy attention usually from the opposite sex, this being the most vapid kind. Like sugar candy to someone who hasn't eaten in days. The only way they will have a happy life is to start to address this unhealthy need or finding healthy ways to address their poor self image.


I think that's a *really excellent* analysis. 



> Following EP's advice in this case would not solve the problem and would probably only exacerbate it.


That's where I disagree. If we go with the whole "the causes MUST NOT be looked at", "the Wayward is simply a bad person / immoral / selfish / entitled" line of thinking, then the wayward's childhood wounds will never get uncovered. As soon as the therapist starts asking about those wounds, the anti-Perel people here will start baying "excuses, excuses, she's giving the wayward excuses". It's vital, as in the first quote above, to understand what happened, and that doesn't mean blaming the betrayed (and Perel NEVER says it does). But that triggers a lot of people here because when you say "understand", they hear "justification". 

I don't think anyone here (nor Perel) is advocating that cheating is an acceptable way of dealing with marriage discontents, but that's what some people are hearing.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

sokillme said:


> And like I said in the previous post the advice also never addresses the passive aggressive nature of someone who cheats on their spouse instead of telling them that they can't stay in the sexless marriage. That is just a bad way to handle problems, and in my mind probably contributes to the marriage being sexless in the first place. Especially when it comes to men, women just don't find passive men attractive. *If you are passive in this case you are probably passive in a lot of other areas.* Maybe that is why your wife doesn't want to be with you.


Again, this is an excellent understanding of a pattern that I see often "in the room". So should the couple be banned from trying to understand it? Or the counsellor from trying to help them understand it?


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

Quality said:


> But we DO have evidence that EP promotes and supports non-normative destructive lifestyles. Pretty good criteria upon which a thinking Christian may contextualize that the woman lacks character, judgment and discernment.


^^^ This is sanctimonious bull****.

Excuse me while I give myself a timeout to go cool off. issed:


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Quality said:


> I'm not a fan of her double talk. Where you can just hear the hangin "but" in the air when she qualifies her statements with words like "I don't condone cheating".....{but}


And that's it. She doesn't condone cheating. The 'but(t)s' are in people's imagination who need or want to put them there.

I don't quite understand why when you go to a psychiatrist, it is absolutely accepted and normal to look at various aspects of your life or events that happened in your life to understand the *context* of your make up (key word being 'understand', not 'excuse'). Yet when it comes to infidelity, there has to be this absolute exception. It makes no sense to me.

There seems to be some kind of fear of looking inwards sometimes. The misunderstanding is that her 'job' is not to fix or 'undo' infidelity, she wants to fix a marriage that was wounded from infidelity (and where people decided to reconcile and move on). It takes two to make up a marriage, it only makes sense to look at both to fix it. And infidelity can often be a symptom of an ailing marriage (and sometimes, it is not). This is a pretty much accepted and common sense view. How many times in a sentence does she need to qualify this with a 'but cheating is wrong'?



Quality said:


> For example, the last thing Cletus's wife needed to hear on her first, second or even third marriage counseling session with her remorseful husband was how her inadequacy in bed and vanilla sex is, contextually speaking, a part of the "why'?


And would it _really_ be the *first* thing she would say? 




Quality said:


> I do agree that context DOES matter, to some extent; but, not ALWAYS and certainly not immediately.


Then you agree with Perel. It really is not more complicated than that.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Refusing to look at context may lead to so many problems....For example looking at crime statistics only without ever looking at context may easily lead to very shallow, dangerous and potentially racist conclusions.

The world is more complex than this.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

Quality said:


> But the bigger problem is that wayward see, hear and get referred to her harmful materials *way to early in the process* ....
> 
> For example, the last thing Cletus's wife needed to hear on her *first, second or even third marriage counseling session* with her remorseful husband was how her inadequacy in bed and vanilla sex is, contextually speaking, a part of the "why'?
> 
> Plus...betrayed spouses are the ones, {mistakenly} pursuing the "why?" question.


Yes, yes and yes! Working with this, timing is of the essence. And it's the BETRAYED usually who tries to hurry it along to "why", and "how did this happen", and "did I do something wrong". A lot of the work is steering the betrayed away from those questions for a while. 

And, sadly, they'll have that conversation outside the room -- I can't stop them -- while the betrayed is still riding a rollercoaster. 

I am wondering if for some people here (not you, Quality, obviously) _any _attempt in counselling to repair the harm done to the marriage, constitutes "condoning" the infidelity?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Laurentium said:


> Quality said:
> 
> 
> > But the bigger problem is that wayward see, hear and get referred to her harmful materials *way to early in the process* ....
> ...


 Exactly


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

To over simplify a bit, what I hear is that wants in Fidelity happens, the cheating is the only marital problem that matters. Ever. I agree it should be the only one that matters for a good while. But at some point if there were pre affair problems, you either have to be willing to work on them or just on the fact that you think your spouse cheating entitles you to do whatever you want.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

TheBohannons said:


> A truly twisted thread.


no ****. people are saying I think Perel endorses affairs when I never said that. 
You better believe I'm rigid when it comes to having an affair. I had one. It was wrong. In every single way. I don't see how putting my affair or it's whys in a gray area makes it better for me or my BS.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

personofinterest;19502105 you think your spouse cheating entitles you to do whatever you want.[/QUOTE said:


> no one is saying this either.
> I'm guessing everyone has marital problems to various degrees. But they didn't cause the affair. The entitlement of the WS did.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> personofinterest;19502105 you think your spouse cheating entitles you to do whatever you want.[/QUOTE said:
> 
> 
> > no one is saying this either.
> ...


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

katies said:


> no ****. people are saying I think Perel endorses affairs when I never said that.
> You better believe I'm rigid when it comes to having an affair. I had one. It was wrong. In every single way. I don't see how putting my affair or it's whys in a gray area makes it better for me or my BS.


You didn't but the post you quoted wasn't referring to you. You replied to post that was quoting and replying to SKM.


----------



## She'sStillGotIt (Jul 30, 2016)

Cletus said:


> What have you heard?
> 
> Some might say she's pro-affair because she deals with the problem with brutal pragmatism and honesty, but she herself says that she is not. I know some people conflate "talking honestly about" with "giving permission for", but that's not a very nuanced view of her work.


I think there are those who prefer to stay deluded and want to believe their cheater is in 'the fog' and really isn't responsible for the decisions they're making. They also want to believe that some childhood issue (neglect, abuse, bad parenting) made them do it, or some dreamed up disorder they think their cheater suffers from.

ANYTHING but face the reality of why their cheater really cheated.

Perel also says that staying with a cheater is the new shame, and I agree with her 1000%. I think for a lot of betrayed spouses, they want to believe they're being 'strong' and 'brave' by choosing to stay with someone who treated them like something they found on the bottom of their shoe. Well, I guess we all have different opinions of what being 'strong and brave' is.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

She'sStillGotIt said:


> I think there are those who prefer to stay deluded and want to believe their cheater is in 'the fog' and really isn't responsible for the decisions they're making. They also want to believe that some childhood issue (neglect, abuse, bad parenting) made them do it, or some dreamed up disorder they think their cheater suffers from.
> 
> ANYTHING but face the reality of why their cheater really cheated.
> 
> Perel also says that staying with a cheater is the new shame, and I agree with her 1000%. I think for a lot of betrayed spouses, they want to believe they're being 'strong' and 'brave' by choosing to stay with someone who treated them like something they found on the bottom of their shoe. Well, I guess we all have different opinions of what being 'strong and brave' is.




Until it happens to you and then you’ll find an excuse to stay too. Well not everyone will but many people who proclaim they won’t, often do. That’s what statistics show. What we should be doing and what we end up doing is not always the same thing.

Does it make them weak? Again, it’s complicated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

As'laDain said:


> this whole thread highlights that ironic paradox about infidelity...
> 
> the BS usually has that one burning question that they seem to need an answer to: "why?"
> but the problem with asking that question is that very few are willing to accept an answer. even if the truth were completely laid out in all of its intricate detail, they cannot accept it.
> ...


I think that @As'laDain 's analysis is pretty good here. Esp when equating some of the affects of PTSD. 

Now, my problem is that I think in some of the cases of Infidelity, the WHY does really matter. I also think that the why is many times that the WS was too chicken sh** to just get a divorce, they were selfish, and they wanted some strange. THAT is why so many BS's have trouble with the why is because the WS does not want to admit that basically, the WS is a POS and they were to chicken SH** to divorce and do it the right way. 

Since the WS really does not want to admit to the truth that they are a POS, the BS struggles with the why. And maybe as @As'laDain says, they just cannot except the reason. 

But for me, while at this point I would never take any cheater back, it would be refreshing to hear from the cheater..."You know what, I am a chicken *** and a POS. I was selfish and I was a coward. What I did was wrong and I don't deserve to be taken back." 

I might have a different Opinion if I had ever had anyone say that to me and mean it...



Laurentium said:


> Yes, yes and yes! Working with this, timing is of the essence. And it's the BETRAYED usually who tries to hurry it along to "why", and "how did this happen", and "did I do something wrong". A lot of the work is steering the betrayed away from those questions for a while.
> 
> And, sadly, they'll have that conversation outside the room -- I can't stop them -- while the betrayed is still riding a rollercoaster.
> 
> I am wondering if for some people here (not you, Quality, obviously) _any _attempt in counselling to repair the harm done to the marriage, constitutes "condoning" the infidelity?


This is where I disagree with almost everything that EP says and for this reason. In the initial stages, no one should be listening to EP. The WS will "Hear", "You know it is understandable that you cheated. People are not naturally monogamous. Sex dried up between you and your spouse and you both lost attraction, I mean it is understandable, right. Now let's look at why these things happened that "caused you to cheat", not that I condone cheating, but I understand it." 

While on the other hand, the BS "hears", "You know what, it really is your fault that they cheated. You did not want to have sex with your spouse, or you are not really good in bed and the AP was new and exciting. If you were a better lay, this would not have happened. Now let's look at what you can do better to keep them from cheating." 

That is what the BS hears from EP. And it to complete crap in both cases. In the early stages, the WS better figure out that that are a POS and they DESERVE HEAVY HEAVY CONDEMNATION FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE. They need to let the BS HEAP burning coals on their head and figure out pretty quick that if they are really sorry, forget remorse at this stage, then they better pony up for the feelings that are going to come out of the BS, because they did not cheat....YOU DID. 

Now, I am not OBTUSE enough to say that there is not room in the later stages of reconciliation for an introspective look at issues in that marriage that need to be fixed, not at all. But early on is not the time to do it EVER. Maybe after a year or more you can go there, maybe. 

This is also the thinking and method (EP type thinking) that most MC's use and that is why they SUCK at it...



She'sStillGotIt said:


> I think there are those who prefer to stay deluded and want to believe their cheater is in 'the fog' and really isn't responsible for the decisions they're making. They also want to believe that some childhood issue (neglect, abuse, bad parenting) made them do it, or some dreamed up disorder they think their cheater suffers from.
> 
> ANYTHING but face the reality of why their cheater really cheated.
> 
> Perel also says that staying with a cheater is the new shame, and I agree with her 1000%. I think for a lot of betrayed spouses, they want to believe they're being 'strong' and 'brave' by choosing to stay with someone who treated them like something they found on the bottom of their shoe. Well, I guess we all have different opinions of what being 'strong and brave' is.


Now, for my money @She'sStillGotIt is spot on. THIS is I believe is at least one of the bottom lines to this type of situation. 

I think there are many reasons people have, but when it comes down to the nut cutting, FEAR is one of the main reasons people stay with or do not divorce a WS...


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> no ****. people are saying I think Perel endorses affairs when I never said that.
> You better believe I'm rigid when it comes to having an affair. I had one. It was wrong. In every single way. I don't see how putting my affair or it's whys in a gray area makes it better for me or my BS.


Sorry, the post was meant to address yours and our question about his wife's thoughts on EP.

What we feel is twisted, is the effort by the OP to endorse the EP book, method, whatever, when he can't get the one person who matters most to agree with him. His wife. Every situation is different, but if what works for the OP, does not work for the one he hurt, perhaps he is the one who should scrap the Esther Perel approach and try something different.

Doesn't look like the wife is buying it. And that is what is twisted.


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

In closing, I agree that constant rejection/sexless marriage with no medical reason behind it, could put a person in a position of straying. But that is not the case here.

What the OP has consistently said is quite frankly. "I cheated because the sex sucked". Ouch. In my opinion, the EP method may work in some cases, but harping on that will not lead to the betterment of the marriage. Which appears to be the case in the marriage in question.

Question. How was the sex for her?. Is it possible that your skills were lacking therefore it was never special? As long as you are going to go backwards and look at root causes, perhaps you should go back a little further and try to figure out why you could not "turn her on".

I don't mean this to be hostile, but many men think they are spectacular, when they clearly are not.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

I personally just think infidelity is a problem of character in the person who cheats. It's a dysfunctional answer to a possible problem. In my mind that is a totally different thing then a bad marriage. When I have heard her speak she seems like an apologist, in the sense that she always blames the marriage not the cheater and by implication that is blaming BS. I just don't believe that, and nothing I have read has shown that.

Again I have never heard any story so bad where I think, yep cheating was the way to handle that. 

I have no problem with dealing with problems before hand but that really isn't about infidelity then. Everyone should actively work on their marriage.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Laurentium said:


> That's where I disagree. If we go with the whole "the causes MUST NOT be looked at", "the Wayward is simply a bad person / immoral / selfish / entitled" line of thinking, then the wayward's childhood wounds will never get uncovered. As soon as the therapist starts asking about those wounds, the anti-Perel people here will start baying "excuses, excuses, she's giving the wayward excuses". It's vital, as in the first quote above, to understand what happened, and that doesn't mean blaming the betrayed (and Perel NEVER says it does). But that triggers a lot of people here because when you say "understand", they hear "justification".


The marriage and the BS are not the cause of that though. EP would say different, her whole the WS is looking for themselves is crap. They may be doing just that but when you are in a marriage where you made a vow if you do that and break your vow that is called entitlement. Call it like it is. That doesn't seem to be her attitude at least on the shows I have seen her. That is where my problem is. Cheating is a totally different thing then your marriage.

My overall problem is she would say the marriage was not fulfilling a need of the WS and that was the reason for the cheating. Marriage isn't about fulfilling your needs at least at the expense of you ****ting all over your partner. There purpose isn't to fulfill you that is just more Disney Hollywood stuff. You have to fulfill your own needs by taking action in a healthy way. If you are not happy in your marriage, say what you need. If it still is not working out and your need is reasonable like say a sexless marriage you leave, it think that is a moral way to deal with that situation. IF this was what she was saying I would be fine with that, again though that has nothing to do with cheating. 

Honestly most affairs are really about people being bored and wanting new sex or romance, they want both their spouse and the new sex. I can't generate much sympathy for that. 

As far as the WS goes I am all for them getting help, I don't think they are stuck being bad people forever but you are your actions in my mind I am not going to say anything different. There are plenty of former WS who have transitioned into good people, some of them active on here. I personally would still advise the BS to move on. Life is too short to wait, when many of them don't even want to get it. That doesn't mean that the WS is irredeemable, but when a BS comes on here my goal is to help them as they are the victim. If it's a WS my goal is to get them to work on themselves.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

TheBohannons said:


> What we feel is twisted, is the effort by the OP to endorse the EP book, method, whatever, when he can't get the one person who matters most to agree with him. His wife. Every situation is different, but if what works for the OP, does not work for the one he hurt, perhaps he is the one who should scrap the Esther Perel approach and try something different.


Whoa, way the hell out of bounds.

My wife doesn't read Perel's work, true enough. That's because she doesn't read anyone's writings, or listen to Ted talks about relationships, or read books about infidelity. It is not her way, it is not her interest, and it is not my place to force it upon her.

If you ask her point blank if she believes that our sexual incompatibility played a role in my infidelity, you will get complete agreement.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

TheBohannons said:


> Question. How was the sex for her?. Is it possible that your skills were lacking therefore it was never special? As long as you are going to go backwards and look at root causes, perhaps you should go back a little further and try to figure out why you could not "turn her on".


Or maybe she is not emotionally connect to you because you are a **** to her all the time and treat her like a blow up doll. 

I just would doubt how effective EP is because she doesn't focus on the root causes of infidelity which are often or not in my experience the person who cheated in the first place.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Whoa, way the hell out of bounds.
> 
> My wife doesn't read Perel's work, true enough. That's because she doesn't read anyone's writings, or listen to Ted talks about relationships, or read books about infidelity. It is not her way, it is not her interest, and it is not my place to force it upon her.
> 
> If you ask her point blank if she believes that our sexual incompatibility played a role in my infidelity, you will get complete agreement.


But you chose to stay in the marriage with sexual incompatibility, then you chose to cheat. Again it's not like you didn't have other choices. So how is sexual incompatibly the issue? Let me guess you're catholic? 

Besides that you had no right to open your marriage without telling your wife that was not a legitimate choice that has any merit for any reason. If a man came on here and said yes I am sorry I hit my wife but if you ask her, she says she was always disrespectful to me and that played a role, we would all think the wife is in a terribly abusive relationship and the whole line of thinking is bull****. No one here would give him a pass just for espousing that line of thinking let alone hitting her. This is no different at all, but that is exactly what EP is saying. 

I can see why EP resonates with you because that is what you are saying, but my example above is why I think she stinks and you are wrong, it's the same kind of blame the victim mentality that she sells and that is just wrong.


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

Cletus said:


> Whoa, way the hell out of bounds.
> 
> My wife doesn't read Perel's work, true enough. That's because she doesn't read anyone's writings, or listen to Ted talks about relationships, or read books about infidelity. It is not her way, it is not her interest, and it is not my place to force it upon her.
> 
> If you ask her point blank if she believes that our sexual incompatibility played a role in my infidelity, you will get complete agreement.


It is not way out of bounds, since this is your thread. My point is, how is anything that EP writes affecting your current marriage?

If it has had NO effect WITH YOUR WIFE, perhaps you should try a different approach.

Which is the same advice you seem to be giving to others.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

TheBohannons said:


> What the OP has consistently said is quite frankly. "I cheated because the sex sucked". Ouch. In my opinion, the EP method may work in some cases, but harping on that will not lead to the betterment of the marriage. Which appears to be the case in the marriage in question.
> 
> Question. How was the sex for her?. Is it possible that your skills were lacking therefore it was never special? As long as you are going to go backwards and look at root causes, perhaps you should go back a little further and try to figure out why you could not "turn her on".


I tried to avoid going down this road, because it is not central to the argument, it's been laid out in my posting history years ago, and it will certainly to some ears sound like special pleading. But since you're going to come to multiple incorrect conclusions based on information you lack, I'll give you the short version.

Married at 22. Wife did not allow sexual contact before marriage, believing that the right man would be willing to wait. The condensed version of the facts are that she did not me to touch her sexually at all - not on the breasts, not below the belt. Oral sex, giving or receiving, is disgusting by definition, and to date has been tried. Sex was properly defined as PIV only, two positions, standard missionary and woman on top. Foreplay consisted of 5 or 10 minutes of kissing, but no touching except in places that a masseuse would have been allowed access. Sex was best in a dark room with the lights off, but that wasn't strictly required. Looking at her anywhere but in her eyes during PIV was never banned outright, but was clearly discouraged - "my eyes are up here". During sex, she orgasmed probably 95% of the time, and has gone through several periods of being multi orgasmic. I did the best I could to make sure that she enjoyed herself. I am no doubt nothing special in the bedroom, but I am committed to my partner's pleasure. 

So she enjoys sex, and she enjoys sex with me, but we have an incompatible definition of what is not only acceptable but necessary for sexual fulfillment. 

I did this for 20 years. I tried to be patient and play the long game. I tried to improve things within the boundaries established, and some small progress was made, but it was suffocating to have your only allowed sexual partner to not even allow you to touch her sexually. Too often our conversations about sex turned into tears and frustration, which inevitably caused us to stop addressing it. 

So yeah, I "turned her on" plenty. And she turned me on as well. The affair was a ONS and was about nothing more involved than sex. Given what I know about myself, I am perfectly confident when I say that our sexual situation set the stage for [insert appropriate verbiage that, once again for the millionth time, asserts my understanding that the choice to cheat was mine alone].


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> But you chose to stay in the marriage with sexual incompatibility, then you chose to cheat. Again it's not like you didn't have other choices.


Thank you, Captain Obvious. Like this hasn't been hashed to a bloody pulp a zillion times in the past.

The point is, my other choice was divorce. Now let's visit that alternate reality where I chose that path. You'd have no issue in my discussing what part my ex had to play in the dissolution of my marriage, would you?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

TheBohannons said:


> It is not way out of bounds, since this is your thread. My point is, how is anything that EP writes affecting your current marriage?
> 
> If it has had NO effect WITH YOUR WIFE, perhaps you should try a different approach.
> 
> Which is the same advice you seem to be giving to others.


I am not trying anything in my marriage. It is intact and in good shape. I am not looking for advice. I am, in this thread, trying to PROVIDE it to others.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> I just would doubt how effective EP is because she doesn't focus on the root causes of infidelity which are often or not in my experience the person who cheated in the first place.


So then I have to ask - 

What is your deep well of experience from which you are drawing conclusions about everyone's affairs? I hope it is beyond internet forums. 

Perel has been in practice for decades and has all of the credentials previously listed. Why then should I prefer your interpretation of the root causes of infidelity before hers?


----------



## TheBohannons (Apr 6, 2018)

Cletus said:


> I tried to avoid going down this road, because it is not central to the argument, it's been laid out in my posting history years ago, and it will certainly to some ears sound like special pleading. But since you're going to come to multiple incorrect conclusions based on information you lack, I'll give you the short version.
> 
> Married at 22. Wife did not allow sexual contact before marriage, believing that the right man would be willing to wait. The condensed version of the facts are that she did not me to touch her sexually at all - not on the breasts, not below the belt. Oral sex, giving or receiving, is disgusting by definition, and to date has been tried. Sex was properly defined as PIV only, two positions, standard missionary and woman on top. Foreplay consisted of 5 or 10 minutes of kissing, but no touching except in places that a masseuse would have been allowed access. Sex was best in a dark room with the lights off, but that wasn't strictly required. Looking at her anywhere but in her eyes during PIV was never banned outright, but was clearly discouraged - "my eyes are up here". During sex, she orgasmed probably 95% of the time, and has gone through several periods of being multi orgasmic. I did the best I could to make sure that she enjoyed herself. I am no doubt nothing special in the bedroom, but I am committed to my partner's pleasure.
> 
> ...


We get it, but our question is not about the right and wrong, but what does anything EP has to say have anything to do with your current state of affairs? Did she have a "come to Jesus" moment?. If not then the book appears to be irrelevant to your marriage. Is that a "incorrect conclusion"?.

To simplify, if you want a better marriage, read a different book.

Not trying to put you on blast, so we will depart with a sincere best wishes for your family.


----------



## SilverDuckLaserBeam (May 17, 2018)

Cletus said:


> Thank you, Captain Obvious. Like this hasn't been hashed to a bloody pulp a zillion times in the past.
> 
> The point is, my other choice was divorce. Now let's visit that alternate reality where I chose that path. You'd have no issue in my discussing what part my ex had to play in the dissolution of my marriage, would you?


I think most people would be quite willing to acknowledge and agree that your ex had a part to play in the dissolution of your marriage if you were to divorce. The thing is though, you can't sneak out and get a divorce. It isn't secret. It isn't kept from your spouse. Your wife would know that you're divorcing. That is very different than your wife not knowing that you're sleeping with someone else.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Thank you, Captain Obvious. Like this hasn't been hashed to a bloody pulp a zillion times in the past.
> 
> The point is, my other choice was divorce. Now let's visit that alternate reality where I chose that path. You'd have no issue in my discussing what part my ex had to play in the dissolution of my marriage, would you?


Essentially you are saying is your wife contributed to you having an affair because she didn't live up to your sexual expectations and I think that is an illegitimate line of thinking, because it was an illegitimate reaction to problems in your marriage. That is all that needs to be said. 

Again if it was a guy coming on her saying he hit his wife because of her disrespect (even if she agreed) I would feel the same way. What do you say to that? Do you not see the parallels? 

Abuse doesn't merit any discussion on the reasons why. Abuse is abuse, infidelity is a grave abuse. I think you have to get to the point of thinking exactly like this (abuse is abuse) before you can really work on your marriage. The BS has to know with certainty that you get this before they will really be willing to discuss the possible problems which are a different thing entirely. Now maybe they will fain agreement but even if they do, that says there are still major problems in the marriage and the people in the marriage. I don't believe your marriage has any possibility of recovering if there is even passively accepted abuse in it. Because just that very fact makes it dysfunctional. 

Ester Perel's philosophy in my mind adds legitimacy to the line if thinking that there ARE reasons for abusive behavior and I think that does much more harm then good. It just leads to more dysfunction. People may be able to continue in the marriage yes but I wouldn't call it a good one.


----------



## MyRevelation (Apr 12, 2016)

Cletus said:


> I tried to avoid going down this road, because it is not central to the argument, it's been laid out in my posting history years ago, and it will certainly to some ears sound like special pleading. But since you're going to come to multiple incorrect conclusions based on information you lack, I'll give you the short version.
> 
> Married at 22. Wife did not allow sexual contact before marriage, believing that the right man would be willing to wait. The condensed version of the facts are that she did not me to touch her sexually at all - not on the breasts, not below the belt. Oral sex, giving or receiving, is disgusting by definition, and to date has been tried. Sex was properly defined as PIV only, two positions, standard missionary and woman on top. Foreplay consisted of 5 or 10 minutes of kissing, but no touching except in places that a masseuse would have been allowed access. Sex was best in a dark room with the lights off, but that wasn't strictly required. Looking at her anywhere but in her eyes during PIV was never banned outright, but was clearly discouraged - "my eyes are up here". During sex, she orgasmed probably 95% of the time, and has gone through several periods of being multi orgasmic. I did the best I could to make sure that she enjoyed herself. I am no doubt nothing special in the bedroom, but I am committed to my partner's pleasure.
> 
> ...


It sounds to me like you just chose very poorly in the life partner department and now you're trying to find a way to shift blame/excuse/explain that very basic relationship fact away.

... and don't think I'm dumping on you. If I'm being perfectly honest, my D from my XW was for exactly the same reason ... I bulled right through a bunch of red flags and chose poorly and it came back to bite me ... it happens, and I'd venture to guess is the underlying reason for the vast number of D's.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

TheBohannons said:


> We get it, but our question is not about the right and wrong, but what does anything EP has to say have anything to do with your current state of affairs? Did she have a "come to Jesus" moment?. If not then the book appears to be irrelevant to your marriage. Is that a "incorrect conclusion"?.
> 
> To simplify, if you want a better marriage, read a different book.



No, I have a better marriage now, because we both did some work. She has loosened some of her sexual restrictions - we'll never see eye to eye, but the effort itself is encouraging, and I have changed my outlook on what our differences mean and to what I am entitled.

Both of us, if we had been more aware of the risks for continuing down the path that we were on, would have probably done differently. Perel's work might not be of great value to a couple after the affair has happened unless one or both partners have the "I have to understand all of the nooks and crannies" mindset. It (or something very much like it) should absolutely be mandatory reading before and/or during marriage. As a warning of what goes wrong with many, many marriages and how one might avoid the same pitfalls that have caught so many others in the past. 

So no, if you want a better marriage, read her book and understand exactly what it implies for your marriage.



> And a sincere best wishes for your family.


Thank you.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> So then I have to ask -
> 
> What is your deep well of experience from which you are drawing conclusions about everyone's affairs? I hope it is beyond internet forums.
> 
> Perel has been in practice for decades and has all of the credentials previously listed. Why then should I prefer your interpretation of the root causes of infidelity before hers?


Granted I am not a practice counselor but this is also just a message board not a Ted talk. 

I draw on my experience with infidelity, my parents marriages and the infidelity I lived through there, my crappy stepfather and his abuse, my fathers many affairs and his attitude towards marriage. Counseling and articles I had/read in the aftermath. My 15 years of successful though not perfect marriage. What I think at least in my mind I would call being a good husband no matter what the circumstances were. And yes reading on here and other forums.

Lots of credentialed people are wrong. You don't have to prefer my interpretations, you asked what I thought and I told you. It can have as much bearing on your life as you want. You can seem me as just some opinionated ******* on the internet, which I don't disagree with. That is kind of what we do here. It's strange you ask the question and then get offended by the answer. 

As you say about her, I try to post_ with brutal pragmatism and honesty._


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

MyRevelation said:


> It sounds to me like you just chose very poorly in the life partner department and now you're trying to find a way to shift blame/excuse/explain that very basic relationship fact away.


Does anyone ever get the perfect life partner?

I have a very good one. She's kind, loving, committed, smart, good with money, has no substance abuse problems...

I consider it a pretty good roll of the dice to get a life partner who checks off every box save one on the application form. It is a little sad when the one unchecked box also happens to be the only one for which a monogamous relationship allows no alternative solution. But overall? I would not still be with her if we were not otherwise well matched.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> As a warning of what goes wrong with many, many marriages and how one might avoid the same pitfalls that have caught so many others in the past.


translation: better meet your spouses needs or be prepared for them to look elsewhere. 

infidelity is a personal problem, not a marital one.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> Lots of credentialed people are wrong. You don't have to prefer my interpretations, you asked what I thought and I told you. It can have as much bearing on your life as you want. You can seem me as just some opinionated ******* on the internet, which I don't disagree with. That is kind of what we do here. It's strange you ask the question and then get offended by the answer.


I'm not offended by the answer. I'm a tiny bit offended by the fact that you seem to cavalierly discredit the opinions of someone who has spent a lifetime researching a problem as if she fails the grasp the essentials.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> translation: better meet your spouses needs or be prepared for them to look elsewhere.


Sage advice, and offered literally by nearly every single person who is active on this forum. Go spend some time in the relationship and sex forums for sufficient proof to drown under. 

Reality doesn't much care whether or not you approve.


----------



## MyRevelation (Apr 12, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Does anyone ever get the perfect life partner?
> 
> I have a very good one. She's kind, loving, committed, smart, good with money, has no substance abuse problems...
> 
> I consider it a pretty good roll of the dice to get a life partner who checks off every box save one on the application form. It is a little sad when the one unchecked box also happens to be the only one for which a monogamous relationship allows no alternative solution. But overall? I would not still be with her if we were not otherwise well matched.


Whatever it takes to look yourself in the mirror, but in my mind, if what you claim is true, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

For your consideration:

The Guy in the Glass

by Dale Wimbrow, (c) 1934

When you get what you want in your struggle for self,
And the world makes you King for a day,
Then go to the mirror and look at yourself,
And see what that guy has to say.

For it isn't your Father, or Mother, or Wife,
Whose judgement upon you must pass.
The feller whose verdict that counts most in your life
Is the guy staring back from the glass.

He's the feller to please, never mind all the rest,
For he's with you clear up to the end,
And you've passed your most dangerous, difficult test
If the guy in the glass is your friend.

You may be like Jack Horner and "chisel" a plum,
And think you're a wonderful guy,
But the man in the glass says you're only a bum
If you can't look him straight in the eye.

You can fool the whole world down the pathway of years,
And get pats on the back as you pass,
But your final reward will be heartaches and tears
If you've cheated the guy in the glass.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus - I dare you to post your story on SI's wayward forum. See what they have to say about it. See if they agree with you about EP. 

We're both fWS in good marriages and you espouse EP and I do not. Our reality is ours.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

Cletus said:


> I tried to avoid going down this road, because it is not central to the argument, it's been laid out in my posting history years ago, and it will certainly to some ears sound like special pleading. But since you're going to come to multiple incorrect conclusions based on information you lack, I'll give you the short version.
> 
> Married at 22. Wife did not allow sexual contact before marriage, believing that the right man would be willing to wait. The condensed version of the facts are that she did not me to touch her sexually at all - not on the breasts, not below the belt. Oral sex, giving or receiving, is disgusting by definition, and to date has been tried. Sex was properly defined as PIV only, two positions, standard missionary and woman on top. Foreplay consisted of 5 or 10 minutes of kissing, but no touching except in places that a masseuse would have been allowed access. Sex was best in a dark room with the lights off, but that wasn't strictly required. Looking at her anywhere but in her eyes during PIV was never banned outright, but was clearly discouraged - "my eyes are up here". During sex, she orgasmed probably 95% of the time, and has gone through several periods of being multi orgasmic. I did the best I could to make sure that she enjoyed herself. I am no doubt nothing special in the bedroom, but I am committed to my partner's pleasure.
> 
> ...


You know what, as horrific as all of that sounds, brother that your fault. YOU HAD THE CHOICE TO DIVORCE, I sure as hell would have. But then I would never have married any woman with out having sex with her for a while, even though that is no guarantee.

Of course EP appeals to you, you don't have the balls to divorce and find a woman compatible with you. 

So yes, I am busting you up side the head with a 4x4...


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

Cletus said:


> Does anyone ever get the perfect life partner?


No or as you would say "Thank you, Captain Obvious" and that is just one more reason not to legitimize abuse because of it.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

katies said:


> Cletus - I dare you to post your story on SI's wayward forum. See what they have to say about it. See if they agree with you about EP.
> 
> We're both fWS in good marriages and you espouse EP and I do not. Our reality is ours.


I would feel safer married so someone who thinks like you. But that is me. I also may be more willing to work on things because I know you now got it. Getting it is a very big deal in my book. Again though that is just me, and I am kind of a ****.


----------



## sokillme (Jun 10, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> You know what, as horrific as all of that sounds, brother that your fault. YOU HAD THE CHOICE TO DIVORCE, I sure as hell would have. But then I would never have married any woman with out having sex with her for a while, even though that is no guarantee.
> 
> Of course EP appeals to you, you don't have the balls to divorce and find a woman compatible with you.
> 
> So yes, I am busting you up side the head with a 4x4...


Since you went there, how much of the sex problem is tied into the same kind of thinking as not divorcing but cheating. Like maybe you Curtis are also responsible for your sex issues. It seems a possible problem of entitlement, or entitlement thinking. Maybe it has to do with how you address issues with your wife and other things. I know you are going to be even more pissed off at me for saying this but that is the sense I get a little bit. 

Have you tried to change the dynamic in your chemistry? Like maybe she is asexual and then there is no hope but also maybe she is put off because sex seems more like a demand and less like something fun for her to do with you, or a way to celebrate you love for her. Granted I know nothing of the situation and you will probably just tell me to go to hell, which I'm sure I deserve.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

sokillme said:


> Since you went there, how much of the sex problem is tied into the same kind of thinking as not divorcing but cheating. Like maybe you Curtis are also responsible for your sex issues. It seems a possible problem of entitlement, or entitlement thinking. Maybe it has to do with how you address issues with your wife and other things. I know you are going to be even more pissed off at me for saying this but that is the sense I get a little bit.
> 
> Have you tried to change the dynamic in your chemistry? Like maybe she is asexual and then there is no hope but also maybe she is put off because sex seems more like a demand and less like something fun for her to do with you, or a way to celebrate you love for her. Granted I know nothing of the situation and you will probably just tell me to go to hell, which I'm sure I deserve.


You know, @sokillme, I am not even going to go there. His situation is horrible. To me that is not sex at all, my point is WHY allow yourself to stay in that situation. You can say money, you can say kids and I can say BS on that. 

If only the sex with my Ex W had been this horrible, maybe I would have gotten out sooner. But it wasn't. 

That is actually the single biggest 2x4, bad sex, that could have hit me in the head, then I would have understood how completely and utterly stupid I was for ever staying with her.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> You know what, as horrific as all of that sounds, brother that your fault. YOU HAD THE CHOICE TO DIVORCE, I sure as hell would have. But then I would never have married any woman with out having sex with her for a while, even though that is no guarantee.
> 
> Of course EP appeals to you, you don't have the balls to divorce and find a woman compatible with you.
> 
> So yes, I am busting you up side the head with a 4x4...


Not to bust you upside the head with a 4x4 but I'm going to defend Cletus and his wife here.

Cletus's premarital sexual strategy netted him a loving faithful wife and mother to his children who was a tad vanilla in bed whereas yours netted you a bi-polar wayward wife who had multiple affairs and, I'm supposing, a lifetime of drama as well as kids likely still incurring the consequences.

Cletus's choice to marry a woman he hadn't bedded, "for awhile", wasn't his mistake. It was a strategy that, "even know there are no guarantees" will, more often than your strategy {or mine - I was a fornicator as well}, result in a better marriage and spousal partner. 

Years later, Cletus had a one night stand. That was his bad choice.

Not finding a way to fix his marriage or end it years prior. That was his bad choices.

Men do not have to have intercourse with women to test drive their passion and sexual compatibility. 

Although I used him and his story as an example several times in this thread, I do so because I know he handles it well and continues to participate. I'm not trying to offend him, insult his wife, or passive-aggressively frustrate him for sport.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Quality said:


> Not to bust you upside the head with a 4x4 but I'm going to defend Cletus and his wife here.
> 
> Cletus's premarital sexual strategy netted him a loving faithful wife and mother to his children who was a tad vanilla in bed whereas yours netted you a bi-polar wayward wife who had multiple affairs and, I'm supposing, a lifetime of drama as well as kids likely still incurring the consequences.


Calling it a "strategy" would be to gild the lily a bit much. 

It was ignorance, pure and simple. I did not know that people could be that far apart on sex. So not only did I go in with eyes closed, I didn't even know that I should open them.

Which brings us full circle to Perel and the wisdom to be found in understanding how these things happen. Really, I have no particular love of her personally or her style. She's a little toucy-feely for my tastes. But still, she is doing a necessary service.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

Quality said:


> Not to bust you upside the head with a 4x4 but I'm going to defend Cletus and his wife here.
> 
> Cletus's premarital sexual strategy netted him a loving faithful wife and mother to his children who was a tad vanilla in bed whereas yours netted you a bi-polar wayward wife who had multiple affairs and, I'm supposing, a lifetime of drama as well as kids likely still incurring the consequences.
> 
> ...


No, I am sorry. She is not vanilla, she is an entire, large bottle of vanilla extract. What he describes to me, is horrific. 

No doggie, no lazy dog, no bending her over the kitchen table, NO ORAL FOR EITHER OF THEM, COME ON!!!!

I don't even know if that is sex. And I know for sure I would have never, ever married a woman like that. I frankly doubt that she even wants to have sex. 

Now way, not in a million years would I ever put up with that... I would have gotten an annulment in the first week.


----------



## Quality (Apr 26, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> That is actually the single biggest 2x4, bad sex, that could have hit me in the head, then I would have understood how completely and utterly stupid I was for ever staying with her.


Exactly. Premarital/extramarital sex is fornication. Fornication is sin. Sin has consequences. Your disastrous marriage and choosing to even stay for the good sex was likely the natural result of years of this kind of lustful immoral thinking and behavior. 

We don't often get what we want in a spouse, but we almost always get what we deserve. 

Might want to rethink your dating strategies.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

sokillme said:


> Since you went there, how much of the sex problem is tied into the same kind of thinking as not divorcing but cheating. Like maybe you Curtis are also responsible for your sex issues.


I am not responsible for my sex issues. Neither is my wife. Or if you prefer, we are mutually responsible, but neither of us alone has the power to correct the problem. Owning this fundamental fact - that it was no one's fault - to the bone was a very important part of our reconciliation. 

There are ample potential sexual partners for each of us that would find the other more than satisfactory. It is only within the framework of a monogamous marriage that our styles are difficult to impossible to resolve.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

Quality said:


> Exactly. Premarital/extramarital sex is fornication. Fornication is sin. Sin has consequences. Your disastrous marriage and choosing to even stay for the good sex was likely the natural result of years of this kind of lustful immoral thinking and behavior.
> 
> We don't often get what we want in a spouse, but we almost always get what we deserve.
> 
> Might want to rethink your dating strategies.


Save the preaching for someone else. I got what I got because I was a Christian, I did not believe in divorce, and I believed in things like honor, doing the right thing and undying love, and a bid dose of stupidity from me.

I am not so hung up on those things like I was before. I am better now, so save the old fingers for someone that gives a sh**.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Quality said:


> Although I used him and his story as an example several times in this thread, I do so because I know he handles it well and continues to participate. I'm not trying to offend him, insult his wife, or passive-aggressively frustrate him for sport.


I'd wager $50 that there are several cheaters following this thread right now who haven't admitted it to the forum. That's there right, I don't begrudge them. I figure someone has to talk about it, might as well be me. Others might not have a skin hardened in the old school free-for-all unmoderated world of usenet. It's also part of owning my past bad behavior instead of trying to pretend to be all virtuous and above reproach.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

Cletus said:


> I'd wager $50 that there are several cheaters following this thread right now who haven't admitted it to the forum. That's there right, I don't begrudge them. I figure someone has to talk about it, might as well be me. Others might not have a skin hardened in the old school free-for-all unmoderated world of usenet. It's also part of owning my past bad behavior instead of trying to pretend to be all virtuous and above reproach.


Kudo's to you, but I am not sure that anyone is above reproach, esp ME...


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> No, I am sorry. She is not vanilla, she is an entire, large bottle of vanilla extract. What he describes to me, is horrific.
> 
> No doggie, no lazy dog, no bending her over the kitchen table, NO ORAL FOR EITHER OF THEM, COME ON!!!!
> 
> ...


Haha, my goodness, 'no oral sex', what a scandal!

Since everyone is advocating divorce if there's no oral....So do you and others think that Cletus' wife would have preferred a divorce or one crappy ONS from her husband? (Don't say neither: if there was only this choice available, hypothetically).

And if his wife preferred the ONS and not divorce, how would it have made him a better person if he went ahead with a divorce anyway in those circumstances? 
Neither is ideal. Talking about lesser of two evils again.

Many women don't actually mind if their husband gets it from somewhere else once in a while. they are otherwise happy with the marriage and love their husband but it just so happens that they find sex....tiring. They don't want their husband to divorce them nor do they want to have more or better sex with their husband either or think that there's anything that needs to be 'fixing'. I am not saying this is his wife, just that there really isn't one shoe that fits every marriage and this moral preaching can get tiresome.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

inmyprime said:


> Haha, my goodness, 'no oral sex', what a scandal!
> 
> Since everyone is advocating divorce if there's no oral....So do you and others think that Cletus' wife would have preferred a divorce or one crappy ONS from her husband? (Don't say neither: if there was only this choice available, hypothetically).
> 
> ...


if that's the case then why hide it? Why not say I dont' want to divorce, but I'd like more or this, but if you don't give it to me, I'll get it elsewhere. 
Did a ONS really solve the problem? What if the wife was given a choice?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Cletus said:


> I'd wager $50 that there are several cheaters following this thread right now who haven't admitted it to the forum. That's there right, I don't begrudge them. I figure someone has to talk about it, might as well be me. Others might not have a skin hardened in the old school free-for-all unmoderated world of usenet. It's also part of owning my past bad behavior instead of trying to pretend to be all virtuous and above reproach.


Honestly, the LAST place I would want to be if I was cheating would be ANY marriage forum anywhere.

I could throw MYSELF into the wood chipper with a lot less effort lol


----------



## Handy (Jul 23, 2017)

After reading how divorce is a better choice than having an affair of any type, maybe just after my 50th anniversary I should file for D.

* not particular to anyone but this fits some of the marriages I read about
but it just so happens that they find sex....tiring. They don't want their husband[wife] to divorce them nor do they want to have more or better sex with their husband either or think that there's anything [sexually] that needs to be 'fixing'.*


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Handy said:


> After reading how divorce is a better choice than having an affair of any type, maybe just after my 50th anniversary I should file for D.
> 
> .


well yeah. Getting a divorce is not going behind someone's back.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Handy said:


> After reading how divorce is a better choice than having an affair of any type, maybe just after my 50th anniversary I should file for D.
> 
> * not particular to anyone but this fits some of the marriages I read about
> but it just so happens that they find sex....tiring. They don't want their husband[wife] to divorce them nor do they want to have more or better sex with their husband either or think that there's anything [sexually] that needs to be 'fixing'.*


*

In the above case, you are basically married to a lazy, selfish person who doesn't care about your needs. Let's call a spade a spade.*


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> Haha, my goodness, 'no oral sex', what a scandal!
> 
> Since everyone is advocating divorce if there's no oral....So do you and others think that Cletus' wife would have preferred a divorce or one crappy ONS from her husband? (Don't say neither: if there was only this choice available, hypothetically).
> 
> ...


You know @inmyprime, some people have oral sex, and you know what, OMG, some people use sex toys and have anal sex as well. And, SOME PEOPLE actually have other positions that missionary. 

There is a great variety in sexual tastes, maybe you have not heard of it you, you should do some research. 

Sounds like she gives him minimal duty sex, which for me is completely unacceptable, but that is just me...


----------



## frozensprouts (Aug 1, 2009)

In my mind, her thinking is akin to asking the bs to be responsible for the ws behvaior. I would feel less inclined to find her advice nauseating if it was aimed just at the ws, but it is not. 

Simply put, people need to be responsible for their own choices. Aren't happy in your marriage? Talk to your spouse. If that doesn't work, seek a divorce or be upfront about what you are doing.

The lines of "I don't want to hurt my spouse/ kids/ extended fmaily/ dog. cat/ goldfish.rubber tree plant" or " I can't divorce because I'll lose my house/ car/ boat/ video game/ rubber tree plant" don;t hold water/ After all, if one is so concerned about these consequences, they won't engage in the one action that has a high probability of leading to them.

Sure, this might be black and white thinking, but if grey thinking leads to cheating, I really don't care.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

katies said:


> if that's the case then why hide it? Why not say I dont' want to divorce, but I'd like more or this, but if you don't give it to me, I'll get it elsewhere.
> Did a ONS really solve the problem? What if the wife was given a choice?


Dear Allah in Heaven

No is trying to say that it was the right choice or that it solved anything. That is so obviously missing the point that it almost seems intended.

The point is, that situation - 50% of which can be laid at my spouse's feet - provides the context in which an affair was a definite possibility. And no, at this point, I'm not going to provide the boilerplate "it was still the wrong choice" paragraph. Absolutely everyone else in the forum understands that by now.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

frozensprouts said:


> In my mind, her thinking is akin to asking the bs to be responsible for the ws behvaior. I would feel less inclined to find her advice nauseating if it was aimed just at the ws, but it is not.
> 
> Simply put, people need to be responsible for their own choices. Aren't happy in your marriage? Talk to your spouse. If that doesn't work, seek a divorce or be upfront about what you are doing.
> 
> ...


You are grossly underestimating the importance of a rubber tree plant, and I am offended.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

BluesPower said:


> Sounds like she gives him minimal duty sex, which for me is completely unacceptable, but that is just me...


No, that's not accurate. Duty sex implies doing it for your partner when you don't like to do it.

I know it's hard for people to wrap their head around someone that vanilla actually taking pleasure from sex, but they can. They can get everything that they want with no fuss or bother from a tightly regimented system. 

Anyway, that is a topic for a different forum, one which I have contributed to many times. Perel et. al. would have much to say about this kind of a marriage and what it implies for the chance for infidelity. 

I just had an epiphany. We'll start Vegas betting on how long a marriage remains infidelity free. Place you bets, choose your time horizon, watch the money roll in. As soon as billions are being wagered, lost, and won, folks will start caring a whole bunch about context.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Cletus said:


> Dear Allah in Heaven
> 
> No is trying to say that it was the right choice or that it solved anything. That is so obviously missing the point that it almost seems intended.


It probably is, seriously

Why didn't I take that left turn at Albuquerque? I dunno.....but I already did it. And Back to the Future was just a movie......


----------



## frozensprouts (Aug 1, 2009)

personofinterest said:


> You are grossly underestimating the importance of a rubber tree plant, and I am offended.


I bet you'll be jealous of me then, as I have two. I guess that makes me a "polyplantus" .:grin2::grin2::grin2::grin2:


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

frozensprouts said:


> I bet you'll be jealous of me then, as I have two. I guess that makes me a "polyplantus" .:grin2::grin2::grin2::grin2:


I'm afraid to have one. I'm so terrible with plants, I would probably kill even a rubber one.....bahahahaha

I heard Esther Perel has plants (there, see, I'm still on topic)


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> I heard Esther Perel has plants


Implants do not count as plants.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Cletus said:


> 50% of which can be laid at my spouse's feet - provides the context in which an affair was a definite possibility.


you're 50% blaming your spouse for your affair. Think she would have agreed to that if you had given her a choice?


----------



## lucy999 (Sep 28, 2014)

inmyprime said:


> Many women don't actually mind if their husband gets it from somewhere else once in a while. they are otherwise happy with the marriage and love their husband but it just so happens that they find sex....tiring.


 How on Earth would you know this? I think this is probably the most ridiculous statement on this thread thus far.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

I think if I put 1% blame on my affair on my husband he'd throw me out.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

Cletus said:


> I know it's hard for people to wrap their head around someone that vanilla actually taking pleasure from sex, but they can. They can get everything that they want with no fuss or bother from a tightly regimented system.


I know this may sound sadistic...But I sometimes miss plain-vanilla romantic looking in the eyes kind of sex...
My wife mostly gets off with kinky, submissive, aggressive kind and in the beginning, this seemed all WAY over my 'pay grade' to me...but I worked hard, to get 'promoted' and I think I get it now. We do sometimes have the 'regular' kind but I am not always sure if she's doing it for me or she doesn't want to seem 'weird'.
I never knew it would turn out like this when I met her; she was always relatively 'luke-warm' and regular when it came to things of sexual nature.

I guess what i am saying is...it never hurts to look at it from the 'glass half full' perspective: at least she's enjoying and doing whatever it is you guys are doing. You could also have a marriage and not have ANY kind of sex at all. Which is really not that uncommon...

This is probably a dumb question: but have you spoken to her about it? Have you ever asked her to.., lets say, set one night per week where she'd just let you do whatever it is you want to do to her? Call it the 'Cletus Night'. She doesn't need to be always in control. And, speaking of context...very often men have a difficult time articulating what it is they want to their spouse. Instead they post about it on forums :wink2:


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

lucy999 said:


> How on Earth would you know this? I think this is probably the most ridiculous statement on this thread thus far.


Oh I haven't even gotten started yet, sister 

My wife told me (bunch of her other mum friends frequently complain to her about not being able to get their horny husbands off their back and they come up with all kinds of creative ideas, including telling their husband: "Please, just **** someone else already. But please don't make a big deal out of it and I don't want to hear about it afterwards. Do you know how ****ing tiring it is to take care of school kids AND have you humping my leg all day long?")

It's really not that a surprising solution, considering how much these private schools cost...Sometimes you got to do what you got to do in order to 'save the marriage'.


----------



## lucy999 (Sep 28, 2014)

inmyprime said:


> Oh I haven't even gotten started yet, sister
> 
> My wife told me (bunch of her other mum friends frequently complain to her about not being able to get their horny husbands off their back and they come up with all kinds of creative ideas, including telling their husband: "Please, just **** someone else already. But please don't make a big deal out of it and I don't want to hear about it afterwards. Do you know how ****ing tiring it is to take care of school kids AND have you humping my leg all day long?")
> 
> It's really not that a surprising solution, considering how much these private schools cost...Sometimes you got to do what you got to do in order to 'save the marriage'.


Well, to be fair, I am child-free by choice so I have no first-hand experience on how exhausting it is. Interesting perspective and I could easily see that happening.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> Oh I haven't even gotten started yet, sister
> 
> My wife told me (bunch of her other mum friends frequently complain to her about not being able to get their horny husbands off their back and they come up with all kinds of creative ideas, including telling their husband: "Please, just **** someone else already. But please don't make a big deal out of it and I don't want to hear about it afterwards. Do you know how ****ing tiring it is to take care of school kids AND have you humping my leg all day long?")
> 
> It's really not that a surprising solution, considering how much these private schools cost...Sometimes you got to do what you got to do in order to 'save the marriage'.


And you actually BELIEVE that they meant what they said in exasperation? That they actually, truly, wouldn't care if their husbands got naked with some other woman? That is very naive...


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> And you actually BELIEVE that they meant what they said in exasperation? That they actually, truly, wouldn't care if their husbands got naked with some other woman? That is very naive...


Didn't you tell me to try and take things at face value sometimes? 
I don't know, I am not planning to go all Freud on them, but I will try to find out if there are cases where this 'theory' has actually been put to practice...
I think the fact that this suggestion has been aired already says a lot IMHO...


----------



## TheGoodGuy (Apr 22, 2013)

BluesPower said:


> This is where I disagree with almost everything that EP says and for this reason. In the initial stages, no one should be listening to EP. *The WS will "Hear", *"You know it is understandable that you cheated. People are not naturally monogamous. Sex dried up between you and your spouse and you both lost attraction, I mean it is understandable, right. Now let's look at why these things happened that "caused you to cheat", not that I condone cheating, but I understand it."
> 
> While on the other hand,* the BS "hears",* "You know what, it really is your fault that they cheated. You did not want to have sex with your spouse, or you are not really good in bed and the AP was new and exciting. If you were a better lay, this would not have happened. Now let's look at what you can do better to keep them from cheating."
> 
> ...


BAM! Perfectly said. Wish I could give this a million likes. 

Rhetorical thought, not directed at you specifically, Blues: What can/should we do about it though? However true and pure the intentions of EP and others are, people are going to see/hear things through their own lens. Many WS will "hear" the WS side like you have described and use it to their benefit to excuse their cheating. No amount of pleading from the BS is going to make them view it from the other lens. If the WS had the foresight to think about long term consequences and destruction of their families (looking at it from their spouses perspective), they may have chosen a different alternative to cheating. It's more of a character issue.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> Didn't you tell me to try and take things at face value sometimes?
> I don't know, I am not planning to go all Freud on them, but I will try to find out if there are cases where this 'theory' has actually been put to practice...
> I think the fact that this suggestion has been aired already says a lot IMHO...


You know, I bet if I asked a thousand people if they would cut of their hand for 100,00 dollars, at least a couple of people would say yes.

That does not make cutting off one's hand a mainstream way to earn 100,000 dollars....


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

TheGoodGuy said:


> BAM! Perfectly said. Wish I could give this a million likes.
> 
> Rhetorical thought, not directed at you specifically, Blues: What can/should we do about it though? However true and pure the intentions of EP and others are, people are going to see/hear things through their own lens. Many WS will "hear" the WS side like you have described and use it to their benefit to excuse their cheating. No amount of pleading from the BS is going to make them view it from the other lens. If the WS had the foresight to think about long term consequences and destruction of their families (looking at it from their spouses perspective), they may have chosen a different alternative to cheating. It's more of a character issue.


Very true. Just like many a BS will NEVER be willing to hear about prior marital problems.

This is one of the pragmatic reasons cheating is just stupid, in addition to wrong.

If you get caught, then you have basically obliterated ANY chance of having your marital problems addressed because they will ALL pale in comparison to your affair.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

personofinterest said:


> You know, I bet if I asked a thousand people if they would cut of their hand for 100,00 dollars, at least a couple of people would say yes.
> 
> That does not make cutting off one's hand a mainstream way to earn 100,000 dollars....


Who said it's supposed to be 'main stream'? Just that it's not unheard of to outsource your vajayjay from time to time, when things are a bit...snowed under, instead of D that's given out here to everyone, like candy.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

inmyprime said:


> Who said it's supposed to be 'main stream'? Just that it's not unheard of to *outsource your vajayjay* from time to time, when things are a bit...snowed under, instead of D that's given out here to everyone, like candy.


Thank you for making me nearly choke to death on my tea lol


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

TheGoodGuy said:


> BAM! Perfectly said. Wish I could give this a million likes.
> 
> Rhetorical thought, not directed at you specifically, Blues: What can/should we do about it though?


Well, we certainly don't stop investigating reality just because some people will misinterpret the findings or color them with their own prejudices, which is basically unavoidable anyway. 

After all, the Flat Earth Society is still alive and well.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

personofinterest said:


> Very true. Just like many a BS will NEVER be willing to hear about prior marital problems.
> 
> This is one of the pragmatic reasons cheating is just stupid, in addition to wrong.
> 
> If you get caught, then you have basically obliterated ANY chance of having your marital problems addressed because they will ALL pale in comparison to your affair.


In the short term, that's probably true. 

I'm 13 years post affair, and that's just no longer accurate. It doesn't loom that large in day-to-day life. There's still ample room to discuss and work on the marriage albeit one with an additional issue to consider.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

Cletus said:


> In the short term, that's probably true.
> 
> *I'm 13 years post affair, and that's just no longer accurate. It doesn't loom that large in day-to-day life.* There's still ample room to discuss and work on the marriage albeit one with an additional issue to consider.


Would your wife agree?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Wazza said:


> Would your wife agree?


It is no longer a topic of conversation. If she disagrees, then she is disagreeing silently. No doubt she thinks about it more than she lets on, as do I of course. Occasionally remembering doesn't require that it interfere.

I still remember every really big marital issue that we have overcome. But I don't dwell on them - the ones where I thought I was very much in the right, and the ones where I was clearly wrong. Who can actively hold on to resentment for that long? Who would want to? 

Everyone keeps asking what my wife thinks about all of this. I don't know. It is no longer an active issue in our marriage. We as a couple are not prone to long, protracted conversations about what we have to do to continuously improve or to dredge up the past. We do not talk about it except in rare circumstances. 

Frankly, that sounds exhausting anyway. She believes that I was remorseful, that I modified my expectations and behavior, and that I have acted in good faith since. As long as I don't violate that trust, we're good.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

I will say that every other problem we have seems very small compared to what we've overcome.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

TheGoodGuy said:


> BAM! Perfectly said. Wish I could give this a million likes.
> 
> Rhetorical thought, not directed at you specifically, Blues: What can/should we do about it though? However true and pure the intentions of EP and others are, people are going to see/hear things through their own lens. Many WS will "hear" the WS side like you have described and use it to their benefit to excuse their cheating. No amount of pleading from the BS is going to make them view it from the other lens. If the WS had the foresight to think about long term consequences and destruction of their families (looking at it from their spouses perspective), they may have chosen a different alternative to cheating. It's more of a character issue.


Well for me, the first step would be to stop listening to EP for sure. 

And I guess that is my general point about this whole thread. Which to sum it up is: 

1) the way she presents the contextualization in talking about infidelity actually warrants the reaction that I spoke, and that @TheGoodGuy responded to in his post above. To answer his question, what should we do... My answer is to NOT use or listen to the EP material. 

IMHO, it is the way that she discusses infidelity as well as the way that she wants to look at the marriage after infidelity has happened. While I am not saying that her work has no merit, I am saying that her way of looking at infidelity in the early stages is hurtful and wrong. It is the difference between freshman history and a graduate level history class, the freshman has no business being there. 

2) I believe that in the early stages of DDay, it is the victim, the BS, that deserves all the consideration. The BS's needs come first before the WS, or actually issues in the marriage. And yes those issues in the marriage take a back seat for the foreseeable future until the BS is at least out of the worst of the pain. 

Counselors should focus on this, and help them deal with the shock in a positive way, and the WS should immediately get the picture that they are the one that cause this, they are the ones responsible and they MUST learn some way to help their spouse to recover. 

3) And all of that is based on the premise that the BS WANTS to stay married and in the relationship. If not then the counseling should maybe focus on helping the partners split in as positive a way as possible. With the continued focus of helping the BS to get out of the state of shock that they are in. 

So, in conclusion, that is my case for the EP materials actually being a bad source for dealing with infidelity in the early stages...


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

A friend of mine had a bicycle wreck and needed reconstructive knee surgery. She would also, of course, need physical therapy. However, she didn't begin going to rigorous physical therapy until she had recovered enough from surgery and the pain was not so acute. To try to do physical therapy right after surgery would have been excruciating and impossible.

I think looking at the marriage as a whole and its pre-A problems is way to excruciating for the BS who has just been wrecked by infidelity. IF recovery and reconciliation is the chosen route, then the A comes first. THEN the marriage problems.

This can be solved if the WS can choose to focus on THEIR responsibilities and anyone else's. A WS who is completely focused on their spouse won;t get distracted by how this or that was before the A. If they are impatient do get their BS up to speed on that issue that used to bug them....they are still in selfish mode.


----------



## Randy2 (Jul 19, 2016)

Faithful Wife said:


> Esther and other recent researchers bring up new ideas for us to consider.
> 
> A big one is that for women, stats seem to show that their desire for their long term partner declines much sooner than their man's desire for them does.
> 
> ...


I just read this post about Esther Perel. Given all the passionate posting in this thread, I find it striking that nobody quoted , liked, or mentioned the one above. Well, I just "Liked it" and agree with some of Faithful's points . So I sense that all the back and forth here is really about something else. "new ideas for us to consider" may not be what this is about. :scratchhead:


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

Randy2 said:


> I just read this post about Esther Perel. Given all the passionate posting in this thread, I find it striking that nobody quoted , liked, or mentioned the one above. Well, I just "Liked it" and agree with some of Faithful's points . So I sense that all the back and forth here is really about something else. "new ideas for us to consider" may not be what this is about. :scratchhead:


It basically boils down to the same old knee jerk reactions. And extreme thinking with an inability to listen.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

BluesPower said:


> Well for me, the first step would be to stop listening to EP for sure.
> 
> And I guess that is my general point about this whole thread. Which to sum it up is:
> 
> ...


And in conclusion of the conclusion....you still don't understand what her message is; she says this: "in the early stages of DDay, it is the victim, the BS, that deserves all the consideration" over and and over in all her speeches and books. Why do you choose to ignore it?


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

She really doesn’t. Look at her podcasts that deal with infidelity. It’s all about the WS not having some need being met and the BS being somehow responsible for not knowing the wS even had a need.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

katies said:


> She really doesn’t. Look at her podcasts that deal with infidelity. It’s all about the WS not having some need being met and the BS being somehow responsible for not knowing the wS even had a need.


Lets look at facts, shall we?
Please watch this video at 9:00:

https://youtu.be/RmiKAoAmYSg?t=9m1s

She says: "What is the bare minimum you (as a BS) need from your partner? - which is btw the condition for making it or not: you need a partner who can acknowledge how badly they hurt you. If they can't acknowledge that; *if they minimise it, if they justify it, if they explain that in fact you drove them to do it, you are done. *

How does she make the BS responsible with this statement???


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

BluesPower said:


> IMHO, it is the way that she discusses infidelity as well as the way that she wants to look at the marriage after infidelity has happened. While I am not saying that her work has no merit, I am saying that her way of looking at infidelity *in the early stages* is hurtful and wrong. It is the difference between freshman history and a graduate level history class, the freshman has no business being there.
> 
> .....
> So, in conclusion, that is my case for the EP materials actually being a bad source for dealing with infidelity *in the early stages*...


There I would agree. I have been "pro" EP in this thread. I don't think she is anti-marriage or pro affairs or whatever. Earlier I posted some specific quotes from a specific podcast of hers that I think demonstrate that. 
*But *I certainly wouldn't advise anyone in the first few months of recovering from an affair to listen to it. 



BluesPower said:


> 2) I believe that in the early stages of DDay, it is the victim, the BS, that deserves all the consideration.


Well, kind of. Actually the WS may also emerge injured from the train wreck, and it's a bit like being a paramedic at the scene of a crash, you treat the injuries of both parties, even the one who was clearly responsible for causing the crash. I wouldn't do that *in front of* the BS. Obviously. But actually, if the WS got injured too, and can say so, that's one of the best signs that they might change in future. In that specific respect, the analogy with a car crash works.


----------



## Laurentium (May 21, 2017)

inmyprime said:


> https://youtu.be/RmiKAoAmYSg?t=9m1s
> 
> She says: "What is the bare minimum you (as a BS) need from your partner? - which is btw the condition for making it or not: you need a partner who can acknowledge how badly they hurt you. If they can't acknowledge that; *if they minimise it, if they justify it, if they explain that in fact you drove them to do it, you are done." *


That's a great example. Watch it a few times.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

inmyprime said:


> Lets look at facts, shall we?
> Please watch this video at 9:00:
> 
> https://youtu.be/RmiKAoAmYSg?t=9m1s
> ...


yeah, she doesn't go anywhere near saying something like that in her new podcasts. 

Listen to "I've had better" or "100 things I say to you in my head." - or something like that.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

BluesPower said:


> Well for me, the first step would be to stop listening to EP for sure.
> 
> And I guess that is my general point about this whole thread. Which to sum it up is:
> 
> ...


I understand (I think) what you are saying, but I violently disagree. Speaking as a BS.

From a BS perspective you are absolutely right, but pragmatically, the needs of the WS are also real, whether valid or not. You are not solving any problems if you ignore that. 

Now, if the WS is a selfish jerk, the best way to acknowledge their needs might be to say “get stuffed”. But I don’t believe that every WS is that. There are some who did the wrong thing, but have a shred of decency. 

Now, if the BS is done with the marriage, fair enough in my view. But if the BS wants to reconcile, then it is at some point about rebuilding a relationship. You don’t do that by just kicking the WS in the head each time they express a view. You have to work through the issues.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

Nothing wrong with needs for either side. But what Perel does is ties those needs to the infidelity. And she lets the WS go on and on (in the podcasts) about how their needs weren’t being met. Just no.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

katies said:


> Nothing wrong with needs for either side. But what Perel does is ties those needs to the infidelity. And she lets the WS go on and on (in the podcasts) about how their needs weren’t being met. Just no.


Perel summarized:

“Yeah, but....”


----------



## SunCMars (Feb 29, 2016)

inmyprime said:


> Until it happens to you and then you’ll find an excuse to stay too. Well not everyone will but *many people who proclaim they won’t, often do*. That’s what statistics show. What we should be doing and what we end up doing is not always the same thing.
> 
> Does it make them weak? Again, it’s complicated.
> 
> ...


The BS's stay because they are in love, love overrules [bailing out] of the boat, swimming away.
They bail out the sinking boat, remove the stinky water, bail, because the boat holds them afloat.

The boat, the marriage, the children, the love holds them afloat.

Not their pride. 
Their image is not of their own making. It's existence is codependent on others, other things. 

BS's who rug sweep are often hopeful beings, being trapped in a hopeless situation.


----------



## BluesPower (Mar 27, 2018)

Wazza said:


> I understand (I think) what you are saying, but I violently disagree. Speaking as a BS.
> 
> From a BS perspective you are absolutely right, but pragmatically, the needs of the WS are also real, whether valid or not. You are not solving any problems if you ignore that.
> 
> ...


Listen, I understand what you are saying, I really do. 

And, there are not strong enough words to explain how wrong I feel that you are. 

Let me guess, and I am not tying to be sarcastic, you spouse cheated, (Wife?) and you took her back, and you really looked at what the cheating spouse's need were and you did everything you could do to fix them? 

Is that anywhere close???


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

If it were ME, after getting over the shock of discovery, I would WANT to know what was going on with my WS. If reconciliation were the goal, having my betrayed feelings would be necessary. But also would be my ultimate forgiveness. My forgiveness would need to include understanding of his feelings. This is not a day long journey. But I would not choose a reconciliation dependent on a fault model. Forgiveness would include understanding, acceptance and ... well eventually forgiveness going hand in hand with the understanding that the knowledge we both gain ensure it does not happen again.

I don't have the same feelings about infidelity as many. I see it as very, very damaging for sure. But I don't see it as the be all end of all of damage. I can understand how a person could feel lost, lonely and frankly fogged out by the ease of NRE. I have never cheated. Never would. Part of that is not that I am such a great human being. I am lucky. I don't WANT to. It is easy for me to not seek what I don't want. But I can see how someone else might. 

I find her PoV very interesting.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

inmyprime said:


> Many women don't actually mind if their husband gets it from somewhere else once in a while. they are otherwise happy with the marriage and love their husband but it just so happens that they find sex....tiring. They don't want their husband to divorce them nor do they want to have more or better sex with their husband either or think that there's anything that needs to be 'fixing'. I am not saying this is his wife, just that there really isn't one shoe that fits every marriage and this moral preaching can get tiresome.


Still partners should worry. Everything changes. That NSA sex partner yesterday? Well, now he wants to be recognised very publicly as a boyfriend. Someone who once agreed that it was consensual, well, after a few visits with a therapist, they now think something else.

It wasn't until I was listening to a discussion about one of these sex scandals in the UK. someone on the radio explained that men with high sex drives will go after boys because they don't get pregnant........ How about your partner making those kinds of decisions?


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

> I see it as very, very damaging for sure. But I don't see it as the be all end of all of damage.


Me too. It is a horrific pain and betrayal. But I do not think it is the only type of betrayal that matyers, or THE biggest pain someone can ever experience. I certainly wouldn't equate it with losing my child, for example.

Neglect of a child and abuse of a child, for example, can both lead to a child's death. I'm not sure much is served by debating which child suffered more.


----------



## katies (May 19, 2015)

I think betrayal can only be measured by the person experiencing it.


----------



## personofinterest (Apr 6, 2018)

katies said:


> I think betrayal can only be measured by the person experiencing it.


Exactly, which is why I didn't appreciate when people would tell me in the midst of my pain over being rejected and neglected for years "at least he didn't cheat."

Oh yes he did. He cheated ME out of a marriage that was a marriage.


----------



## 269370 (Dec 17, 2016)

katies said:


> I think betrayal can only be measured by the person experiencing it.




If that is the case (and I agree that it is, because it’s so subjective), then if the person doesn’t know anything about the betrayal, does it change anything about it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## manfromlamancha (Jul 4, 2013)

The danger with her and other similar minds is that they tend to (unknowingly) blur the line between exploring sexuality and straight cheating. How do you know when you are cheating. Their answer would be to be honest up front - that would apply if you knew up front that you were polyamorous or whatever.

Here at TAM we have always said if you want to do something with someone else (for whatever reason) and you are in a monogamous relationship, let your partner know FIRST. Then try and see if there is a resolution and if not then separate FIRST and then do what you need to do.

And as for the guy on the panel that said write down all the things that excite you on post it notes and then go find others who are into similar things - how would that work for paedophilia or necrophilia etc. Some of these things are illegal or wrong for good reasons. So it really is not as simple as that.

Finding out what is right for you first is probably the right thing to do but real life never works that way.

So ... good to read now and then if only to arm yourself with what to be careful of.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

katies said:


> I think betrayal can only be measured by the person experiencing it.


This is very true. On this board, the assumption seems to be that the complete decimation of the relationship is obvious, normal and people who don't share that view are messed up. I can see how this author/speaker would not resonate with many. But I can also see how it could and does resonate with many.


----------

