# The "fog", myth or fact.



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

I've been asked to start a thread about the , so-called, "fog. So here goes. 
Do you believe in it? 
I do not, except as infatuation, and an excuse mechanism, that allows people to be further deceived, and evade responsibility for their actions.
What do you think?


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Any new romantic relationship - legitimate or not - involves infatuation fog.


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

Not quite sure what I think about this. I know that I have been smitten/infatuated before in my relationships to the point that it drives my thoughts and actions, but never so deep in a "fog" that I can excuse all acceptable behavior and be tempted to do immoral and socially unacceptable things while putting myself and others at risk (which is what the "fog" seem to entail). 

I don't doubt that some serious attraction occurs and this drives those involved, but I don't think it is some temporary suspension of reality that changes your morals, beliefs, and general character when in it, like most WS's would like you to believe. I think it is more like fantasy land. They know they are doing wrong and shouldn't but it feels so good that they stop caring about others and just focus on their happiness (at whatever expense to others it brings).


----------



## Gabriel (May 10, 2011)

I think the hangup is in the word "fog".

Bottom line is new love turns people blind to things on the outside. 

Some examples:

When you were a kid and your best friend got a new girlfriend/boyfriend, suddenly your best friend flaked out a lot, right? They backed out of plans, etc, with you.

When someone is deeply in love they make excuses for their SO's bad behavior.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening all
I have definitively experienced "infatuation fog". I've never actually acted on it, but it is a very strong effect. Your mind can play all sorts of tricks on you and you can find yourself starting down a very dangerous path. 

I suspect that the main reason I never cheated is that I don't drink (this is part of the reason I don't drink). With fewer inhibitions I might well have done so. 

FWIW, I've only felt at all tempted during those times when my wife wouldn't have sex with me. When our sex life was good, there was no temptation.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

The fog is real and I have experienced the fog. It is indeed a stage of emotion involved with love. Love and other emotions are due to a chemical mix in the brain that help develop neural connections. The fog is distinguished from love in that a particular set of chemicals helps to undo previous neural connections. I wrote about it awhile back:



> Now back to the question about the difference between “in love” and “the fog”. If you are married and you are still in love then you are probably at the long term true love spectrum of the chemical mixture. You probably (but not necessarily) went through an infatuation stage with your spouse. However since you may not have been attached to anyone else your new addiction to your pre-spouse may have gone unnoticed except by friends that saw less and less of you because you were then head over heels in love. Friends understand that is what happens often.
> 
> Now suppose you are married and in long term love but begin to have feelings for another. The addiction components of the ****tail propel you to escalate contact as much as possible. Soon you get the rush and excitement and you are infatuated when the other. The escalation of contact from the desire to be with the other leads to a reprioritization of what is important. These new priorities are at odds with the marriage and don’t make sense. Furthermore when the oxytocin kicks in and neural connections with the spouse are replaced with the other then links to those old feelings diminish and disappear. This is often noted as rewriting history of the relationship because the way you remember things has changed and is changing. This is the fog. It is noticed more because it is in stark contrast to an existing relationship. Now if you have lost the love for your spouse you will still go through the steps above but your connections to your spouse have already been lost through other means and it is still the fog.


See the link in my sig for the full post about the fog. The review paper I quote in that post can now be found at:

http://www.researchgate.net/profile...nalytic_review/links/09e415016d798d8efd000000


----------



## Whip Morgan (May 26, 2011)

Its myth. Its not real. 

I do believe that people can get easily excited about new things (i.e. affair partner,secrecy) but the "fog" as we see here discussed is not real. Perhaps more so with cheating spouses who post (particularly on SI), the "fog" is used as the excuse that leads to the idea the cheater was powerless to control themselves. 

We all understand how new things make a person feel. However, when it comes to cheaters, often times experiencing that new thing is a result of bad or no boundaries where the cheater did nothing to stop the inappropriate behavior that led to the affair. 

On SI, one of the "epic" BH/WW combo threads, the BH discovered his wife created and kept a journal which detailed explicitly just how much she LOVED cheating on her husband with his good friend. He discovered this during his "R", which we all would call a false R. This resulted after several incidents of trickle truth and actually catching his WW at a bar with her OM. Yet, several posters there chalked the journal up to her foggy thinking....

No, it wasnt the fog. She was continuing her false R, and she got caught..Again. The BH tried to stay, even though he kept discovering her lies. They posted recently that he is divorcing her. 

To carry on an affair, it takes deliberate, cold calculated actions to hide the affair and betray a spouse. They have complete control, and are not subject to "the fog." How many times have cheaters posted here saying that they were with their affair partner, but the AP wouldn't leave their BS or have a relationship, so the WS then "realizes" just how much they love their BS? When in reality if the AP stayed with the cheater, that cheater would also leave the BS. There is no fog there.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all
> I have definitively experienced "infatuation fog". I've never actually acted on it, but it is a very strong effect. Your mind can play all sorts of tricks on you and you can find yourself starting down a very dangerous path.
> 
> I suspect that the main reason I never cheated is that I don't drink (this is part of the reason I don't drink). With fewer inhibitions I might well have done so.
> ...


When you are having good sex with your spouse you are encouraging more neural connections to grow which increases the bond with your spouse. The neural connections are sort of like a lawn. When they are dense and green they help prevent weeds from growing. If you let the lawn go the grass thins out and more chances for weeds to germinate. 

The best way to keep a marriage strong is to proactively do things like dating, adventure and other things with your spouse that will keep the neural connections dense.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

Whip Morgan said:


> Its myth. Its not real.
> 
> I do believe that people can get easily excited about new things (i.e. affair partner,secrecy) but the "fog" as we see here discussed is not real. Perhaps more so with cheating spouses who post (particularly on SI), the "fog" is used as the excuse that leads to the idea the cheater was powerless to control themselves.
> 
> ...


I agree the fog is NOT an excuse. You know you have feelings and you know when they conflict with your situation. You know cheating is bad. The fog is not something you can blame anything on. It is mearly the name for the chemical end result of displacement of neural connections. 

Not all people experience fog but it exists all the same. The example you site above is certainly one of those.  There are cold calculating cheaters that don't experience the fog.

I know what the fog is because I've experienced it. I've felt the conflict and confusion. I didn't cheat as a result. I knew something was wrong and I sought to understand it which is how I landed on TAM three years ago.

Don't discount the fog it is very real.


----------



## Acoa (Sep 21, 2012)

Not sure "fog" is the best analogy for the phenomena it is often used to describe. 

But there is definitely something to the fact that people will make bad choices leading up to and during an active affair. The excitement, lust and infatuation make engaging in some activities more appealing than is normal or healthy. 

For example, you are married, things are okay at home. Let’s say you are out of town on business, and a total stranger approached you in a bar and asked you back to their hotel room for sex. You are most likely to decline (exceptions of course for sex addicts and impulse control defects).

Now let’s say you have a co-worker you find attractive. They know you are married, but you get the idea the attraction is mutual. But they bring up your spouse. You like the attention and don’t want it to end. So, instead of saying hey, I love my spouse. You fib a little. And say how things are not so great at home. Aww, poor you. You have a few drinks. And this co-worker invites you back to the room for a romp. In this situation, the risk of loss is identical to the first. But, because of that lustful feeling, a bit of knowledge of the coworker, and a little investment in deceit already (fibbing about the relationship at home), the risk is much higher that you’d say yes.

Once down that path, most people are not honest with themselves. The guilt can drive them mad if they don’t build constructs to protect themselves and justify their actions. So, suddenly the relationship at home really isn’t that great. And the co-worker is suddenly everything the BS isn’t. The infatuation grows and the relationship with the spouse gets worse and worse. And the WS doesn’t see it, because they are in denial. You can call this denial “fog” because it’s easier to say and less likely to challenge the WS ego. But in the end, it’s just denial that they made a series of poor choices, and don’t want to accept full responsibility for their actions, and want to protect that relationship with the affair partner. Because if you strip away all of the denial, they would see how horrible the choice was, and the affair would have to end.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

Acoa said:


> Not sure "fog" is the best analogy for the phenomena it is often used to describe.
> 
> But there is definitely something to the fact that people will make bad choices leading up to and during an active affair. The excitement, lust and infatuation make engaging in some activities more appealing than is normal or healthy.
> 
> ...


Another and perhaps better way to understand it is it is an addiction. What you describe above is really an evolution of the thinking of an addict. The fog is an addiction to the pleasurable neural transmitters in the brain.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Rookie, I've already expressed my feelings on the "fog." It is real. It is a proven scientific fact. It is simply another name for heavy infatuation and it affects different people differently. Does it negate logical thought. No. Does it affect judgement? Absolutely. Is it an excuse? Hell no!

I'd like to know why you've called it "mythology" and "new age babble." Is it so hard to believe that people are affected by brain chemicals? Testosterone is a brain chemical. Do you get aroused? Where do you think that comes from? Is it out of the realm of possibility that judgement is affected? After all isn't your judgement affected by a couple of glasses of wine? Isn't your judgement affected by lack of sleep? Why is it so hard to understand that a brain saturated with dopamine, the same chemical released by cocaine, would affect someone? Why is it so hard to believe that someone who gets that massive shot of dopamine in response to interaction with another would crave that person's company? Can't you understand why a WS would be in a state of confusion while "detoxing" from that dopamine saturation. Wouldn't that explain why some WS's say and do things that make no sense? Wouldn't it explain why some WS's don't immediately feel remorse for what they've done?


----------



## Lancer (Sep 15, 2014)

I think it is only called the fog as an excuse for an affair. When two singles meet with the same feeling it is infatuation that may lead to love. So yes, the wayward spouse is in a fog but no different than any other infatuation.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Feelings arise and are both natural and beyond our conscious control. What we DO about them is within our control.


----------



## badkarma2013 (Nov 9, 2013)

Lancer said:


> I think it is only called the fog as an excuse for an affair. When two singles meet with the same feeling it is infatuation that may lead to love. So yes, the wayward spouse is in a fog but no different than any other infatuation.


However ..I truly believe that there comes a moment of clarity, with each BH here... that YOU KNOW if you can continue in the 
marriage or not...

Mine was when I saw the pics of my WWS affair with the OM
...I knew at that second there would be no R...and no more Marriage...

As i have stated the decision to have an A with her boss and destroy 2 families..was HERS and hers alone..

The decision to burn everything to the ground was mine..not hers.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Infatuation (fog) or cocaine?

1) You feel great. You can't remember ever feeling better.

2) You have an extra spring in your step. Lots more energy.

3) You are more aware of everything. Things seem much clearer.

4) You can talk for hours and not feel sleepy.

Maybe I understand the fog (infatuation) because I used to do coke. I understand how addicting the feeling is and I know how hard it is to give up. I know how everything seems incredibly awesome when you are "high" (with lover) and how confused you can get when withdrawing (away from lover.) I've seen one person use huge amounts and barely be affected and another use just a little and be totally blitzed. That's how I also know how dopamine (cocaine and fog) can affect people differently.


----------



## thatbpguy (Dec 24, 2012)

I see "fog" like being drunk or hypnotized. You may loosen up around the edges, but in general are still the same core person. As such, while I think there is something to being in a 'fog', I think it is used too easily as a bogus excuse.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

If one wants to examine the hormonal component of this.. this is a great write up by Pit-of-my-stomach...**** *http://talkaboutmarriage.com/coping-infidelity/21172-never-say-never.html *****

It speaks of the FOG, like being on Drugs (dopamine, PEA, oxytocin) ..about instinctive desires.... Rationalization, Denial, and Repression...denial....also Sublimation, Displacement, Projection and Intellectualization .


----------



## Hardtohandle (Jan 10, 2013)

What Whip Morgan said hit home for me just now.. I just didn't realize something until now..

The statement 



> The fog is not an excuse to cheat


I remember trying to explain to my Ex wife how she was in a fog and I would print out stories about infidelity fog.. 

She laughed and scoffed at me. It was like how pathetic you look right now doing this to try to win me back..

The *Fog* is not some all encompassing mystical power that possesses someone and takes them over, that they wake up months or years later and say 
*"Where am I ?. How did I get here ? And who are you ? Where is my husband HTH !?"*

Neither is it some narcotic that makes you steal and do heinous things to get *"a fix"*

I do think it does play a part and people can get swept away into it, but I do think there does come some point where they say *"WTF am I doing !??, I have a spouse and kids and a family.. I can't be doing this crazy sh!t like this !.. What will people think of me ?"*

I think its at this point where the fog has no play in the excuse..

So the Fog is *Fact* but *NOT* the get out of jail free card..


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

EI said:


> Meson has nailed it. I would also add, from my own personal experience, that in a marriage where the "connection" with my spouse was long gone before my affair began, I think it was much easier to give in to the feel good feelings of "the fog." When new connections are being formed and the old connections are already very weak or non-existent, (no history re-writing necessary) the feel good feelings created by the bonding hormone oxytocin are an _extremely_ powerful ****tail.
> 
> While "the fog" doesn't override logic, common sense, morals and values, or provide a justification for an affair, I believe it does help explain why so many are willing to set aside their logic, common sense, and morals and values, at least, for the duration of the affair.
> 
> *That's not scientific data. That is simply my personal experience.*


And basic common sense if you have even an elementary understanding of addictions and the destruction they cause.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

SimplyAmorous said:


> If one wants to examine the hormonal component of this.. this is a great write up by Pit-of-my-stomach...**** *http://talkaboutmarriage.com/coping-infidelity/21172-never-say-never.html *****
> 
> It speaks of the FOG, like being on Drugs (dopamine, PEA, oxytocin) ..about instinctive desires.... Rationalization, Denial, and Repression...denial....also Sublimation, Displacement, Projection and Intellectualization .


SA, you should be the TAM historian! This is the thread that introduced me to the ideas. I then did a review of current research at the time and confirmed it. The review article I quote came from that search.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

Fog is real, but it involves lots of separate ingredients to get there and once it is there only the fire of consequential truth can burn it away. As they indoctrinate themselves as well as compartmentalize whatever they need to to ensure the gravity of the fog remains is a psychological addiction. Logic, kindness, support, anything positive will not dissipate this fog either. 

Even still, after all the truth and consequences have been administered one can still remain in the fog so long as the source remains; their desires.


----------



## staystrong (Sep 15, 2012)

Whether myth or real, you must treat it as not a "fog" but a brick wall which you can not penetrate without a wrecking ball. Otherwise, you can be drawn into the fog and become confused yourself. 

It is by far the hardest thing to deal with because for them it is real. But because the dialog is almost always between the two of you, there's no outside arbitrator of truth. I think only a trained infidelity counselor could assist at breaking down the barriers, and for many WS that will mean not showing up for the next session.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Limerence is very real - and the fog is the effect that limerence has on someone who lacks enough moral fiber to not cheat on, lose faith in, and betray their spouse.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

staystrong said:


> Whether myth or real, you must treat it as not a "fog" but a brick wall which you can not penetrate without a wrecking ball. Otherwise, you can be drawn into the fog and become confused yourself.
> 
> It is by far the hardest thing to deal with because for them it is real. But because the dialog is almost always between the two of you, there's no outside arbitrator of truth. I think only a trained infidelity counselor could assist at breaking down the barriers, and for many WS that will mean not showing up for the next session.


Wrecking ball???? Try a 50 megaton nuke.

I once detailed a timeline of her actions and statements that were even backed up by her answering my yes or no questions and when I finished the illustration with all the details and irrefutable truth she still denied it!!!!!


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

EI, you already know I'm not always a nice person. When Mrs M first came to TAM I was very hard on her. Recently I got into a little debate with Regret and I know my words stung her tremendously. Regardless I have an incredible amount of respect for you, them, and all the other former WS's here and in my personal life. Why is that? First off there of course is my faith. As a Christian it warms me to the core to see someone turn away from sin and have the desire and willpower to atone. It reaffirms my belief in God and in the goodness of people. But it goes further than that.

I have experienced addiction. Overcoming those addictions and the subsequent withdrawals was the hardest thing I've ever done. To go through that while simultaneously healing a spouse and piecing together a broken marriage? Honestly I don't know if I could do it. And when you've been an addict I don't think it truly ever leaves you. The guilt I still feel for the things I did is sometimes overwhelming. And the fear that since it happened once it can happen again is almost paralyzing. I believe that the infatuation and developing love for my wife helped me not to relapse and to this day it is our enduring love that prevents me from sliding back into that deep dark pit I once called home.


----------



## azteca1986 (Mar 17, 2013)

I have a question about the fog. We often hear after the affair the FWS is shocked at the things they did, said, wrote during the affair. Evidence of the fog, I'd say.

Now on one thread on here a WW said "I wish I'd never been married. I wish I'd never had the kids". Now the wish of being single again is one thing, but to me that second sentence is.. well. The general attitude in the thread seems to be "oh she'll say crazy sh!t when she's in the fog".

I've not mentioned it in that thread, as we're a pro-marriage forum, but I'd divorce my wife in a heartbeat if she ever uttered those words. Attaching to the AP and detaching from the spouse, I get. Wishing your children our of existence is way over the line. The affair would become secondary to getting my child the h3ll away from that woman.

Am I being harsh or is that 'just' fog-speak?


----------



## the guy (Aug 3, 2010)

" my wife is doing some crazy sh1t, acting like a b1tch, and risks losing everything she has worked for"



"my wife is in the fog"


It just seem easy to write the word "fog" then typing out the meaning...


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Hard to talk about. I think that weak willed people can get caught up in something that makes them feel good or special. Abandoning common sense or what's right. Think this is hard for strong willed people to understand who are able to resist temptation and do the right thing, put others first. I still have a lot of trouble understanding it but I have witnessed it first hand.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

No fog. Just denial. It's easier for some people to pretend their spouse has a brain tumor than it is acknowlege they are screwing around and have little or no empathy for how it affects their spouse or family.

Poor coping strategy if it persists more than about 30 minutes.

It's also easier to claim some nebulous malady than take responsibility for your own behavior, but that's just ordinary, manipulative gashlighting most of the time. Sometimes folks are so disordered they can't own their own choices though. There's no there there.


----------



## tacoma (May 1, 2011)

It's a fact.

The term "The Fog" is derogatory and used in such a manner by those who have been hurt by infidelity and want an excuse for their betrayers actions.

It's actually Limerence and it exists in any romantic situation up to a point.

Limerence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

TimeHeals said:


> No fog. Just denial. It's easier for some people to pretend their spouse has a brain tumor than it is acknowlege they are screwing around and have little or no empathy for how it affects their spouse or family.


Denial is part of the fog so to speak. Think about it, the sudden introduction of a outside intrusive force that severely alternates one thinking as well as disregard whatever damage it does to ones self or others. The only item left for disagreement is the fact that people do have the ability to be self aware, but if unwilling to nothing can be recognized or acknowledged until an equally or more intense experience is endured. Most alcoholics do not enter AA until a key point of rock bottom or inescapable consequence is confronted. Only then is the damage report accepted, but often it is too damn late.


----------



## loyallad (Aug 1, 2014)

Wolf1974 said:


> Hard to talk about. I think that weak willed people can get caught up in something that makes them feel good or special. Abandoning common sense or what's right. Think this is hard for strong willed people to understand who are able to resist temptation and do the right thing, put others first. I still have a lot of trouble understanding it but I have witnessed it first hand.


Ten years ago I would have thought this to be farfetched to say the least. Now after all I have been through with my WW I totally agree with this.

Most of you on here see the name I go by on here and can reasonably assume I picked that because I perceive myself to be a loyal type of person. And I am to the core. I think about this often. I truly take to heart your word is your bond. I have a friend from college who I haven't seen in over 20+ years. He could call me out of the blue and say "come a runnin'" and no matter what I would go. Perhaps this is why my WW breaking our marriage vows hurt me so deeply. I also realized that we don't share a lot of values and that is troubling to me.

I have seen many times over how she allows herself to be swayed one way or another by the people she is around. I believe WW thinks what her and POSOM have/had was so special because he has shoveled a lot of crappola her way and she bought it. She bought into the fog. She is weak willed and thus the fog is reality to her.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



the guy said:


> " my wife is doing some crazy sh1t, acting like a b1tch, and risks losing everything she has worked for"
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, to give you some perspective. When I was on a coke binge my sister was trying to talk some sense into me. I told her to get the fvck away from me, stay out of my business. I told her not only did I wish her dead but I wished she'd never been born. I also said I wished my parents were dead and that if they didn't stay out of my life I'd kill them and her. At the time I meant every word. Of course after I got clean I couldn't believe what I'd said let alone what I'd done. Did that sound familiar? Does it give you any insight into what a screwed up mind is like.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

The fog is just a myth that betrayed spouses tell themselves upon the realization of there wayward spouses lack of character, integrity, and empathy for them people that attempt to explain cheating away with the "fog" are just self serving opportunists. There is no fog just self denial of the fact that you picked a lousy partner who no longer values you or wants you.


----------



## 2xloser (May 8, 2011)

If you say it's "not real", then explain what it is that happens when those WS 'wake up', see things for what they are, regret their choices, end things with their AP, and beg to return... they stop experiencing the high of their affair, and they see things 'normally' again. Looking back at their actions and mindset like they were in some altered state. It happens, no matter what we may call it. And no, it's not any excuse. It's just a label for how warped they were thinking.

To me, the fog real, but it's merely a label for a mindset driven by chemical changes -- the high of infatuation, taken to another level of addiction because it can be maintained constantly without drugs or alcohol. So much so that one screws up what they perceived to be their priorities, and allows or causes them to make decisions they *know* to be harmful and wrong, without caring enough about anything other than maintaining that high.

Arguing about "the fog" as a term is sort of laughable; who cares what it's called. The point is it's a mindset of someone chasing a high and refusing to see things as they should because their judgment about everything is clouded by their own perceived need. People in love make really strange choices, and it's ok, maybe even adorabke, if we can qualify it as love. When someone who's married THINKS they may be in love with someone who is not their spouse, enough so to ignore their family, children, future, history, commitments, etc., we say their judgment's been clouded by not seeing it for the problem-laden falsehood it almost always turns out to be -- they're in the fog. 

And I say let the cloud of a fog turn into a tornado and sweep them all the *#%$&:! away


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

xakulax said:


> The fog is just a myth that betrayed spouses tell themselves upon the realization of there wayward spouses lack of character, integrity, and empathy for them people that attempt to explain cheating away with the "fog" are just self serving opportunists. There is no fog just self denial of the fact that you picked a lousy partner who no longer values you or wants you.


Meh, take a stroll down memory lane and revisit those not so proud moments of youth where we were certain that our intentions were not only in our best interest but did not care who or what was damaged. At the time we had little persuasive elements to disregard our behavior save for whatever authority figures that caught us. As we got older we come to learn the lesson of cause and effect. We speed, then we get tickets, we get drunk we pay the next day, we don't pay the bills we get sh1t taken away. Whatever aspect that caused us to dismiss these end results were intoxicating to be sure. When someone feels that need to be with someone it is the exact same thing, only people try to hard to find the reasons why, and the reason was that they wanted to. The fog, which is self induced more or less indirectly, is a culmination of feelings and thoughts that fabricate whatever perception they need to enable them to continue their actions. All else is secondary.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

xakulax said:


> The fog is just a myth that betrayed spouses tell themselves upon the realization of there wayward spouses lack of character, integrity, and empathy for them people that attempt to explain cheating away with the "fog" are just self serving opportunists. There is no fog just self denial of the fact that you picked a lousy partner who no longer values you or wants you.


----------



## The Middleman (Apr 30, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> I've been asked to start a thread about the , so-called, "fog. So here goes.
> Do you believe in it?
> I do not, except as infatuation, and an excuse mechanism, that allows people to be further deceived, and evade responsibility for their actions.
> What do you think?


It's clearly an excuse for bad behavior and to mistreat your partner.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

3putt said:


>



Thank you for such an intelligent and in death response lol


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

xakulax said:


> Thank you for such an intelligent and in death response lol


It's been explained a thousand times before, and you haven't gotten it by now, then further explanation will do you no good.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

3putt said:


> It's been explained a thousand times before, and you haven't gotten it by now, then further explanation will do you no good.



Unless I'm mistaken the point of this thread was to give are opinions on the subject well I gave my opinion if you disagree that's you're right I have no problem with that but do try and give me the same amount of respect as I give you.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

The Middleman said:


> It's clearly an excuse for bad behavior and to mistreat your partner.


Why is it the only people we see here calling it an excuse are the same ones that are denying it even exists?


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

xakulax said:


> Unless I'm mistaken the point of this thread was to give are opinions on the subject well I gave my opinion if you disagree that's you're right I have no problem with that but do try and give me the same amount of respect as I give you.


Fair enough, and I apologize.

One question though: Do you not see the similarities between the 'so called fog' and the actions and words of, say, people addicted to drugs or alcohol while under the influence?


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

IIJokerII said:


> Meh, take a stroll down memory lane and revisit those not so proud moments of youth where we were certain that our intentions were not only in our best interest but did not care who or what was damaged. At the time we had little persuasive elements to disregard our behavior save for whatever authority figures that caught us. As we got older we come to learn the lesson of cause and effect. We speed, then we get tickets, we get drunk we pay the next day, we don't pay the bills we get sh1t taken away. Whatever aspect that caused us to dismiss these end results were intoxicating to be sure. When someone feels that need to be with someone it is the exact same thing, only people try to hard to find the reasons why, and the reason was that they wanted to. The fog, which is self induced more or less indirectly, is a culmination of feelings and thoughts that fabricate whatever perception they need to enable them to continue their actions. All else is secondary.




Sorry but I cannot relate to this in my childhood I understood early on the difference between right from wrong and the implications my actions and decisions can have on not only my myself but others


----------



## TBT (Dec 20, 2011)

If I ever experience the fog I would seriously have to question how well I know myself. Especially if it overrode what I think are my core values and caused pain for others.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

TBT said:


> If I ever experience the fog I would seriously have to question how well I know myself. Especially if it overrode what I think are my core values and caused pain for others.


Ever gotten drunk or high, did something incredibly stupid, woke up the next day and say to yourself, "What the fvck was I thinking?"


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



TBT said:


> If I ever experience the fog I would seriously have to question how well I know myself. Especially if it overrode what I think are my core values and caused pain for others.


That was exactly my thought process after I cleaned up. It's very unsettling to say the least when you realize you aren't who you thought you were.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

bfree said:


> That was exactly my thought process after I cleaned up. It's very unsettling to say the least when you realize you aren't who you thought you were.


....when under the influence.


----------



## TBT (Dec 20, 2011)

3putt said:


> Ever gotten drunk or high, did something incredibly stupid, woke up the next day and say to yourself, "What the fvck was I thinking?"


I've experienced that for sure! However,I was thinking more along the lines of getting the fog while my brain was capable of some rationality.

Btw,I've been clean and sober for many years now. What you said is so true and I had to clean house of the person I thought I was. I like myself now ...so far anyway.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

TBT said:


> I've experienced that for sure! *However,I was thinking more along the lines of getting the fog while my brain was capable of some rationality.*
> 
> Btw,I've been clean and sober for many years now. What you said is so true and I had to clean house of the person I thought I was. I like myself now ...so far anyway.


If you're in the affair fog then you're already way past the capacity of rational thinking.....just like being drunk or high.

It's been documented around here way too many times and I've seen it plenty enough IRL to simply dismiss it's existence and it's destruction.

And, NO, naysayers, it's NOT an excuse.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



3putt said:


> ....when under the influence.


Yeah but I put myself in that condition. One small "innocent" choice after another until I was scum.


----------



## TBT (Dec 20, 2011)

3putt said:


> If you're in the affair fog then you're already way past the capacity of rational thinking.....just like being drunk or high.
> 
> It's been documented around here way too many times and I've seen it plenty enough IRL *to simply dismiss it's existence and it's destruction.*
> 
> And, NO, naysayers, it's NOT an excuse.


Don't get me wrong,I'm not dismissive of it. Just never experienced it. I was thinking more about how I would have to look at myself after the fact if I ever did.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

bfree said:


> Yeah but I put myself in that condition. One small "innocent" choice after another until I was scum.


They/we all do. Seems like a good idea at the time, but........


----------



## The Middleman (Apr 30, 2012)

3putt said:


> Why is it the only people we see here calling it an excuse are the same ones that are denying it even exists?



Maybe because it goes hand in hand. The fog doesn't exist in my opinion, but as long as the generally accepted wisdom gave it a name and says it's there, anyone can use it as an excuse. I don't accept the fog as an excuse (even if it is used as one) because I don't believe it exists.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

bfree said:


> That was exactly my thought process after I cleaned up. It's very unsettling to say the least when you realize you aren't who you thought you were.


:iagree:

Oh, yeah. Me too!

My thinking was "foggy" for several months. Alcohol makes a very bad medicine for trying to cure a broken heart and a bruised ego.

And when I woke up and realised I'd been a stupid POS, that hurt me so much I ended up on Seroxat for a while.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

The Middleman said:


> Maybe because it goes hand in hand. I doesn't exist in my opinion, but as long as someone gave it a name and says it's there, *anyone can use it as an excuse*. I don't accept the fog as an excuse (even if it is used as one) because I don't believe it exists.


Again, I've noticed that no one but the naysayers have said it's an excuse. It's just a description of a state of mind, just like being under the influence of alcohol is called being drunk, or being under the influence of drugs is called being high. That's it.

I've also noticed that this denial argument is usually supported by those that are 100% against recovery under any circumstances.

I seriously doubt that's a coincidence.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

xakulax said:


> Sorry but I cannot relate to this in my childhood I understood early on the difference between right from wrong and the implications my actions and decisions can have on not only my myself but others


So your telling me in your youth you never made fun of someone, picked on them for anything, their shoes, clothes or looks? You never called someone something rude whilst you were mad? Especially to fit in with a clique or more accurately feel good about being accepted? I won't call you a liar, but i have a difficult time accepting it.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

3putt said:


> Again, I've noticed that no one but the naysayers have said it's an excuse. It's just a description of a state of mind, just like being under the influence of alcohol is called being drunk, or being under the influence of drugs is called being high. That's it.
> 
> I've also noticed that this denial argument is usually supported by those that are 100% against recovery under any circumstances.
> 
> I seriously doubt that's a coincidence.


Your more than likely right on this one. Still they're convinced otherwise for a reason, and in some instance a fog themselves since they are convinced with conviction.


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

I have never bought the whole "fog" concept.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

pidge70 said:


> I have never bought the whole "fog" concept.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Pidge, I think I wouldn't have, except for having personal experience of it.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

pidge70 said:


> I have never bought the whole "fog" concept.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


If I may be so bold, don't people who exhibit BPD dwell within a fog. They often say, do or perceive things far differently than others with no ability to recognize the damage until much later, or even at all.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

IIJokerII said:


> So your telling me in your youth you never made fun of someone, picked on them for anything, their shoes, clothes or looks? You never called someone something rude whilst you were mad? Especially to fit in with a clique or more accurately feel good about being accepted? I won't call you a liar, but i have a difficult time accepting it.



No I haven't because like I said before I was taught early on the importance of right from wrong and importance of my decisions and how they affect me and others so no I never never called someone something rude or did something wrong just to fit into some cliche group I have always been independent and believe to do on to others as I would do unto myself that's just how I was raised..


If you have difficult time accepting that then that's your issue not mine.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

xakulax said:


> If you have difficult time accepting that then that's your issue not mine.


I believe I made that known.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



pidge70 said:


> I have never bought the whole "fog" concept.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Call it whatever you will, but for me the term fog is a perfect metaphor for the state of denial my ex was in when she was having an affair. I was amazed at the lengths her mind could go to reconcile the blatantly selfish and harmful behaviors she was doing.

To her, and AFAIK she believes to this day that what she did was not at all infidelity, travelling three hours to meet men for sex in a hotel, having an entire new group of friends that were excited about her getting laid by other men, all while telling her family and her best friend she was just wanting alone time with nobody at all.

When we originally met with mediator to look at our divorce options she didn't even know what to list as her reason for divorce, so she asked me what I put!? She was the one that wanted it. I listed infidelity on her part and she was flabbergasted and accused me of making stuff up, and said that it was only after the marriage was over (yet there we were with our rings on, me not being told that it was over when she was cheating, her still eating the food I cooked, spending the money I earned, sleeping in the bed I provided).

In subsequent arguments, I accused her of neglecting not just me but our child, that she was going out to drink and dance literally four nights a week, which she tried refuting entirely saying it was once every other week, and when I started reciting exactly which nights she left the house with which friend she got all suspicious of me. Eventually she started flinging all kinds of ridiculous things from years past that bothered her, like the time our neighbor shoveled our walkway of snow one time 3 years prior because I was too tired, like the fact I refused to buy her feminine products, etc.

Her arguments were so weak it was futile of her but didn't change her opinion at all. She was certainly acting behind my back and didn't want me to know of her extramarital sexcapades, but it's not like she went to any great lengths to cover her tracks, as soon as my gut told me to look I found out right away. When I confronted she told me she thought she was a sex addict ...mmm OK thats new (yes she was the HD one, and because of that little slip about SA and her general disconnect from reality, makes me still realize that it's possible she has other indiscretions that she probably can assume no guilt for).

Anyways, this is just my testimony that indeed yes there is a fog like shroud that can surround a person in an affair and keep them so detached from reality.


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

IIJokerII said:


> If I may be so bold, don't people who exhibit BPD dwell within a fog. They often say, do or perceive things far differently than others with no ability to recognize the damage until much later, or even at all.


I don't know about those that "exhibit" BPD as I am full blown BPD. I am a self aware one and I am fully cognizant of how things are. Thus why I don't buy the "fog." Nothing more than an excuse to rationalize poor behavior.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

Lon said:


> Call it whatever you will, but for me the term fog is a perfect metaphor for the state of denial my ex was in when she was having an affair. I was amazed at the lengths her mind could go to reconcile the blatantly selfish and harmful behaviors she was doing.
> 
> To her, and AFAIK she believes to this day that what she did was not at all infidelity, travelling three hours to meet men for sex in a hotel, having an entire new group of friends that were excited about her getting laid by other men, all while telling her family and her best friend she was just wanting alone time with nobody at all.
> 
> ...


Perfect example, but it will also be dismissed as nothing more than an excuse by those that won't see what's in front of their faces.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

pidge70 said:


> I don't know about those that "exhibit" BPD as I am full blown BPD. I am a self aware one and I am fully cognizant of how things are. Thus why I don't buy the "fog." Nothing more than an excuse to rationalize poor behavior.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


So, in your opinion, who's rationalizing it to excuse poor behavior? The WS or the BS?


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

All you naysayers need to do is mosey over to Surviving Infidelity and go to the Waywards forum. Read some of the threads there. There are some doozies...

You will see the fog in all its cloudy glory.


----------



## the guy (Aug 3, 2010)

I don't get it...it's just a phucking term when a dumb @ss spouse does stupid sh1t!

I guess when a waywards uses it ...ya its an excuse for being a dumb ass.

But when a betrayed refers to it in ones post then one is just explaining all the stupid crap that is happening to them.

I mean if your slamming and you want your family dead or your banging someone half your age behind our spouses back with kids at home....thinking there is a future with the AP....

Well one is doing stupid sh1t and can't see. 

But then again I'm sure there are folks that never done any stupid sh1t in their life.

Hell I'm perfect but geeze I still do some stupid crap from time to time.

But then again one can argue.....you just can't fix stupid.LOL


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

pidge70 said:


> I don't know about those that "exhibit" BPD as I am full blown BPD. I am a self aware one and I am fully cognizant of how things are. Thus why I don't buy the "fog." Nothing more than an excuse to rationalize poor behavior.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Then by your statement BPD is nothing more than an excuse as well.


----------



## commonsenseisn't (Aug 13, 2014)

Rookie4 said:


> I've been asked to start a thread about the , so-called, "fog. So here goes.
> Do you believe in it?
> I do not, except as infatuation, and an excuse mechanism, that allows people to be further deceived, and evade responsibility for their actions.
> What do you think?


Speaking of fog in the context of affairs ... I believe it because I've seen it more than once. I've considered fog and infatuation to be varmints of the same ilk and have the common denominator of dishonesty as the main ingredient. 

It's amazing what people will indulge themselves in to give themselves permission to do what they know is wrong. Fog or no fog it still doesn't excuse folks from exercising their free will to make good choices. I hold them accountable. 

I've been amused at watching folks debate fogs existence and nuances when it seems obvious (to my limited mind) they are speaking of very similar things. Some posters make statements as if their respective ideas are mutually exclusive when they sure don't appear to be to me. Agonizing over fog semantics is mental masturbation in my opinion. I'm convinced it exists and it probably comes in as many flavors as there are cheaters. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



3putt said:


> Perfect example, but it will also be dismissed as nothing more than an excuse by those that won't see what's in front of their faces.


Well I'm a pretty upstanding kinda guy, I've never been attracted to people that could live on excuses. If I'd have ever suspected my ex W was capable of such immorality, I wouldn't have made vows to her. Considering how bad a liar she was while cheating, if fogginess was just an excuse then she must have been the most convincing con artist in the world the rest of the time (and I know for a fact that she had neither the patience nor intelligence for that to be true).


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

pidge70 said:


> I don't know about those that "exhibit" BPD as I am full blown BPD. I am a self aware one and I am fully cognizant of how things are. Thus why I don't buy the "fog." Nothing more than an excuse to rationalize poor behavior.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Pidge, as has been stated before I haven't seen one person WS or BS use the fog as an excuse. It is simply an explanation the helps clarify a person's irrational behavior during and after an affair. Smoking and cancer very often exist side by side. You don't smoke because you have cancer. Cigarettes are known to be addictive so that may explain why people who know that smoking will probably cause cancer to continue to smoke. But nobody forces you to pick up that first cigarette or the next or the next. It is a choice or a series of bad choices. It's just a way of understanding why.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> I've been asked to start a thread about the , so-called, "fog. So here goes.
> Do you believe in it?
> I do not, except as infatuation, and an excuse mechanism, that allows people to be further deceived, and evade responsibility for their actions.
> What do you think?


Fog is real.

It's when you take someones words for face value, and they spin an image on you and paint a picture. It creates inaccuracies in your mind.

It's also when someone gets so used to deceiving others, they have a fog. They expect you to react like the robot you where because you loved them. They fool themselves into believing they are masterful, they become self deluded.

Fog can make a receiver of it lose concentration, for some reason confidence is bled down, also they can end up seeing things.

In a heavy liar, fog can cause them to misperceive events, they can hear voices, and as reality hits, causes them a lot of stress.


----------



## Rugs (Apr 12, 2013)

It's getting late and I haven't read all the replies but when two people who are fee and single are attracted to each other, they usually don't have to compromise their beliefs or boundaries to be together. They may, but they don't have to. If a single person compromises their beliefs or boundaries to be with someone, it's an insecurity of needing more than yourself to be complete. 

Many different reasons why people will compromise their principles to be with someone that doesn't share their same level of "like".

Two people entering an illicit relationship born of infidelity have already compromised traditional methods of dating and therefore, they have to be able to rationalize why this relationship is good. 

Again, tons of different justifications. 

No real fog, just a rationalization to pursue a compromised beginning. 

We've all read some of the ridiculous reasons and seen the crazy actions. 

People who can own their Sh!t, don't have affairs. They fix their marriages or divorce. It's the people who can't own their Sh!t, (whatever that sh!t might be) who enter into these selfish relationships. 

I do think everyone is capable of murder given the right circumstances but I don't think everyone is capable of cheating. Most people are afraid to be alone, afraid of rejection, poor communicators, harbor resentment, and find it easy to blame someone else for their problems. 

We are in an age where the blame game is the game to play.

Fog, indicates a suspended state. Almost like pleading insanity. I don't think the term is meant that way but I think that is why some have a problem with it. 

Everyone knows what they are doing when they cheat. Reasons can be individual and depending on the person, their cheating can be uncontrollable like an addiction. It's one word for a very broad scope. 

to think one or two people can have catastrophic affects on so many people is hard to imagine why or how anyone could enter into such an agreement unless they are in an unexplainable state (fog)


----------



## the guy (Aug 3, 2010)

Rugs said:


> It's one word for a very broad scope.
> 
> to think one or two people can have catastrophic affects on so many people is hard to imagine why or how anyone could enter into such an agreement unless they are in an unexplainable state (fog)


Now I get it


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

IIJokerII said:


> Then by your statement BPD is nothing more than an excuse as well.


And what exactly am I stating it's an excuse for?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

bfree said:


> Pidge, as has been stated before I haven't seen one person WS or BS use the fog as an excuse. It is simply an explanation the helps clarify a person's irrational behavior during and after an affair. Smoking and cancer very often exist side by side. You don't smoke because you have cancer. Cigarettes are known to be addictive so that may explain why people who know that smoking will probably cause cancer to continue to smoke. But nobody forces you to pick up that first cigarette or the next or the next. It is a choice or a series of bad choices. It's just a way of understanding why.


We apparently aren't reading the same threads.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

3putt said:


> So, in your opinion, who's rationalizing it to excuse poor behavior? The WS or the BS?


IMO, both do. Not all people, but enough.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

I know about the "in love" feeling and infatuation and lust. I know about moods and brain/sexual chemistry.

I have experienced all of them and have somehow managed to keep my penis in my wife only. Amazing as that sounds, there was no overriding biological/chemical"fog" force compelling me to stick it where it doesn't belong.

I think more highly of humans. We have choices. Some of us "decide" to let our gonads make choices for us. It is unfortunate to turn over such a high function as decision to organs that were not designed to think.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## The Middleman (Apr 30, 2012)

3putt said:


> I seriously doubt that's a coincidence.


You're absolutely right, it's not a coinsidence. I strongly believe there should be no recovery after a physical betrayal and I'm not going to buy a fog as an excuse or anything else. Goes hand in hand.


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

Read and enjoy. You tell me what state of mind this chick is in...

SurvivingInfidelity.com - 1st time here: I am having a hard time getting over him.


----------



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> By Rookie
> I've been asked to start a thread about the , so-called, "fog. So here goes.
> Do you believe in it?



Once a person, with their free will choice, “sets aside their logic, common sense, and morals and values” (Thank you EI) and then betrays trust, loyalty, and integrity of the family then I believe that a person has twisted thinking. This thinking and actions that follow damage the very core of the betrayer and others. Call it fog, call it crazy, call it twisted, call it what you want but I believe it is real, as in real bad!


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> Rookie, I've already expressed my feelings on the "fog." It is real. It is a proven scientific fact. It is simply another name for heavy infatuation and it affects different people differently. Does it negate logical thought. No. Does it affect judgement? Absolutely. Is it an excuse? Hell no!
> 
> I'd like to know why you've called it "mythology" and "new age babble." Is it so hard to believe that people are affected by brain chemicals? Testosterone is a brain chemical. Do you get aroused? Where do you think that comes from? Is it out of the realm of possibility that judgement is affected? After all isn't your judgement affected by a couple of glasses of wine? Isn't your judgement affected by lack of sleep? Why is it so hard to understand that a brain saturated with dopamine, the same chemical released by cocaine, would affect someone? Why is it so hard to believe that someone who gets that massive shot of dopamine in response to interaction with another would crave that person's company? Can't you understand why a WS would be in a state of confusion while "detoxing" from that dopamine saturation. Wouldn't that explain why some WS's say and do things that make no sense? Wouldn't it explain why some WS's don't immediately feel remorse for what they've done?


You have got to be kidding. You equate chemicals with deceit? That brain chemical imbalances or responses are so strong that you basically turn into another person? I fully understand about brain function, but what you are suggesting is some kind of universal excuse for cheating. good luck with that.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

EI said:


> Meson has nailed it. I would also add, from my own personal experience, that in a marriage where the "connection" with my spouse was long gone before my affair began, I think it was much easier to give in to the feel good feelings of "the fog." When new connections are being formed and the old connections are already very weak or non-existent, (no history re-writing necessary) the feel good feelings created by the bonding hormone, oxytocin, are an _extremely_ powerful ****tail.
> 
> While "the fog" doesn't override logic, common sense, morals and values, or provide a justification for an affair, I believe it does help explain why so many are willing to set aside their logic, common sense, and morals and values, at least, for the duration of the affair.
> 
> That's not scientific data. That is simply my personal experience.


HunH? EI, I love you to pieces, but this second paragraph is double talk.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

bandit.45 said:


> All you naysayers need to do is mosey over to Surviving Infidelity and go to the Waywards forum. Read some of the threads there. There are some doozies...
> 
> You will see the fog in all its cloudy glory.




bandit I visit SI daily and if anything the story I have read there have only further harden my opinion that infidelity boils down to a lack of characters not dopamine levels.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

ConanHub said:


> I know about the "in love" feeling and infatuation and lust. I know about moods and brain/sexual chemistry.
> 
> I have experienced all of them and have somehow managed to keep my penis in my wife only. Amazing as that sounds, there was no overriding biological/chemical"fog" force compelling me to stick it where it doesn't belong.
> 
> ...



:iagree:


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

NoChoice said:


> I have not had time to read the entire thread but I would like to present this argument. The human brain is an extremely complicated mixture of neurons, synaptic connections, chemicals and electrical signals. As a person develops from infancy the brain builds a complex network of neural pathways. The more stimulation a developing child has, the denser this network becomes. In the absence of this stimulation retardation occurs in that the brain never develops to its fullest potential. Each of us is at some level of retardation based on our circumstances during development, our physical health and our DNA.
> 
> Highly developed cognizant beings, almost without exception, say and do things that are proactive and preemptive. Careful thought and examination is given to most every situation and the appropriate course of action is then implemented. In lesser developed individuals most, if not all, of what they do is reactive. Their thinking is much more childlike since their brain is literally, to some degree, at the level of a child. Lacking the ability to fully and carefully think any given situation through they act based not on logic and reason but rather on feeling. Then, as the consequences arise, they react, again not with logic but with feeling. This explains why cheaters are said to behave erratically, vacillating wildly appearing to be crazy. This also explains why exposure of an A can sometimes "shock" the individual out of their "fog". You see those who act on feeling do not like bad feelings. Therefore, when the A is brought to light, a plethora of "bad" things are perceived by the WS and they don't like it so they go back to behaving the way they did before the "badness" happened. This is not always the case and is dependent upon the level of maturity a WS has attained.
> 
> ...



Wow NoChoice this is a rather brilliant and insightful post and I completely agree


----------



## NoChoice (Feb 12, 2012)

I have not had time to read the entire thread but I would like to present this argument. The human brain is an extremely complicated mixture of neurons, synaptic connections, chemicals and electrical signals. As a person develops from infancy the brain builds a complex network of neural pathways. The more stimulation a developing child has, the denser this network becomes. In the absence of this stimulation retardation occurs in that the brain never develops to its fullest potential. Each of us is at some level of retardation based on our circumstances during development, our physical health and our DNA.

Highly developed cognizant beings, almost without exception, say and do things that are proactive and preemptive. Careful thought and examination is given to most every situation and the appropriate course of action is then implemented. In lesser developed individuals most, if not all, of what they do is reactive. Their thinking is much more childlike since their brain is literally, to some degree, at the level of a child. Lacking the ability to fully and carefully think any given situation through they act based not on logic and reason but rather on feeling. Then, as the consequences arise, they react, again not with logic but with feeling. This explains why cheaters are said to behave erratically, vacillating wildly appearing to be crazy. This also explains why exposure of an A can sometimes "shock" the individual out of their "fog". You see those who act on feeling do not like bad feelings. Therefore, when the A is brought to light, a plethora of "bad" things are perceived by the WS and they don't like it so they go back to behaving the way they did before the "badness" happened. This is not always the case and is dependent upon the level of maturity a WS has attained.

It has also been said that cheaters lie and this is not totally accurate. They do fabricate stories to try and cover their bad behavior so as not to incur wrath (like a child), I acknowledge that but I refer more to the emotional statements made during the A. The "I hate you"s and the "I never want to see you again"s. Absent the ability to fully understand and think through any given situation, the cheater responds in the spur of the moment with something that they feel is true at that minute and in that context but may not be true the next minute as the situation changes. It's not a lie but rather a poorly thought out truth whose validity changes with the situation.

Also bear in mind that the cheater is not only disadvantaged by the lack of intellect but also by the effect of instinct. This explains why so many affairs occur as a result of lack of sexual and emotional intimacy. So, since people of lesser intellect are controlled by feeling more so than logic and reason and because sex feels good, they go about trying to feel good. Likewise, because it feels good to have someone understand, empathize, exalt and appreciate them, they become involved in EAs.

Many on here advise implementing the 180 plan when an A is discovered and it is sometimes successful again depending on the level of development of the WS. The reason is that it is the nature of a lesser developed intellect to want what they cannot/do not have. A child can discard a toy and ignore it but hand that toy to another child and prepare for the ensuing battle. Similarly, advice is given to set boundaries and limits and to demand compliance or there will be consequences. Sound familiar? Let me state it another way. "You do this and don't do that or you will get a spanking". Sound familiar now? There is an inherent problem with this tactic in that, for first time WSs, the threat of divorce is vague and ambiguous because they have never had a spanking (divorce) and haven't the mental ability to think through it. They cannot appreciate the severity of devastation a D will cause and, therefore, its usefulness as a threat is dubious.

So then, based on the above facts, is R a real possibility? This answer is dependent on so many factors but overall the answer is rarely. You see, according to the latest scientific studies, the human brain continues to develop until the early to mid twenties. After that the die is cast and that person will go through the remainder of their life at that level of mental ability. That's not to say that the WS cannot be "conditioned" (for lack of a better word, perhaps "taught" could be used also) to be faithful but absent the level of mental ability necessary, the propensity to revert back to their original behavior is ever present. So when considering R with any WS it must be rationed and understood that a greater responsibility falls to the BS to keep the WS on the straight and narrow, so to speak. In essence, without the intellect to see and understand the full spectrum of fidelity on their own, the BS must make it impossible for the WS to fall back into the "fog" by making it either so pleasant that the WS has no cause to wander or by making it so unpleasant that fear of consequences arises with every temptation or with a delicate balance of both. I believe that only the latter will be sustainable, if anything can be.

It all boils down to a simple matter of having sufficient intellect to recognize and appreciate what a person has in their marriage and that if the marriage is not so good, having the intellect to approach it from a position of logic and reason to work through problems rather that cheat. Severely underdeveloped individuals however, are more child minded and are always in search of the next great thing in life to make them happy. In this case R is impossible because the WS simply doesn't have the mental wherewithal necessary to be in a committed monogamous relationship and they will continue to seek the next great thing in hopes of finding happiness there. In these cases, whole families are discarded simply because the WS is "tired" of the husband/wife and family "toy" and is in need of another new shiny toy. Sadly this behavior will continue throughout their life as they go from one disappointment to another chasing that elusive creature of happiness. Developed individuals however, realize that happiness come from within by knowing and understanding what you have and making it the best it can be. 


I have said all of this in an effort to bring some understanding and insight to BSs everywhere. If you find any relevant truth in this then apply it as you see fit, if not, then summarily ignore it


ETA: I deleted my previous post because I wasn't quite finished and hit the post button instead of the preview button.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Mr Blunt said:


> Once a person, with their free will choice, “sets aside their logic, common sense, and morals and values” (Thank you EI) and then betrays trust, loyalty, and integrity of the family then I believe that a person has twisted thinking. This thinking and actions that follow damage the very core of the betrayer and others. Call it fog, call it crazy, call it twisted, call it what you want but I believe it is real, as in real bad!


During my period of being "foggy" I did not set aside "my logic, my common sense, my morals and values."

But I *was* doing things that were not in keeping with "my logic, my common sense, my morals and values."

Which, when I suddenly in a split second, realised what I had done, what I had become, was why it came as such a shock to me.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

EI said:


> I disagree that my second paragraph is double talk, Rookie. *I never said that the fog renders someone "stupid.*" But, I do think it can render someone "impulsive." Obviously, we have the ability, as well as a moral obligation, to control our impulses, especially when they are damaging and hurtful to others. When we choose to have an affair, we are choosing to override our logic, common sense, morals and values. We don't temporarily become an amnesiac. We still know right from wrong, but we have elected to set it aside. Why? Obviously, because we want to. At that point, the "feel good" reward has become greater to the cheater than the "do the right thing" reward.
> 
> Rather than trying to justify my A with fog speak, I think I quite clearly just owned it.


My EA near PA rendered me stupid.

I mean, what the hell had I being* thinking*?:scratchhead:


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

pidge70 said:


> We apparently aren't reading the same threads.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I guess not. I do tend to stick to threads where I find my input matters. I don't generally lurk unless I'm participating. I know you'll agree that infidelity in any form is not some cheap thrill to experience or to read about. But if someone is using the fog as an explanation for an affair I would love to take a look. Maybe a few choice words could set them straight?


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

bfree said:


> I guess not. I do tend to stick to threads where I find my input matters. I don't generally lurk unless I'm participating. I know you'll agree that infidelity in any form is not some cheap thrill to experience or to read about. But if someone is using the fog as an explanation for an affair I would love to take a look. Maybe a few choice words could set them straight?


It wasn't an explanation for what I did, but I think it explained how I was able to do what I was doing without realising what I was doing.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> You have got to be kidding. You equate chemicals with deceit? That brain chemical imbalances or responses are so strong that you basically turn into another person? I fully understand about brain function, but what you are suggesting is some kind of universal excuse for cheating. good luck with that.


Again, who said it was an excuse. The fog doesn't make you cheat. That was a choice, a very poor and damaging one. But the chemicals released in the brain do have an effect on the thought process of the individual. There is no doubt about it unless you want to argue with all scientific evidence.

So you don't believe that taking cocaine changes your thought process? You don't believe that dopamine has a deleterious effect on the user? You don't think someone on drugs has an altered personality? Wow you've lived a sheltered life. Frankly I'm jealous.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

xakulax said:


> bandit I visit SI daily and if anything the story I have read there have only further harden my opinion that infidelity boils down to a lack of characters not dopamine levels.


Ok, this brings up another interesting thought. Can one "change" their character? Can one be a good and moral person but degenerate into an immoral one? Can a selfish narcissist learn to be giving and noble? This is an important question for me and one that I have struggled with for a long time. I was not a good person. I was scum. Now I try to be a very good moral person and most people who know me would say I am. But am I still a scumbag deep inside? Am I still that person that used drugs and hurt people? Who is the real me?


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> I know about the "in love" feeling and infatuation and lust. I know about moods and brain/sexual chemistry.
> 
> I have experienced all of them and have somehow managed to keep my penis in my wife only. Amazing as that sounds, there was no overriding biological/chemical"fog" force compelling me to stick it where it doesn't belong.
> 
> ...


I'm not picking on you Conan but I would like to ask you a question.

Do you or have you ever smoked? Ever taken drugs? Ever consumed alcohol?

Smoking causes cancer. Why would anyone smoke? Drugs are bad for you. Why would anyone take them unless absolutely necessary? Alcohol destroys brain cells. But I don't see AnheuserBusch declaring bankruptcy.

The fog doesn't make you do anything. But it clouds your thinking once you've already made the choice to start.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

EI said:


> I disagree that my second paragraph is double talk, Rookie. I never said that the fog renders someone "stupid." But, I do think it can render someone "impulsive." .



It's an unneccessary and unfounded construct.

It's like saying "I was in a carbohydrate fog, so I ate a bag of donuts". 

We could all eat a bag of donuts. We don't all eats bags of donuts all the time, and people who do suffer consequences for that impulsive behavior.

But let's not pretend they can't control it or errect mythical fogs. 

It's not exactly news that a lot of people like sex (and there are 7 billion of them now despite the existence of contraceptives to prove that), but not valuing commitment, not having empathy for how your actions affect your own family or spouse and being prone to adolescent infatuations or prioritizing your own orgasms over everything else is just a character flaw that reveals, if you ask me, a somewhat shallow and self-absorbed character.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

ConanHub said:


> I know about the "in love" feeling and infatuation and lust. I know about moods and brain/sexual chemistry.
> 
> I have experienced all of them and have somehow managed to keep my penis in my wife only. Amazing as that sounds, there was no overriding biological/chemical"fog" force compelling me to stick it where it doesn't belong.
> 
> ...


You love your wife. Some people are in a "hoe" mode. They will get dopamine hits from anywhere.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

bfree said:


> Ok, this brings up another interesting thought. Can one "change" their character? Can one be a good and moral person but degenerate into an immoral one? Can a selfish narcissist learn to be giving and noble? This is an important question for me and one that I have struggled with for a long time. I was not a good person. I was scum. Now I try to be a very good moral person and most people who know me would say I am. But am I still a scumbag deep inside? Am I still that person that used drugs and hurt people? Who is the real me?




An insightful question bfree I think it ultimately comes down to the individual person 



I think the key difference between the ones who have success in changing there character and improving themselves is that they understand that this process is always on going and never static they always have to check and see if they're falling back into old habits 



The ones who fail at this look for quick fix find faults in others to blame for the problems and try to avoid responsibility wherever possible for that types of individuals it's not a matter of self improvement but merely more a matter of camouflaging themselves from scrutiny.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

TimeHeals said:


> It's an unneccessary and unfounded construct.
> 
> It's like saying "I was in a carbohydrate fog, so I ate a bag of donuts".
> 
> ...


But! I didn't cheat for sex!

I cheated for other reasons and the sex part of the affair, when it happened, was, I suppose, when I realised that what I was doing was wrong.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

bfree said:


> I'm not picking on you Conan but I would like to ask you a question.
> 
> Do you or have you ever smoked? Ever taken drugs? Ever consumed alcohol?
> 
> ...


I just posted a huge, well thought out response. My computer glitched and I lost it.

Summary: You have to check your brain at the door to engage in adultery. Anytime we put aside our higher functions and let the lower ones take over, something stupid or devastating always occurs.

Even in the midst of an affair, people can pull their mind out of infidelity jail and start thinking again. This is hard because of all the horrific damage they have done to themselves and their loved ones. Sometimes this happens after the first encounter.

How many times have we read, after a one night stand, "What have I done??!!? I don't know why I did it!!!". Easy, you turned your brain off and allowed yourself to go into mating mode with someone besides your spouse.

I do not believe in the fog. If you turn off your mind, you can feel good doing all sorts of deplorable things.

Solution: Never stop thinking because something might feel good.

Also, I am certainly not trying to bash on anyone. I have learned to have a lot of compassion for a remorseful ws.

If you want to identify the fog as turning of your higher functions and thinking with your hormones, gonads, butt, etc.... then I would agree, otherwise, I do not believe in a powerful "fog" force that takes control.

I will admit that once you stop thinking, it IS hard to start up again.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> I just posted a huge, well thought out response. My computer glitched and I lost it.
> 
> Summary: You have to check your brain at the door to engage in adultery. Anytime we put aside our higher functions and let the lower ones take over, something stupid or devastating always occurs.
> 
> ...


I guess I see a ONS and a LTA in different contexts. If you have a ONS you do effectively check your brain at the door. But engaging in a LTA is something else. To me it's a series of small "innocent" decisions that lead you to a place that you maybe didn't consciously intend to go. Maybe you continued to say it's just a little fun. There's no harm. And you compromised a value here. And you pushed or crossed a boundary there. And you rationalized and compromised over and over until you were too far gone. I've never been in an affair but what I wrote about is the process by which I became a full blown drug addict and pos. I knew where my actions were leading. I knew what I was doing at all times. But I still kept going. Why? It's a question I've asked myself a million times. I'm not sure I have a good answer other than at some point I just didn't care. But how did I get to that point? That's the thing that still bothers me. How could I not care? Did the drugs make me not care or did I not care and do drugs? I have a friend who died of cancer a few years ago. I was talking to him one night and he said that he remembered the first cigarette that he ever smoked. It was freshman year in high school. He knew that it could lead to cancer but he didn't care. He wanted to be seen as cool and so he smoked. I asked him if he would change that moment. He said of course he would but if he traveled back in time to try to stop himself he knows that his younger self would not have listened anyway. The point is that people do stupid things all the time. We make bad decisions knowing the probable consequences. But we do it anyway. We rationalize and compromise a little at a time, step by step until something wakes us up or we hit the wall.


----------



## murphy5 (May 1, 2014)

i was in "the fog" recently, driving thru the town of Antonio bay....


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

I think the question then begs to be asked...Why is it that most BSs do not succomb to a fog? Is it that 
1) We didn't get a rush when we met someone outside of our marriage, at work, etc. 
2) We were never powerfully attracted to anyone besides our spouse & who was equally attracted to us? 
So much so that we threw caution to the wind, forgot our vows and dropped our pants? So is it that we are dorks?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

bfree said:


> I guess I see a ONS and a LTA in different contexts. If you have a ONS you do effectively check your brain at the door. But engaging in a LTA is something else. To me it's a series of small "innocent" decisions that lead you to a place that you maybe didn't consciously intend to go. Maybe you continued to say it's just a little fun. There's no harm. And you compromised a value here. And you pushed or crossed a boundary there. And you rationalized and compromised over and over until you were too far gone. I've never been in an affair but what I wrote about is the process by which I became a full blown drug addict and pos. I knew where my actions were leading. I knew what I was doing at all times. But I still kept going. Why? It's a question I've asked myself a million times. I'm not sure I have a good answer other than at some point I just didn't care. But how did I get to that point? That's the thing that still bothers me. How could I not care? Did the drugs make me not care or did I not care and do drugs? I have a friend who died of cancer a few years ago. I was talking to him one night and he said that he remembered the first cigarette that he ever smoked. It was freshman year in high school. He knew that it could lead to cancer but he didn't care. He wanted to be seen as cool and so he smoked. I asked him if he would change that moment. He said of course he would but if he traveled back in time to try to stop himself he knows that his younger self would not have listened anyway. The point is that people do stupid things all the time. We make bad decisions knowing the probable consequences. But we do it anyway. We rationalize and compromise a little at a time, step by step until something wakes us up or we hit the wall.


Maybe it was simply acceptable at that point in your life and you have changed since then. I do believe that people change, for the better or worse.

I have personally seen a chaste, beautiful, young woman go from a wonderful and virtuous woman to a cheating skank that would have sex with anyone that was half way attractive or had wealth. This woman married my uncle. I was the ring bearer at their wedding. It took years and my uncle was surely responsible for his part in a crappy marriage but she chose a very dark path.
She even came on to me at one point. 

She could, again, change to become a beautiful person again. It would take work and courage but could be done. I hope she has. My uncle died, bad heart, and I have not wanted to see her since I found out about her and she tried to sleep with me.

Choice is one of the greatest gifts we have been given. Even if we find ourselves in a horrible place where we cannot stand our own reflection, we can choose to start being different, to start becoming better.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Calibre1212 said:


> I think the question then begs to be asked...Why is it that most BSs do not succomb to a fog? Is it that
> 1) We didn't get a rush when we met someone outside of our marriage, at work, etc.
> 2) We were never powerfully attracted to anyone besides our spouse & who was equally attracted to us?
> So much so that we threw caution to the wind, forgot our vows and dropped our pants? So is it that we are dorks?


I just don't think a BS ever relinquished control over their body to sexual urges. We all have them but many do not push their mind out of the window of a moving car for the added excitement. No brain no pain.


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

ConanHub said:


> I just don't think a BS ever relinquished control over their body to sexual urges. We all have them but many do not push their mind out of the window of a moving car for the added excitement. No brain no pain.


Love iiitttt! :smthumbup: So technically we are more evolved if we have a higher level of control over our urges? Must admit, it's not too fun-fun...but bad consequences for bad behavior isn't worth a "fun-fog" ride on a roller coaster that has a huge bolt on it's track. Mastering internal controls is key, I suppose but not everyone has the capacity to do it?

(In my own case, I believe my X2B married me for the wrong reasons and kept fogging-up looking for Ms. Right. Erroneously he believes that he was/is "perfect", which is the very reason he believes I was faithful. Thus, I was faithful because of "him" when it was always that I was faithful because of "me". He still can't grasp that concept.)


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Calibre1212 said:


> I think the question then begs to be asked...Why is it that most BSs do not succomb to a fog? Is it that
> 1) We didn't get a rush when we met someone outside of our marriage, at work, etc.
> 2) We were never powerfully attracted to anyone besides our spouse & who was equally attracted to us?
> So much so that we threw caution to the wind, forgot our vows and dropped our pants? So is it that we are dorks?


I think what you're asking is what makes one person cheat and not another. I'm not sure there's is a sufficient answer. I do subscribe to the idea that we all CAN cheat. We all have the capability to commit betrayal. I suppose the simplest answer would be fate. Maybe a person that was not prone to cheating was caught up in a perfect storm and succumbed to overwhelming temptation. I'm sure that has happened. Maybe someone was in such a horrible relationship, felt there was no way out and desperately reached for any happiness they could find. I know that has been the case on several occasions. Maybe someone has FOO issues and while they were able to keep it together for a while eventually their dysfunction surfaced. Yup, seen that too. I think it's likely that there are as many reasons as there are situations.

I always default back to my own experiences. Why did I sink to the depths that I did? I came from a good family. I was loved. I was "groomed" to be successful. I married a woman who turned out to be a serial cheater. Just couldn't seem to keep her legs closed. She mentally screwed me up. What she did was horrible no doubt about it. But why did I react the way I did? Other people have gone through as much or worse than I did. I can see the steps, the progression if you will. Depression...anger...violence...fear...resignation...surrender...

At all points I could have stopped. I could have put myself back together. I should have been strong enough. I should have been wise enough. I had people trying to help me but I ignored them. So what was it in me that kept me traveling down that path? My therapist seemed to think that I was too innocent. I didn't have enough street smarts to handle the trauma of her betrayal and that led to a complete mistrust of everyone I came in contact with. It also led to such despair that I kept putting myself in positions to end my life. I did try to commit suicide once but failed. He thought that failure to take my own life added to my belief that I was indeed a complete and utter failure, just like my exW said I was during the divorce. It was then that I ramped up my drug and alcohol abuse because I just really didn't care anymore.

What makes one person cheat and not another? What makes one person abuse drugs and not another? What makes one person become an alcoholic and not another? I'm not sure we will ever truly know the answers to those questions.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

ConanHub said:


> Maybe it was simply acceptable at that point in your life and you have changed since then. I do believe that people change, for the better or worse.


I hope you're right. I know I can become that rotten [email protected] again. And maybe it is that knowledge that helps me to stay grounded and not go down that path again.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

You have a vision of the man you wish to be. You dont let it out of your sight. That's character.


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

bfree said:


> I think what you're asking is what makes one person cheat and not another. I'm not sure there's is a sufficient answer. I do subscribe to the idea that we all CAN cheat. We all have the capability to commit betrayal. I suppose the simplest answer would be fate. Maybe a person that was not prone to cheating was caught up in a perfect storm and succumbed to overwhelming temptation. I'm sure that has happened. Maybe someone was in such a horrible relationship, felt there was no way out and desperately reached for any happiness they could find. I know that has been the case on several occasions. Maybe someone has FOO issues and while they were able to keep it together for a while eventually their dysfunction surfaced. Yup, seen that too. I think it's likely that there are as many reasons as there are situations.
> 
> I always default back to my own experiences. Why did I sink to the depths that I did? I came from a good family. I was loved. I was "groomed" to be successful. I married a woman who turned out to be a serial cheater. Just couldn't seem to keep her legs closed. She mentally screwed me up. What she did was horrible no doubt about it. But why did I react the way I did? Other people have gone through as much or worse than I did. I can see the steps, the progression if you will. Depression...anger...violence...fear...resignation...surrender...
> 
> ...


I see your pain, I feel your pain, I know your pain because I worked with many. Drugs numb pain, they say. But, I must say that I come from a country where ganja is the bomb, yet I never touched it...Doesn't remove me from the realm of cigarettes and an occasional drink. I just don't like the headache, I don't like the pain. I imagine some people derive pleasure from pain? 

When I was a kid, I did stick the pin in the socket like my parents told me not to and the jolt (the mysterious, weird feeling, I thought was definitely bad and I called it pain - it certainly wasn't pleasure for me) made me not do it again...I generalized "the pain" to many other things without trying them...mostly from observation - seeing others run into brick walls, etc. But I guess, in my X2Bs case, as a kid, he stuck the pin in the socket and kept doing it because "it felt good" to him, an example of an initial fog foray, perhaps?


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Calibre1212 said:


> I think the question then begs to be asked...Why is it that most BSs do not succomb to a fog? Is it that
> 1) We didn't get a rush when we met someone outside of our marriage, at work, etc.
> 2) We were never powerfully attracted to anyone besides our spouse & who was equally attracted to us?
> So much so that we threw caution to the wind, forgot our vows and dropped our pants? So is it that we are dorks?


Oh no there is certainly a BS script too, and along with that is usually what some call a smog. It is while in our smog that a BS loses their appetite and sheds 25-30lbs, we suddenly shift priorities but instead of anger we experience strong need to please. We beg, grovel and plead, we try initiating sex like crazy, and when we do we end up trying to mimic what we think the AP was doing. Why would we do all this even though we were the ones that were wronged, lied to deceived, why are we the desperate ones when we find out about the affair? The trauma casts us out from reality and like the DS in their affair was separated from reality by their fog, the only semblance of reality we can see is that which is outside our own shroud of smog.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> Again, who said it was an excuse. The fog doesn't make you cheat. That was a choice, a very poor and damaging one. But the chemicals released in the brain do have an effect on the thought process of the individual. There is no doubt about it unless you want to argue with all scientific evidence.
> 
> So you don't believe that taking cocaine changes your thought process? You don't believe that dopamine has a deleterious effect on the user? You don't think someone on drugs has an altered personality? Wow you've lived a sheltered life. Frankly I'm jealous.


Dude, you pay lip service to saying that the "fog" doesn't MAKE you cheat, then go on and try to prove why it CAN. Either sh*t or get off the pot. If the choice to cheat is a voluntary, rational, free will issue, then the "fog" is an excuse. The choice to cheat has zero to do with dopamine or addiction or anything else. so why do you keep bringing it up? I have never said that there is not validity to your ideas about the brain and it's functions. But what does it have to do with the Fog as an excuse?


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Dude, you pay lip service to saying that the "fog" doesn't MAKE you cheat, then go on and try to prove why it CAN. Either sh*t or get off the pot. If the choice to cheat is a voluntary, rational, free will issue, then the "fog" is an excuse. The choice to cheat has zero to do with dopamine or addiction or anything else. so why do you keep bringing it up? I have never said that there is not validity to your ideas about the brain and it's functions. But what does it have to do with the Fog as an excuse?


You are reading what you want to, not what I wrote. I'm not out to argue. I'm just participating in a philosophical conversation albeit one that I'm finding a tad hurtful but enlightening nonetheless. Have a nice day.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

There are some BSs who don't see the fog as a metaphor. They act as though their WS were out of their minds, on some drug, in The Fog, and now that they are Out of The Fog, they convince themselves that all is well.

The idea of the fog is open to abuse by both sides. That's why it is easier to see these things as choices because everyone is treated based on what they did, what can be proven, and not on tge idea that they were somehow in an altered state which rendered them less culpable.

Past that, that same alleged fog was also at play when the couple that is now experiencing infidelity got together. So why was that not The Evil Fog as well? Because it didn't involve cheating? Perhaps. But the same chemicals are at play.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> There are some BSs who don't see the fog as a metaphor. They act as though their WS were out of their minds, on some drug, in The Fog, and now that they are Out of The Fog, they convince themselves that all is well.
> 
> The idea of the fog is open to abuse by both sides. That's why it is easier to see these things as choices because everyone is treated based on what they did, what can be proven, and not on tge idea that they were somehow in an altered state which rendered them less culpable.
> 
> Past that, that same alleged fog was also at play when the couple that is now experiencing infidelity got together. So why was that not The Evil Fog as well? Because it didn't involve cheating? Perhaps. But the same chemicals are at play.


Using the metaphor of my WS's fog helped me understand why no matter what logic or rationale I tried to use, I just couldn't reconnect with her to have any sort of meaningful discussion about the state of our marriage, what we could do to save or improve it. It was just over. Fog was never an excuse for either of our actions, but using it as a metaphor allowed me to detach and realize that I indeed wasn't the insane for not buying the actual justifications she was throwing around.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

See that's the point. It's always a choice. I don't think anyone in this thread has disagreed with that.


----------



## Served Cold (May 25, 2014)

Rookie4 said:


> I've been asked to start a thread about the , so-called, "fog. So here goes.
> Do you believe in it?
> I do not, except as infatuation, and an excuse mechanism, that allows people to be further deceived, and evade responsibility for their actions.
> What do you think?


I don't believe in "fog". A cheater knows exactly what they're doing and puts in a lot of effort in not getting caught. Cheating and deceit is a deliberate and conscious action and if anything they manufacture "fog" on their betrayed spouse, it's called gas lighting. 

Nope, not buying cheater "fog".


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

If it is a choice then what purpose does the metaphor serve? all love at its essence is the same. The only difference is that sometimes people fall in love and realized later that is unsustainable. And it could be unsustainable for instance because the other person was lying to them or it could be unsustainable because you're a snob and the other person is trailer trash. there can be cultural reasons there can be emotional reasons I can be all kinds of reasons. But the love they felt is exactly the same. The fact it's not sustainable doesn't suddenly cause it to be a Fog.

I see the idea of fog being used a lot when a person cheats down. it's as though there could be no other explanation. you know other than the fact that there needs such as they were were being met by this person on that they gladly accepted the love and adoration of this person. You know, all the stuff that feels good. 

if a lot of us weren't such a damn snobs than those relationships might go on to be viable. They're not viable in part because of the social constructs. 

deciding for instance that you'd rather stay with your spouse and keep your family together because the other person would not be accepted by your family is another place where people like to use fog. the fog is used to explain why they would risk the family in the first place. Only the fog would explain it.

Is the fog what allowed the cheater who cheated down to use another human being and then cast them aside when they realize that what they had to lose was greater than what they had to gain by being with that person? seems to me that the same characteristics that allowed him to cheat in the first place we're still at play. doing what's best for them and to hell with everybody else. only in this case it happens to align with what the betrayed spouse wants so that makes it suddenly okay. 

but I'm trying to say is if the fog to blame for letting them be selfish and cheat down or is the fog to blame for using and casting aside the person that they cheated with or is the fog to blame for why they cheated in the first place? 


as a metaphor it has its uses but unfortunately it also used to explain things in a way that makes them more palatable and that making it more palatable tends to downplay the selfishness and self centeredness of the cheater. and as crazy as that seems it benefits the betrayed spouse the most because it makes it easier for them to accept the cheater back into their lives.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

The choice to start an affair is not in question. It's when the feelings take root that's at issue. Are you married? Do you love your spouse? Why? What makes anyone love anyone else? Do you choose to love? In part yes. But how many times do we read about someone who is trying to detach. Why is it so hard? What keeps you "in love" long after you've made the choice to detach? If it all is just a choice shouldn't we just be able to choose not to love?


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

When you chose to ignore the fact that you were developing feelings for someone else even though you were married you made a choice. once you let it get its hooks into you what's done is done. All the thinking all of the choices came at the beginning and you made the wrong one. That you fell in love later doesn't erase all of those choices.

By the same token when you decide to dump your affair partner because they are not worth it for whatever reason and you decide to return to your marriage you made a choice and you made that choice even if you still had feelings for that affair partner. Again it's not the feelings but its the actions. 

They could have exercised the thinking part Andy behaving with integrity part all throughout this process. But they didn't. And that because they wanted the good feelings. They chose to pursue what they wanted. They knew it was wrong, thus all the lying and planning.

No fog. Just choices.


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

3putt said:


> My freakin' God, just how many times does it have to be explained to you that it is not an excuse??? You and a couple of your comrade naysayers are the ONLY ones saying it's an excuse!
> 
> Your comprehension skills must be at a 3rd grade level.
> 
> Jesus


My reading comprehension is much higher, thank you very much.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> When you chose to ignore the fact that you were developing feelings for someone else even though you were married you made a choice. once you let it get its hooks into you what's done is done. All the thinking all of the choices came at the beginning and you made the wrong one. That you fell in love later doesn't erase all of those choices.
> 
> By the same token when you decide to dump your affair partner because they are not worth it for whatever reason and you decide to return to your marriage you made a choice and you made that choice even if you still had feelings for that affair partner. Again it's not the feelings but its the actions.
> 
> ...


Yes choices. But choices complicated with feelings. Feelings that manifest from biological processes. This isn't magic. It isn't intellect. It's lizard brain mating rituals.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

lucky for us we aren't lizards 

but yeah now and again that reptile brain wants to take over doesn't it. 

it can be mighty powerful for such a small portion of the brain. but since most of this doesn't happen in the blink of an eye and it isn't part of the fight-or-flight mechanism there is ample time for the rest of the brain to do its duty and tamp us back into place.


----------



## Calibre1212 (Aug 11, 2014)

In reference to being in an unhappy marriage which FORCES cheating, I say...Whatever! There is something called divorce...You don't wait to find someone else, then file one.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> lucky for us we aren't lizards
> 
> but yeah now and again that reptile brain wants to take over doesn't it.
> 
> it can be mighty powerful for such a small portion of the brain. but since most of this doesn't happen in the blink of an eye and it isn't part of the fight-or-flight mechanism there is ample time for the rest of the brain to do its duty and tamp us back into place.


That's why I said earlier it's one compromise after another. Baby steps and little rationalizations that lead you somewhere you may not have intended to go but should have realized was your destination regardless.


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

treyvion said:


> Fog is real.
> 
> It's when you take someones words for face value, and they spin an image on you and paint a picture. It creates inaccuracies in your mind.
> 
> ...



Ummmm, that's called schizophrenia.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

MattMatt said:


> But! I didn't cheat for sex!
> 
> I cheated for other reasons and the sex part of the affair, when it happened, was, I suppose, when I realised that what I was doing was wrong.



Calling BS. Sex and ego strokes if it makes you feel better to say that there is something missing in your that demands external validation regardless of how it affects others. 


Shallow self-absorbtion, IMO. I won't deal with somebody who thought it was alright to disregard their family and how their actions affect others to chase ego strokes and sex. It's just too pitiful, if you ask me. Good luck.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

> but I'm trying to say is if the father to blame for letting them be selfish and cheap down or is the fog to blame for lighting and cast aside the person that she's with or is the fog to blame for why they cheated in the first place?


The fog is that lustful, I love you, you are the one the only, I don't know how I lived without you, I've needed you all my life and didn't know it, no one else including my husband/wife has ever been like you feeling that many many folks get when they have sex for the first time with someone. It seems childish. It seems immature. I don't think it has as much to do with that as it does with a lack of control of the chemical soup released in the brain that brings on those feelings of love and euphoria. 

Now, I don't think I said it made any choice. I don't think I said it is the reason someone strays. I think I said it's that feeling after the decision and the physical act. It's more a reason why it's so tough to get someone to wake up to reality after the affair has gone physical.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

but that exact same feeling is also responsible for what we deem as legitimate love. You can't have it both Ways. You can't demon eyes it oh my god I can't believe that speech to text just did that ... demonized .... on one hand and exhault it to the heavens on the other. 

the falling in love feeling is neutral. It doesn't judge based on all of these qualities that we determine is right or wrong. 

why were you in a position to fall in love with someone in the first place? why as a married person did you put yourself there? Those are choices. When you are single and free and able to go out looking for love in all the right or wrong places s*** happens you fall in love sometimes it works out sometimes it's a disaster. But you don't go and call it the fog do you . 

no only when you're married and you fall in love with someone else do you call it the fog. I call bull****. 

we are not a reptilian brain. Falling in love is not a fight or flight. 

we choose to continue to pursue what feels good at the risk of all other things. 

and even not said the reptilian brain talking about procreation isn't about falling in love. to fall in love you need more time. 

past that a lot of people use the idea of fog to say that it proves that it wasn't love. 

limerence infatuation love. They're all on a continuum. they're all valid. they are what they are. Just because something doesn't last doesn't mean that they didn't exist ever. If that were the case then 50 of all marriages never last and never existed . but gosh darn a lot of us know that we were at one time in love. 

lol this is an interesting conversation gets us nowhere. But it is still an interesting conversation .

as a metaphor it has value. As a law or a rule it is dangerous. And when new people come along we need to be really careful about how we describe this so called fog.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

The only difference is that it's okay to do that when two are single. Not okay when married. So, it's like when you see a new couple hugging, touching, holding hands, kissing and hugging all over the place in public and it kind of gives you a little queasy feeling because it's sugar sweet and sickening. It feels great when you are in it, but it's only appropriate under certain circumstances. Same - same. 

As far as excuses or whatever. I made none. The only trouble with using the term is that not everyone understands it the same.

It's appropriate for single couples. It's not appropriate for married folks who are in an affair, unless they have these feelings for their spouse. 

Of course, if you read here long enough, there are many excuses for almost anything that needs justified to keep someone from feeling bad about their decisions and reconsidering their stance.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> You are reading what you want to, not what I wrote. I'm not out to argue. I'm just participating in a philosophical conversation albeit one that I'm finding a tad hurtful but enlightening nonetheless. Have a nice day.


Dude, I'm only responding to what you said. You stated that you have never heard anyone use the "fog" as an excuse, when you know that this is NOT true. So take a stand, either own that you believe that we are not rational beings, or admit that the "fog" is a figment of the imaginations of weak people. Adding a lot of supposed "scientific' info , doesn't prove anything. If you want to believe in the fog, so be it, but don't sit on the fence. Either the decision to cheat is a rational one or it is not, and if it is, then the "fog" is nothing more than a lame excuse, which is what I stated.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Lots of folks use the word, "fog", as an excuse. It is not an excuse for having an affair. It is a nickname for an actual biological response to an orgasm during sexual intercourse. These things can be tough to comprehend.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> When you chose to ignore the fact that you were developing feelings for someone else even though you were married you made a choice. once you let it get its hooks into you what's done is done. All the thinking all of the choices came at the beginning and you made the wrong one. That you fell in love later doesn't erase all of those choices.
> 
> By the same token when you decide to dump your affair partner because they are not worth it for whatever reason and you decide to return to your marriage you made a choice and you made that choice even if you still had feelings for that affair partner. Again it's not the feelings but its the actions.
> 
> ...


This is absolutely true. 
In my situation, during the final knockdown, drag-out argument that revealed the affair, my ex wife said a lot of extremely hurtful things. Within a matter of a few hours, she was back on the phone , REPUDIATING everything she had said, and swearing that NOW she was telling the truth. So.....when was she in the "fog"? When she was hateful.....or when she was remorseful? Both ...or neither? Or.....was it that she was trying to undo the bad choices she had already made, and attempting to make her actions more palatable, and ultimately , more forgivable?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> That's why I said earlier it's one compromise after another. Baby steps and little rationalizations that lead you somewhere you may not have intended to go but should have realized was your destination regardless.


Once again, you are making excuses.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

MattMatt said:


> But! I didn't cheat for sex!
> 
> I cheated for other reasons and the sex part of the affair, when it happened, was, I suppose, when I realised that what I was doing was wrong.


If it wasn't about the sex, then WHY have the sex? You could have kept it an EA, couldn't you?


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Once again, you are making excuses.


You can stop now. Thanks for playing.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> You can stop now. Thanks for playing.


Perhaps it would go better for you , if you used actual evidence, and stop equating the "fog" with legitimate feelings.
My "lizard brain" makes me want love , sex and pleasure. My "human brain" tells me where, when and how to get it. Cheating isn't an autonomic action, and autonomic actions cannot be used to explain it away.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> This is absolutely true.
> In my situation, during the final knockdown, drag-out argument that revealed the affair, my ex wife said a lot of extremely hurtful things. Within a matter of a few hours, she was back on the phone , REPUDIATING everything she had said, and swearing that NOW she was telling the truth. So.....when was she in the "fog"? When she was hateful.....or when she was remorseful? Both ...or neither? Or.....was it that she was trying to undo the bad choices she had already made, and attempting to make her actions more palatable, and ultimately , more forgivable?


I think your wife was just caught up in emotional turmoil in the midst of the conflict. She probably blurted out some of the things she had been telling herself to justify her crappy behavior.

Once her damage was shoved back full in her face, the illusions she built for herself came crashing down around her. She realized the truth quickly and called. Did she handle the confrontation well? No, she was an ass but she was already in a-hole mode for cheating in the first place.

People do lie to themselves. I think a lot of cheaters start lying to themselves way before they start lying to their spouses.

Maybe believing your own lies is a fog? Anyways, infidelity is a house of cards that only stands as long as there is not the slightest breeze of truth to disturb it.

Your story freaked the hell out of me because you seemed to have a good marriage for many years and then POOF, you had a shift change, did not have as much time together and your wife went and started fvcking a guy at work!!!!! What the hell??!!?

I started worrying if it could happen to me. The whole situation just really pisses me off! What the hell are people thinking?

She took something endearing and worthwhile, your relationship, the tenderness, the years of struggle, helping each other, having and raising children, looking forward to family holidays and dinners, enjoying grandchildren together, and she fvckin blew it out her ass for some penis on the side????!!?

I am seriously heartbroken for you and her, even though she did this to herself and your family.

I am just venting. This subject has seemed so clear to me. I truly do not understand how infidelity keeps claiming so many victims. I am trying to learn but it hurts so bad. I learn so I can help. I do marriage counseling on the side for free and this damn subject has to be learned because so many people fall prey to it!

I think it all boils down to a little God damn self control!

Rant done. Sorry for any offense.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> If it wasn't about the sex, then WHY have the sex? You could have kept it an EA, couldn't you?


I could have. But OW was angling for sex. (She was a divorcee and it turned out she was looking for a father for her two children and had chosen me for that role.)

I was also very drunk. Not an excuse, but I spent a great many months drunk.

Oddly enough it was when it started to go PA (unprotected PIV sex was literally seconds away) when I suddenly realised that I was having an affair and that I was a cheating POS.

Fog suddenly lifted within a second or so, and the next day I knew I had to confess to my wife.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> This is absolutely true.
> In my situation, during the final knockdown, drag-out argument that revealed the affair, my ex wife said a lot of extremely hurtful things. Within a matter of a few hours, she was back on the phone , REPUDIATING everything she had said, and swearing that NOW she was telling the truth. So.....when was she in the "fog"? When she was hateful.....or when she was remorseful? Both ...or neither? Or.....was it that she was trying to undo the bad choices she had already made, and attempting to make her actions more palatable, and ultimately , more forgivable?


Was she, "in love", with this OM? Was she all giddy when she thought about him? Was she sentimental of things they did together? Did she have that twinkle in her eye? Was she all gooey sweet about him? Those are symptoms of the fog. 

She'll turn on you like a mother tiger protecting her cubs during that time. She'll justify anything she has done. She'll rip you apart just because you are in her way of happiness. These emotional responses are fired up and pushed by the release of chemicals in the brain that produce a, "high", of sorts that is very similar to what was being explained. 

It happens in differing degrees depending on the experience one has with dealing with these feelings and our individual biological makeup. 

I equate this stuff with that, "honeymoon period", we all go through. Or, hysterical bonding would even be closer to what this is. It ends eventually. It then tries to turn into real love and some will make it and others won't. It's just like any other relationship. It's just an affair and you end up in the middle of the **** storm and hate.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

The choice to have sex with someone other than a spouse is something different. Many will take time to develop the feelings, gain trust, learn skills of deception, find reasons(excuses) that they should pursue sex with someone else. All of this takes time and is not a part of the fog. After about two years or so of being together, the WS and OM/OW will have to face reality, also. I bet the OM/W is not as fully into this "fog" as is the WS. The wayward has to believe what they are doing is right. They will allow these feelings to overwhelm them because it bolsters their theories they their spouse isn't and never was right for them. 

Listen, some are right. Their spouse is a bad match. Thing is, they need to get out of the marriage first. I just don't think some folks are made that way. They have to have someone to go to for comfort and they know if that person is getting some, they will be more likely to get the comfort they need. It's all screwed up thinking, for sure.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

Rookie4 said:


> Perhaps it would go better for you , if you used actual evidence, and stop equating the "fog" with legitimate feelings.
> My "lizard brain" makes me want love , sex and pleasure. My "human brain" tells me where, when and how to get it. Cheating isn't an autonomic action, and autonomic actions cannot be used to explain it away.


I think what people are trying to point out to you is that when you have sex with a spouse or girlfriend/boyfriend the end result of pleasure for both parties starts and ends with them. No one unattached to the situation cares nor should they care. I never thought about the girl at the coffee shop or did she, as far as I know, think about her coworker and their feelings about us hooking up. The consequences of this action however good (marriage/Pregnancy/LTA) or bad (STD/Pregnancy) {hey some people just ain't cut out for parenhood} belong to us.

When infidelity is brought into question the consequences are known since the event is hidden, insidious and harmful to others. Everyone knows this since most couples explain that they'll never cheat on each other since they know how much it hurts by either going thru it or seeing others go thru it, and this is a claim everyone intends to adhere to.

So now comes the why, why people stray. Because they want to and they rationalize, compartmentalize and indoctrinate themselves with what eventually starts as idea's and then turns to beliefs. Smokers know smoking is bad and can, and will, in time kill you and hurts others in the vicinity. Do they care, no, they, I , need a smoke and be damned the consequences. I can easily find a reason to be stressed enough to keep smoking or get smokes when I need them. Mind the vocabulary, need vs want, when facing a addiction is relative. Wanting a smoke vs needing one is derived from availability and access to my addiction.

Same thing for waywards. Thats why gas lighting is so effective after catching or suspecting a spouse of cheating. Everything you thought was ok and good enough is not. No matter how much one knows this to be false they are invariably crestfallen by these verbal attacks. They hurt to the core as our faith in our spouses is shattered. And even in the face of undeniable evidence of the contrary waywards will never admit it and usually end the conversation with an angry response and leave. 

Thus the moment of stress has been produced for them to go and get their fix as well as validate their marital outlook of supposed displeasure. Regardless, fog or not, I wholly agree that they are responsible for their behavior.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> Was she, "in love", with this OM? Was she all giddy when she thought about him? Was she sentimental of things they did together? Did she have that twinkle in her eye? Was she all gooey sweet about him? Those are symptoms of the fog.
> 
> She'll turn on you like a mother tiger protecting her cubs during that time. She'll justify anything she has done. She'll rip you apart just because you are in her way of happiness. These emotional responses are fired up and pushed by the release of chemicals in the brain that produce a, "high", of sorts that is very similar to what was being explained.
> 
> ...


None of the above. She hated the affair, hated herself, hated her AP, and above all, hated me and my job, which she blamed for the whole thing.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

You see, using the euphemism , "the fog" is an excuse by it's very existence. It's easier on the ego, than saying that you were selfish, lazy, stupid, deceitful, cunning, deluded, cruel or evil. Similar to using the term "war crimes" it's easier than saying you gassed babies , raped women and butchered families. Few have the guts to face their demons without trying to apply some sugar-coating on them. So they will say that they were in the "fog", and it makes it way easier to live with.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

EI I think you are taking this far too personally.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> None of the above. She hated the affair, hated herself, hated her AP, and above all, hated me and my job, which she blamed for the whole thing.


Reads like you need to find a way to thank your lucky stars. Find it. It's there and I know you can figure this out enough to let it go and be much happier. 

I read your next post and have to say that I don't think you are taking into account that scientists have found this to be real. They just don't call it the fog. I forget what they call it. I've read it on several sites. One I believe, was psychcentral. I trust them. Some of this stuff you have to look up in ways that don't call it the fog. Look up what the brain does when it's in love. What is love? There's a few different ways I looked it up. I wish I saved it all, but I didn't. 

It's certainly no excuse(the fog), just as others have said. It's a condition that happens in men and women when they orgasm during sex. Of course, there has to be some good feelings associated with their partner. There has to be good memories associated and the chemicals make new neuropathways to memories that are pleasant. When a person recalls those, the pathways are strengthened.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

TimeHeals said:


> It's an unneccessary and unfounded construct.
> 
> It's like saying "I was in a carbohydrate fog, so I ate a bag of donuts".
> 
> ...


Hey Time. While I will agree that there is no excuse for infidelity, EI was not simply looking for sexual gratification.

If you have researched her story, you will find a woman destroyed by circumstance, some bad choices on her part and some bad choices on her husbands part. She was not in a good life, much less marriage. She was in so much pain that instead of taking real medicine to help heal her and reduce her anguish, she chose the quick, easy and devastating narcotic called infidelity. I am in no way justifying what she did, neither is she for that matter, but sometimes people who are desperate make deadly decisions.

I was in such tremendous pain from viral meningitis one time that I was pleading with my wife to kill me with a hammer to my head. Would that have stopped the pain? Sure. Was there a better solution? Of course. It took longer, but the medical treatment I received, did help me recover and my family is very grateful I did not use the hammer option.

Thankfully, after her husband discovered EI was on "heroin", he helped her come off her addiction and gave her the real medicine that she needed and she in turn helped him heal from her hurting him as well as encourage him to fix the issues that were harming their marriage to begin with.

Their situation was not like many, where a ws just did not control themselves.

Anyway.....


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> EI I think you are taking this far too personally.


yep. I do too. I liked her post because I agree with her and believe her. I still did feel the same as you. I didn't think she needed to defend herself. That's something that just asks for more. Don't do it. I think some of the others who left did the same thing. You are accepting crap not necessarily directed at you. It's a guilt thing and I have to work on that myself. That's how I know it. I'll accept crap because I think I deserve it. I and only I have the power to stop accepting it, or owning it.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

EI said:


> You were quoting from one of the two posts above of mine when you made the statement that I highlighted in blue. Though I am guilty of many things, I'm not sure how you could have read the post that you quoted me from and concluded that I pretended that I wasn't in control of my actions or that I erected a mythical fog so that I could blame it for my affair. I clearly did not blame the fog for my choice to have an affair. The OP's post asked, "The 'fog,' myth or fact." According to my understanding of the definition, I believe that "the fog" does exist, but I did not, in any way, blame it for my affair. Instead, it was a result of the affair, not the cause. But, I don't believe it's any different than the feelings that everyone experiences in the early stages of a new physically and/or emotionally intimate relationship.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*Really?* Married for thirty years? So you and B1 were married before you were both 9 years old?:scratchhead:


----------



## phillybeffandswiss (Jan 20, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> The only trouble with using the term is that not everyone *understands *it the same.


Right, a better word is "define" it the same.

It's funny because I defined it as something similar to a physical fog on the highway. You see it, you know you are heading into it and you choose to keep going because you think it'll be fine nothing will happen. Most times people make it through, other times there are terrible crashes and death.

Others define it as a mental fog like a concussion. Your faculties are dimmed, you appear okay and you don't really recognize what is happening until it is too late. Then things are pointed out because of your memory loss and you think "OMG what did I do."

Then there is definition, which appears to be irritating Rookie4, which sounds like a medical and psychological fog. It's where people equate it to an actual mental disorder like being bi-polar. Then they berate or harass a betrayed/wayward because "they don't get it." My other favorite is "you have to wait for it to clear," Which is a mixture of my personal definition and this one. Yes, if you'd like I'll get links. I thought it was a joke and when I saw people grasp onto the last two, which I personally do not like so, I decided to stop using the term fog.

Nope, not arguing for anyone being correct because I can see how they work for each individual.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

MattMatt said:


> *Really?* Married for thirty years? So you and B1 were married before you were both 9 years old?:scratchhead:


Flattery will get you everywhere!!! At least with me, I'm a cheap date! LOL!!


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

phillybeffandswiss said:


> Right, a better word is "define" it the same.
> 
> It's funny because I defined it as something similar to a physical fog on the highway. You see it, you know you are heading into it and you choose to keep going because you think it'll be fine nothing will happen. Most times people make it through, other times there are terrible crashes and death.
> 
> ...


_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> *By EI*
> Caregiving for both of my parents in our home for several years, unexpected deaths, illnesses, several chronic health issues, a lawsuit, bankruptcy, foreclosure, raising a large family, including my special needs nephew who we adopted after spending years in the court system fighting for the "privilege" to raise, just to name a few. Those aren't even the hardest challenges that we've had to endure. It all takes it toll and effects individuals differently. My husband coped by withdrawing from me, physically, and emotionally. Eventually, he withdrew from the kids, as well. I coped by reaching out for help, but there t was no one, no help, no support.


*And Timeheals has given you no help or support either!*


Timeheals,
EI is a person that has gone through enormous tests in her life and is a very giving and remarkable person. Her and her husband’s (B1) are a GINORMOUS inspiration to those that believe in second chances and are able to make their lives better after infidelity.

I have come to know EI a little bit during my time on this forum and know that she has not even given you all her devastations in her life. This woman has been tested severely and she is a very strong woman. I am sure that she breaks down sometimes and falls to the ground but she has gotten back up every time and to me she should have the name Rocky! *Timeheals do you believe in what you posted? I am reprinting your post below*


*



By Timeheals
It is the things that test us most that can make us stronger

Click to expand...

*EI has been tested and is a strong woman. And if you believe that people can make a terrible-horrible choice and then have a second chance and then become a giving and helpful person then you may want to consider EI.

In addition, EI is a great mother and her BS husband thinks she is pretty cool also and the proof is that he married her last summer.

All WSs are not the same and if anyone is going to make a harsh judgment of EI they should read her many posts on this forum for over 2 years. In addition, you can also read her husband’s posts as he will attest to her value. 

*There are some WSs that are truly remorseful, have made changes for the better, have sacrificed for others, that have compassion, that are an inspiration, and are humble and caring. That is EI!*


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

phillybeffandswiss said:


> Right, a better word is "define" it the same.
> 
> It's funny because I defined it as something similar to a physical fog on the highway. You see it, you know you are heading into it and you choose to keep going because you think it'll be fine nothing will happen. Most times people make it through, other times there are terrible crashes and death.
> 
> ...



Well, it looks like everyone is getting their definitions in different places. I don't know how everyone wants to define it. I know what it is. It is caused by a release of endorphins in the brain. It happens to everyone, but affects each of us in differing degrees. 

Am I the only one here who has felt or seen someone else, "in love"? I mean when they first meet someone and have sex and you know what? That person is the best thing that ever happened to them. You can even read it here with those who have met someone they think is going to be something serious. That person is the greatest. Then, a year or two later, they start to have questions and things aren't what they thought they were. 

Suddenly, they see their new partner's faults. They see where they are not as compatible as they once thought they were. This is where the work has to begin, if they want to stay in love. It's where others in this very thread have said it's the only thing that is love. Well, love has many stages and depths. There are, I think six different kinds of love. Is that five? Okay, not sure. 

It's because of the strong bonding chemicals released during first sexual encounters. They are meant to be there in case we get pregnant. It helps us to survive as a species. Better to have two parents than one, so to speak. Today, that may not be such a huge factor, but at one time, it was a huge factor in survival. 

You want links?


----------



## phillybeffandswiss (Jan 20, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> I don't know how everyone wants to define it. I know what it is. It is caused by a release of endorphins in the brain. It happens to everyone, but affects each of us in differing degrees.


 Yes, you define this as fog, I do not.


> Am I the only one here who has felt or seen someone else, "in love"? I mean when they first meet someone and have sex and you know what? That person is the best thing that ever happened to them. You can even read it here with those who have met someone they think is going to be something serious. That person is the greatest. Then, a year or two later, they start to have questions and things aren't what they thought they were.


 Yes, I know exactly what you are saying. Again you define this as fog, I do not.



> Suddenly, they see their new partner's faults. They see where they are not as compatible as they once thought they were. This is where the work has to begin, if they want to stay in love. It's where others in this very thread have said it's the only thing that is love. Well, love has many stages and depths. There are, I think six different kinds of love. Is that five? Okay, not sure.


I'm not disagreeing with much of what you are saying, I'm saying you use fog and others understand and define it differently.



> You want links?


Sure. 

The one I do not like, which you are hopefully not addressing, is the one that likens it to a mental DISORDER. Basically, when people try to express it is a true psychological disorder like being bi-polar, manic and etc.

I think we are talking past each other.
Edit:
Please,send them to me in a PM. We don't need to derail this thread with people arguing "those links suck PBF/2 is right."


----------



## phillybeffandswiss (Jan 20, 2013)

I'll get the links, but you are completely somewhere else from me after reading those links. I see it is now a semantics issue. We will be arguing meaning next.

Thanks, though, I understand your position as I delve further into each article.


----------



## Hopeful Cynic (Apr 27, 2014)

Rookie4 said:


> You see, using the euphemism , "the fog" is an excuse by it's very existence. It's easier on the ego, than saying that you were selfish, lazy, stupid, deceitful, cunning, deluded, cruel or evil. Similar to using the term "war crimes" it's easier than saying you gassed babies , raped women and butchered families. Few have the guts to face their demons without trying to apply some sugar-coating on them. So they will say that they were in the "fog", and it makes it way easier to live with.


Yes, I agree that the problem with the word is one of terminology. When we hear the word 'fog' we think of some sort of outside element that rolls in, and you just muddle blindly about inside of it until another outside force clears it away. A 'fog' isn't something we chose to create, nor is it anything we can exert control over or fix with our own actions. So calling the affair feelings 'fog' is a bad metaphor, and attractive to cheaters because it absolves them of responsibility for it.

As others have mentioned, a better analogy would be likening it to a drug high. One chooses to engage in drug use, despite an awareness of the dangers, and once begun, it is difficult to withdraw from. An addict seeks out the drug, does not think clearly and rationally while high, does not think clearly and rationally while undergoing withdrawal either, and engages in truly bad choices to pursue it, such as crime or unsafe needle sharing, etc.

Is the psychological term limerence? Limerence is wonderful when you are both single, horrible if one or both of you are not.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Limerence is a pretty good term. What I know about it is that it does not occur, as I understand it, until sexual relations have occurred. That's when it can be a more obsessive looking thing. I don't think it is really obsession, though. 

The links I was looking at to try to explain what I know it to be, for anyone who wants to read them: 

http://psychcentral.com/lib/love-lust-or-addiction/00020522

http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2013/06/15/but-i-love-him-so-what-is-love/

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/relat...nce-of-genuine-love-and-what-love-quotes-say/
Types of love. This is new to me. I believe I read the philosophical definitions of love. These are psychological definitions. 

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/handy-psychology-answers/201102/the-psychology-love

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...01203/lovers-dreams-are-they-always-illusions

It was tough to find what I read before. You will have to read them and interpret as best you can. I think they explain it reasonably well. I don't think it's a mental disorder. I just think it's a little different from limerence, but nearly the same. I think some studies have come out or some things have changed in the last couple of years. Who knows? There is always something new to read and try to understand. Maybe no one understands it? Maybe it doesn't fit with current thinking? I don't know. I have no agenda other than to explain how I understand it.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> Limerence is a pretty good term. What I know about it is that it does not occur, as I understand it, until sexual relations have occurred. That's when it can be a more obsessive looking thing. I don't think it is really obsession, though.
> 
> The links I was looking at to try to explain what I know it to be, for anyone who wants to read them:
> 
> ...


Please understand that I am not disagreeing with you as to the nature of brain functions, and chemical responses. What I am disagreeing with is the use that is being made of them, by some posters. As justification for infidelity. A fair number of posters will pay lip service to saying that the "fog" is not an excuse, then spend page after page, explaining how it CAN be.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> Please understand that I am not disagreeing with you as to the nature of brain functions, and chemical responses. What I am disagreeing with is the use that is being made of them, by some posters. As justification for infidelity. A fair number of posters will pay lip service to saying that the "fog" is not an excuse, then spend page after page, explaining how it CAN be.


LOL


----------



## phillybeffandswiss (Jan 20, 2013)

2ntnuf said:


> Limerence is a pretty good term. What I know about it is that it does not occur, as I understand it, until sexual relations have occurred. That's when it can be a more obsessive looking thing. I don't think it is really obsession, though.
> 
> The links I was looking at to try to explain what I know it to be, for anyone who wants to read them:
> 
> ...


Woah Woah Woah. I am not attacking or have implied you are agenda driven at all in any of my posts. My one and only point is we all define things differently. Everything you have linked I agree with, our small difference is cause and effect. You said understands and I said "define" is a better word. That is it. 


> It was tough to find what I read before. You will have to read them and *interpret as best you can.*


Exactly. The way you interpret something may not be the same as me. Just like we all define affair fog differently. You feel the links you provided help define the "fog" and I feel they define the feeling of love separately from the "affair fog." Sure they intertwine, but I feel some people say "AHA, he/she is crazy, save the marriage at all costs fog fog fog fog."


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

phillybeffandswiss said:


> Woah Woah Woah. I am not attacking or have implied you are agenda driven at all in any of my posts. My one and only point is we all define things differently. Everything you have linked I agree with, our small difference is cause and effect. You said understands and I said "define" is a better word. That is it.
> Exactly. The way you interpret something may not be the same as me. Just like we all define affair fog differently. You feel the links you provided help define the "fog" and I feel they define the feeling of love separately from the "affair fog." Sure they intertwine, but I feel some people say "AHA, he/she is crazy, save the marriage at all costs fog fog fog fog."


I hope not. It's not meant to be explained in a way that it's just a passing thing. It's the beginnings of love like any other relationship. It is just something that will not allow critical thinking to influence this new relationship, once sex has taken place. Call it what you will. It's not a disorder. It(this newfound love, limerence, affair fog) is nearly impossible to break through when it's strongly felt.

Sometimes the 180 will turn the WS around for a look back at the spouse. Sometimes not. Sometimes just letting them go will work. Sometimes not. Sometimes nothing works. 

Who knows what all went on in the marriage before the affair? Something wasn't very good. It didn't cause the infidelity, but it likely caused it to be a choice for their partner. One of many choices, the better ones being counseling, separation, divorce. 

However, I do think the WS has something within them that allows them to do that. Maybe I have it too? I don't know. I just know I haven't yet gone that route. I don't think I ever will. It may be that we can all succumb under the right circumstances. I don't rule that out. I just think some are much less prone to stray than others.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> Reads like you need to find a way to thank your lucky stars. Find it. It's there and I know you can figure this out enough to let it go and be much happier.
> 
> I read your next post and have to say that I don't think you are taking into account that *scientists have found this to be real. They just don't call it the fog.* I forget what they call it. I've read it on several sites. One I believe, was psychcentral. I trust them. *Some of this stuff you have to look up in ways that don't call it the fog. Look up what the brain does when it's in love. What is love? There's a few different ways I looked it up. I wish I saved it all, but I didn't. *
> 
> It's certainly no excuse(the fog), just as others have said. It's a condition that happens in men and women when they orgasm during sex. Of course, there has to be some good feelings associated with their partner. There has to be good memories associated and the chemicals make new neuropathways to memories that are pleasant. When a person recalls those, the pathways are strengthened.


Anyone who wants to research the effect "love" has on the brain should start with Dr. Helen Fisher. She can be somewhat clinical in her writing style but if I can make it through so can anyone else if they truly want to.

This would be a good start:

Helen Fisher: Why we love, why we cheat | Talk Video | TED.com

And by the way, everything I've said in response to this topic is echoed by Dr. Fisher. Rookie, if you still doubt or have an issue with my comments I suggest you contact her.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> Anyone who wants to research the effect "love" has on the brain should start with Dr. Helen Fisher. She can be somewhat clinical in her writing style but if I can make it through so can anyone else if they truly want to.
> 
> This would be a good start:
> 
> ...


Why would I do that? I agree with it. What I don't agree with is your use of it as some sort of emotional mantra, to explain infidelity. Like I said before. It sounds to me like saying that the " devil made me do it". All emotional impulses work about the same way, but it takes rational thinking to find something as obvious as attraction, to explain away cheating. So, therefore, the idea of the "fog' is actually true in one aspect. It is definitely being used to blow smoke up somebody's ass.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> None of the above. She hated the affair, hated herself, hated her AP, and above all, hated me and my job, which she blamed for the whole thing.


But she moved out to go live with OM her AP?


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

The point is that a married person should not put themselves in a position to fall for someone else. Guard your heart. Don't flirt. Avoid situations. They only have the opportunity to fall for someone else because they allow it. And then there are all those times they manufacture reasons to see them well before they fall in love. That happens when their curiosity is piqued or shoot, because they are just fine having an affair in the first place and want to see how far it will go. There are plenty of people who think cheating is ok, too. Their values are screwed up. 

Since the chemicals are the same in both good and bad relationships they are a wash. There are probably a lot more relevant things at play than that anyway. If a person is suggestible and believe in love at first sight, soul mates, if they are selfish, able to lie, narcissistic, arrogant, needy, empty, all the things that make people ignore boundaries. By the time they get to the point where the chemicals are in full command they have ignored many opportunities to do the right thing. The chemicals are secondary. They might make a person willing to leave their family but they aren't responsible for the affair. And again since those chemicals are the same ones that made the person fall in love with their spouse in the first place they are essentially neutral. 

A spouse by virtue of being there first isn't necessarily a better partner. They just happen to be there first . There's no way you can use the chemicals to suggest that the person is on drugs and if they hadn't been on drugs they wouldn't have cheated or falling in love with that person. Is the best anyone could do is say I'm glad you're no longer in love with your affair partner. They certainly can't say wow I'm glad they stopped using those elicit and illegal drugs and now see their affair partner as the awful person that they really are. Because if they weren't married to you they may have fallen in love with that person anyway.

And for those who talk about cheating down it's partially on the cheater because they were around someone who was vulnerable. That's a little opportunistic don't you think? It speaks to the character of the cheater. Can you blame someone 4 wanting something better? They, the OP, went at it in a dead wrong way just like the cheater did but the other person goes on to be demonized forever yet the cheater gets forgiven.

There's a whole lot that doesn't make sense and reconciliation. The fog is just 1 of those things. For some reason you have to suspend disbelief in order to get through it to some extent. And I think that's why it's so darn difficult. Because deep down people know the truth and that' truth sucks.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

Rookie4 said:


> Why would I do that? I agree with it. What I don't agree with is your use of it as some sort of emotional mantra, to explain infidelity. Like I said before. It sounds to me like saying that the " devil made me do it". All emotional impulses work about the same way, but it takes rational thinking to find something as obvious as attraction, to explain away cheating. So, therefore, the idea of the "fog' is actually true in one aspect. It is definitely being used to blow smoke up somebody's ass.


I suppose gambling addiction is also not a real issue since the proven euphoria from this practice is self sustained by lazy greedy people just not wanting to work for a living, Right? 

The affair fog is real people, it turns loved ones into possessed aliens who will ensure their destructive lifestyle is sustained by any means possible. Most people already know this and have experienced it themselves, this relationship fog they just don't know it.

Think back to when you and your future spouse or SO first got together or even earlier in the courtship. Friends and or activities with friends were dismissed or simply ignored. Work may have been missed by calling out to spend time with this new love interest, time from family is taken away....... Of course, since this is a new relationship the consequences of this new love is as normal and it is expected that our friends and family understand and accept this end result. If they don't and voice their displeasure about our abandoning them for a new love interest or our objections to the possible negative aspects one can or will introduce to their lives (Drug addiction/Criminal aspect/Etc) we fight like hell to keep the exposure of the relationship on the DL or simply rebel to what usually in the end was sound advice all in the name to nourish a relationship we think at the time is something that we feel we NEED, although not necessarily want.

The affair fog is the same thing it just has the addition of a spouse, children (usually) and property that will be heavily affected by infidelity. People know this going into an affair, they just refuse to accept it until its too late, and in most cases not at all. People will pay any price if they feel the value is warranted.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

if its the same thing then why is it so evil? Why are they depicted as aliens? oh I see. Because they fell in love with someone else. It's just as legit then ? Aren't you just saying that it's bad when they fall in love with someone else but it's fine that they fell in love with you? and why isn't it legit when they say they fell out of love with you a long time ago well before they cheated? why is that rewriting history? 

you can't have it both ways. And that's what people are trying to do.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

convert said:


> But she moved out to go live with OM her AP?


No, I kicked her out, she stayed a couple of nights with the OM (because she didn't have anyplace else to go) then moved back with her parents, then got a roommate (female).


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

clipclop2 said:


> if its the same thing then why is it so evil? Why are they depicted as aliens? oh I see. Because they fell in love with someone else. It's just as legit then ? Aren't you just saying that it's bad when they fall in love with someone else but it's fine that they fell in love with you? and why isn't it legit when they say they fell out of love with you a long time ago well before they cheated? why is that rewriting history?
> 
> you can't have it both ways. And that's what people are trying to do.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It's because it was a conscious decision. Most of the affair "in love" is a bunch of bs. It's a really selfish activity, people do it not because they fell out of love with their spouses, but because they are extremely selfish and take their spouses for granted.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

treyvion said:


> It's a really selfish activity, people do it not because they fell out of love with their spouses, but because they are extremely selfish and take their spouses for granted.


Then it's a character issue, right? Don't dance around it. People don't change that much usually. Chances are that this sort of thing manifested itself in other ways too because it's hard to keep up an act all the time.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> if its the same thing then why is it so evil? Why are they depicted as aliens? oh I see. Because they fell in love with someone else. It's just as legit then ? Aren't you just saying that it's bad when they fall in love with someone else but it's fine that they fell in love with you? and why isn't it legit when they say they fell out of love with you a long time ago well before they cheated? why is that rewriting history?
> 
> you can't have it both ways. And that's what people are trying to do.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Precisely.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

TimeHeals said:


> Then it's a character issue, right? Don't dance around it. People don't change that much usually. Chances are that this sort of thing manifested itself in other ways too because it's hard to keep up an act all the time.


More than likely. 
This is another issue I have with the "fog". Why is it that these people are somehow incapacitated by the "fog", yet are rational enough to go to great lengths in the cunning used in the deception, meetings and other nuts and bolts aspects of the affair? We have heard some stories here on TAM, that would require a Masters Degree to implement, yet these same people are Zombies, because of the "fog"?


----------



## NoChoice (Feb 12, 2012)

The discussion continues. It really is a simple matter of brain cells or more accurately, the number of synaptic connections connecting those cells together in a network.

I personally have had no experience with chemicals affecting my cognitive function. I've never had a "runners high" or experienced any sort of overwhelming "rapture" over another person. As I see it, this "fog" you describe is nothing more than a person being so caught up in their own "need" (really a want) for validation, acceptance, pleasure or what have you, that all else is cast aside in favor of attaining that "feeling". Also remember the role instinct plays here. For some individuals those urges are difficult to impossible to overcome intellectually.

It all boils down to being able to logically ration out the pros and cons BEFORE committing the deed and deciding accordingly. Some people's intellect can come to the right conclusion but it takes more time and unfortunately it's often too late and the A has occurred. That is why I contend that some people are capable of R and some are not, based on their cognitive abilities.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

There is a rational function at work: thinking they will simply do what they want and not get caught.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> Why would I do that? I agree with it. What I don't agree with is your use of it as some sort of emotional mantra, to explain infidelity. Like I said before. It sounds to me like saying that the " devil made me do it". All emotional impulses work about the same way, but it takes rational thinking to find something as obvious as attraction, to explain away cheating. So, therefore, the idea of the "fog' is actually true in one aspect. It is definitely being used to blow smoke up somebody's ass.


I have never erased a post on TAM. Please show me where I "use(d) it as some sort of emotional mantra, to explain infidelity." Please quote my original post in your reply. Otherwise please let this debate go as it's not advancing the topic of the thread.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> More than likely.
> This is another issue I have with the "fog". Why is it that these people are somehow incapacitated by the "fog", yet are rational enough to go to great lengths in the cunning used in the deception, meetings and other nuts and bolts aspects of the affair? We have heard some stories here on TAM, that would require a Masters Degree to implement, yet these same people are Zombies, because of the "fog"?



Oh and don't forget manipulation. Some of them will turn on a dime and go from "love ya, Hun" to "I never loved you, ever" 10 minutes later and after they are found out and know they can't pull off manipulating you anymore.

Manipulative kind of goes hand in hand with any long-term deception. You are usually dealing with a manipulative person.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

TimeHeals said:


> Then it's a character issue, right? Don't dance around it. People don't change that much usually. Chances are that this sort of thing manifested itself in other ways too because it's hard to keep up an act all the time.


Well if at age 25 you always fantacized about multiple women, seeing it on tv, the world, and now @shl3y [email protected] proclaiming it on national tv "anybody but my wife"... It might be something that you do with a lack of responsibility and reasoning of the repurcussions.

At 35 you might have known what you did at 22-25 made alot of pissed off women who did affect your life in the end and know that's something you don't want to do.

Sometimes people are just YOUNG. Then other times people are just to friggin selfish. It's not really static though, people can and do change. 

Personally I say someone is who they have been in the last 5 years, earlier behaviors can be restarted but their is no guarantee.

Finding someone who hasn't done anything is no guarantee they won't do anything, because they might be easily influenced and get around the wrong "friends".


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

TimeHeals said:


> Oh and don't forget manipulation. Some of them will turn on a dime and go from "love ya, Hun" to "I never loved you, ever" 10 minutes later and after they are found out and know they can't pull off manipulating you anymore.
> 
> Manipulative kind of goes hand in hand with any long-term deception. You are usually dealing with a manipulative person.


This is how some people are. You have to know who you are dealing with. Sometimes this is what you are going to deal with, so you need to make it less attractive for them to try to fool you.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

The fog, as I have always defined it as a metaphor that works for me was NEVER an excuse, it was a principle I as a BS used to not fall into her irrational world, it helped ME detach from her affair.

The Big Apology: http://youtu.be/FAvOC3_Ubtk


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> I have never erased a post on TAM. Please show me where I "use(d) it as some sort of emotional mantra, to explain infidelity." Please quote my original post in your reply. Otherwise please let this debate go as it's not advancing the topic of the thread.


Just my opinion, Bud. I see what you are doing as "fence sitting' and only wish you would roll off on one side or the other. No debate to it.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Just my opinion, Bud. I see what you are doing as "fence sitting' and only wish you would roll off on one side or the other. No debate to it.


So in other words I haven't made any posts where I state that the fog is an explanation for cheating. Ok, thanks.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I'd just let it go if I were both of you. In the end we are all on the same side of the larger issue.


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

It's like they are the only two players in a game of tag.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

pidge70 said:


> It's like they are the only two players in a game of tag.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


They're in the fog!


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

meson said:


> They're in the fog!


Probably. I use it to explain away my sinking of the Lusitania, and causing the Chicago fire. LOL You know....if I really thought about it, I could probably use the "fog" to excuse just about anything I want to. OK...I've changed my mind....the "fog" DOES exist. Now we'll see if it will get me out of that speeding ticket I got last weekend.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> Now we'll see if it will get me out of that speeding ticket I got last weekend.



I got a speeding ticket a couple of years ago (tis true). There's a stretch of Hwy 64 that goes from 70 mph to 55 mph to 45 mph all in about 400 ft after you come up over a hill. It's a local speed trap, and I know about it.

But... I was happy.... and I was driving along and singing the Sesame Street song. "Sunny Day..."

Fog. lol


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

pidge70 said:


> It's like they are the only two players in a game of tag.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Yeah, I should have learned my lesson by now. Don't participate in any of rookie's threads. It always end up being a cluster. I'm out.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> Yeah, I should have learned my lesson by now. Don't participate in any of rookie's threads. It always end up being a cluster. I'm out.


Well, this is really funny, seeing as how it was YOU who asked me to start the thread, in the first place. Remember?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

TimeHeals said:


> I got a speeding ticket a couple of years ago (tis true). There's a stretch of Hwy 64 that goes from 70 mph to 55 mph to 45 mph all in about 400 ft after you come up over a hill. It's a local speed trap, and I know about it.
> 
> But... I was happy.... and I was driving along and singing the Sesame Street song. "Sunny Day..."
> 
> Fog. lol


I have a funny feeling that the State Police do not believe in the "fog", either.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Well, this is really funny, seeing as how it was YOU who asked me to start the thread, in the first place. Remember?


Because you were thread jacking another thread.

You have a very bad habit of invalidating other's opinions if they do not agree with yours. This has happened in quite a few threads that you've participated in. This thread was started so people could talk about the fog. I come here and offer my feelings freely. I use my life experiences and equate the fog with some of the things I remember when I was abusing drugs, specifically cocaine. Then you come and completely dismiss what I've said. Who are you to do that? You are not me. You've never lived my life. EI comes here and shares her opinions as a fWS. She opens up as she always does and talks about what she experienced during that troubling period in her life. And again you argue and debate her life. Who are you to challenge her on what she lived? Frankly her perspective may be one of the most relevant because she lived it.

The reason you make enemies here sometimes rookie is because your tone and attitude resonate arrogance when you communicate with someone that doesn't share your viewpoint. Yet I continue to try to interact in a reasonable manner with you. That's what I mean when I say I should have learned my lesson by now.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I've noticed several people suggest that fog is connected to sexual affairs. So there is no "fog" in EAs?


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

I don't know what "fog" is really.I can only speak for what I was feeling at the time. I started out always speaking highly of my husband.practicing what I preached...if you speak positively you'll feel positive.Little by little I got stupid,let my guard down and started to vent about small things that bothered me on occasion. Somehow emailing about it made it more real.More serious. It made the small problems into huge problems I suddenly had with H.
He 'listened' and told me how lucky my husband was and this sort of self righteous "yeah,he's LUCKY to have ME!" feeling washed over me. I started thinking more and more about how my husband was failing me.It stopped being about communicating with my husband and more about making him see how he didn't appreciate me.

I never stopped chasing my husband for sex and love. The EA was I guess a supplemental to fill in the imagined gaps in my life. Getting feedback from others on how great they thought I looked was another piece of it too.I said on here once that I didn't need validation from my H but it was nice to have it.Maybe I was just being tough? I did need it.I do need it. If I didn't need it,I wouldn't have felt the need to get it elsewhere.

At some point it seems I felt it was easier to get my ego fix from somewhere else rather than continue working on my issues as I always had in therapy and with H. I gave up on the goal of being the most emotionally healthy version of myself I could manage.It was easier to give in and let all that praise envelop me. At the time,I was being rejected by H's family bc it was just hitting them that I wasn't kidding when I said I couldn't have children anymore.I had just cut contact with my mother too.It's possible I was sick of trying so hard and always feeling a void was left inside. Having that positive feedback and flirtatious interaction felt really,really good amidst all the sh*t storms around me. Then it felt really,really horrible to the point where I wanted to hurt myself.Im still struggling with that horrible feeling.The worst part is I did it to myself.The even more awful part was I did it to someone as sweet and innocent as my H.
Maybe that's fog?


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

So SB, you are saying that the feelings you had during the EA were clouding your perception of reality?

(And others, note, I am not saying anything about some external force justifying any choices here)


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> So SB, you are saying that the feelings you had during the EA were clouding your perception of reality?
> 
> (And others, note, I am not saying anything about some external force justifying any choices here)


The feedback from the EA felt good at the time and it was the easiest path to getting those good feelings in excess.I knew what I was doing was wrong.Every time I looked at my husband my gut told me just how wrong I was.Every time I looked at him I vowed to myself I wouldn't open my email the next day.I'd delete the account.I'd stop going back for more praise. I still perceived right and wrong very clear.I don't know what it was that kept me from doing the right thing. A feeling of being sick of always doing the right thing? Probably just plain selfishness.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

SB,

You certainly were in the fog. The desire to do what feels good over what is normal or right is a component of it. The drive to feed that feeling is powerful. That feel good component was super strong in mine. Entropy felt it as well it's a common component. The next problem is now that the fog is lifting you will feel withdrawal and a slew of other emotions. I was depressed for several months.

But yet you are now aware of it. You are feeling the other pull and too much of that is just as unhealthy. You need balance of the mind. At this point I asked my wife for help and she provided it. Her attention helped me recover the withdrawal and reinforced the good feelings I had for her. It took about a year for me to return to normal. My feelings were all over the place but gradually the swings decreased and my feelings for the OW left. I think you have the strength to ride it out. The final piece of my recovery was establishing better boundaries. Boundaries are what can protect us from being too frequently exposed to stimuli that could induce the fog. To avoid the fog in the future analyze where your boundaries broke down. To me this is the value of recognizing what the fog is. Knowing what it is can help you identify sooner when you are going too far. That feel good feeling, if it pops up in some other circumstance is then easier to recognize you are crossing a boundary. Good Luck SB!


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Doesn't sound like you lacked clarity then, saw what you were doing was wrong and had awareness. I think in your case there wasn't a fog then, either because you didn't need to create a fog to justify any decisions in your mind, or perhaps 2ntuf is onto something about the sex part.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

meson said:


> SB,
> 
> You certainly were in the fog. The desire to do what feels good over what is normal or right is a component of it.



Oh Lord..., apply that to any other situation and tell me how it holds up.


Give me ego strokes, and I will do horrible things, and I am not responsible. Fog.

You know, I get it. People have a lot of unresolved problems with boundaries and coping strategies that show up more often in close personal relationships than in formal relationships.

A guy can go to work, do a good job, but when he goes home, he beats his wife and terrorizes his own children. You see it all the time.

But it is no different than anything else generally. It is just treated differently by a lot of people because so many people are screwed up when it comes to boundaries and coping, especially in more intimate relationships.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> Because you were thread jacking another thread.
> 
> You have a very bad habit of invalidating other's opinions if they do not agree with yours. This has happened in quite a few threads that you've participated in. This thread was started so people could talk about the fog. I come here and offer my feelings freely. I use my life experiences and equate the fog with some of the things I remember when I was abusing drugs, specifically cocaine. Then you come and completely dismiss what I've said. Who are you to do that? You are not me. You've never lived my life. EI comes here and shares her opinions as a fWS. She opens up as she always does and talks about what she experienced during that troubling period in her life. And again you argue and debate her life. Who are you to challenge her on what she lived? Frankly her perspective may be one of the most relevant because she lived it.
> 
> The reason you make enemies here sometimes rookie is because your tone and attitude resonate arrogance when you communicate with someone that doesn't share your viewpoint. Yet I continue to try to interact in a reasonable manner with you. That's what I mean when I say I should have learned my lesson by now.


My purpose here on TAM is not, contrary to popular belief, to knee-jerk agree with Bfree or EI or anyone else. My purpose is to help posters in trouble and to learn about marital issues that effect us or have effected us. This is an internet forum, and my opinion is as valid or invalid as your or anybody 's. If you choose not to interact, because I don't agree with you, that is your decision, and you are welcome to it.
AS far as your life experiences, they are yours, not mine. And DO NOT constitute proof of anything, except to use as support for your beliefs, the same goes for me and my experiences. I am certainly not arrogant enough to believe that my opinion is the last word, as you seem to think that yours is. so , tell me who is the MORE arrogant? In other words, "you're not the boss of me". LOL
As far as being "liked", I am not 12 years old, I can live with or without the approval of others.
Now... if you would like to continue to debate the "fog", I'm your huckleberry. If you are going to assume the stance of a victim, then you are on your own.


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

meson said:


> SB,
> 
> You certainly were in the fog. The desire to do what feels good over what is normal or right is a component of it. The drive to feed that feeling is powerful. That feel good component was super strong in mine. Entropy felt it as well it's a common component. The next problem is now that the fog is lifting you will feel withdrawal and a slew of other emotions. I was depressed for several months.
> 
> But yet you are now aware of it. You are feeling the other pull and too much of that is just as unhealthy. You need balance of the mind. At this point I asked my wife for help and she provided it. Her attention helped me recover the withdrawal and reinforced the good feelings I had for her. It took about a year for me to return to normal. My feelings were all over the place but gradually the swings decreased and my feelings for the OW left. I think you have the strength to ride it out. The final piece of my recovery was establishing better boundaries. Boundaries are what can protect us from being too frequently exposed to stimuli that could induce the fog. To avoid the fog in the future analyze where your boundaries broke down. To me this is the value of recognizing what the fog is. Knowing what it is can help you identify sooner when you are going too far. That feel good feeling, if it pops up in some other circumstance is then easier to recognize you are crossing a boundary. Good Luck SB!


Thank you.

I feel so disgusted every time I think of what I did that it overrides any good feeling I could ever associate with that time and the feedback I was getting.The thought of doing things like that again is enough to make me physically sick. I don't feel a withdraw or anything negative associated with losing all that praise. I feel positively grateful I still have my husband and every single time he compliments me,hugs me,kisses me,or does anything loving toward me I feel such a deep sense of belonging and gratitude I get choked up.
It's beyond a shame I couldn't have let those things sink in so deeply before I behaved terribly. I'm terrified of letting myself again get into a mindset that made me choose wrong over right.So I cut myself off from every social interaction online,except this place and even here I don't accept private messages.I miss nothing.None of it was ever worth losing my husband over.None of it was worth any of the feelings that came afterward.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> I've noticed several people suggest that fog is connected to sexual affairs. So there is no "fog" in EAs?


I would think that there would be, because the same level of personal involvement exists in both.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

clipclop2 said:


> I've noticed several people suggest that fog is connected to sexual affairs. So there is no "fog" in EAs?


For EA's it is even worse, like a marital bruise that just won't heal until certain criteria is met. My STBXW (yeah for me!!) is facing a divorce, has spent most her earnings in important and non important stuff, has irrefutable evidence of child abuse, neglect, domestic violence and suicidal idealization, her WILLING to leave the children in my custody and care as well as an array of other issues and all I asked her to do moving forward was stop her online affairs and go transparent and at leact focus on her children, the house and then if possible me, since she wants me to still pay for joint bills........

The answer!!!!!

"Yeah, this is what I want!"

I could make a power point presentation about her claims of unhappiness and other crap and still have her dismiss this as untrue.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

Lon said:


> Doesn't sound like you lacked clarity then, saw what you were doing was wrong and had awareness. I think in your case there wasn't a fog then, either because you didn't need to create a fog to justify any decisions in your mind, or perhaps 2ntuf is onto something about the sex part.


The fog is more about the force of the drive to obtain good feelings. It doesn't prevent reasoning, choices are still being made. It is not a construct of justification. So just because nothing was justified or made an excuse of doesn't mean there is no fog. That drive to escalate contact and continue the good feelings is still there that drive can be overcome. 

The fog is a physiological effect not a reasoning construct.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

meson said:


> The fog is more about the force of the drive to obtain good feelings. It doesn't prevent reasoning, choices are still being made. It is not a construct of justification. So just because nothing was justified or made an excuse of doesn't mean there is no fog. That drive to escalate contact and continue the good feelings is still there that drive can be overcome.
> 
> The fog is a physiological effect not a reasoning construct.


I agree, that is what it is. I do not deny the existence of attraction and pleasure nor their origins. But these effects are NOT SPECIFIC to cheating, and should not be used to rationalize cheating. Nor is it an independent force, which cannot be controlled.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



meson said:


> The fog is more about the force of the drive to obtain good feelings. It doesn't prevent reasoning, choices are still being made. It is not a construct of justification. So just because nothing was justified or made an excuse of doesn't mean there is no fog. That drive to escalate contact and continue the good feelings is still there that drive can be overcome.
> 
> The fog is a physiological effect not a reasoning construct.


I would have to disagree in the case of my ex's exit affair. For her, every decision of every day was about obtaining those good feelings. Even in the beginning of our marriage when everything felt good to her. But in her case, like everyone else, the source of good feelings comes from entirely within, and when those stopped sure there was a drive to get them back, but to me the entire reason it's called a fog is because it limits our vision and prevents us from seeing the right path. The cheater choose to venture off the path, walked into the fog and is now lost, the only way they get their bearings again is to stumble around and eventually find their way out of it or it slowly burns off. You can call out to someone in a fog but they likely won't hear and if they do it possibly sends them continuing in the wrong direction. Sometimes if we, people outside of a fog bank, can cause a sudden change in the atmosphere we can cause it to lift or blow away.

It has nothing to do with justification, after all the cheater walked right into it, or created it themselves. Once they are in it has everything to do with their ability to reason. They are alone and completely unaware of the damage they left behind outside the fog, and depending on their personality they may even be at peace in the fog. There is no ability for others to make them feel guilty because they are incommunicable, or at least they are to their spouse and they like it that way because it feels better than facing reality.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> I agree, that is what it is. I do not deny the existence of attraction and pleasure nor their origins. But these effects are NOT SPECIFIC to cheating, and should not be used to rationalize cheating. Nor is it an independent force, which cannot be controlled.


Fog is as real as psychological operations. 

A heavy and tight liar can cause confusion and stress to your brain.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



meson said:


> The fog is more about the force of the drive to obtain good feelings. It doesn't prevent reasoning, choices are still being made. It is not a construct of justification. So just because nothing was justified or made an excuse of doesn't mean there is no fog. That drive to escalate contact and continue the good feelings is still there that drive can be overcome.
> 
> The fog is a physiological effect not a reasoning construct.


Further, I think your definition is just plain old compulsion.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

EI said:


> rookie, no one on this thread has said that the fog rationalizes cheating. Your thread title is: _ The "fog," myth or fact._ Those of us who have personally experienced what we believe to be the fog, as we understand the definition, (which could also simply be called clouded logic, impaired judgement, or in the case of a PA, possibly even an EA, it could accurately be described as lust driven decision making - there, I said it) have shared our thoughts and experiences with the fog. No one on this thread has said that the fog, or the devil, or anything else was responsible for any of our choices.
> 
> Plain and simple, if you choose to drink a case of beer and chase it down with a bottle of whiskey, you will become drunk. Period. You chose to drink. Every single time you drink, you make another choice to drink. You are responsible every single time you make that choice. And, that is completely on you. Now, after you have drank all of that alcohol, you will become drunk. That is not a choice, it is a result. You cannot avoid drunkeness when you drink in excess. But, you can avoid drinking in excess. Whatever consequences occur as a result of your drunkeness are completely on you. You chose to drink in excess knowing what the result would be. Drunkeness is a result of a choice. The fog is a result of a choice. The fog doesn't choose us. In essence, we choose it. Sometimes, over, and over, and over again.
> 
> ...


Sorry, I'm not buying it. By your own admission you made the choices, but then again, your choices were sometimes governed by the "fog" and sometimes by reason. How convenient. A built-in alibi. I know you say that your decisions were made by you, but you give yourself an "out" by describing your feelings as something apparently (at Times) beyond your control. So what controlled them? If not your rational mind? 
My point is to try to cut through the myth of the "fog' and expose it for what it really is, a series of selfish ideas, that do not stand up to scrutiny, and apparently (for some people) can be turned on and off like a radio.
A lot of posters have spent a lot of time typing about brain operations, chemicals, addiction, etc, etc, etc. ALL of which can and do happen to every single person on earth, in some form or another. We all want a pleasurable life, and if truth were told, we all have some form of addiction or other. Whether it is sex, drugs , golf or food or anything that can be pleasurable can also be addictive. It isn't about the pleasure, it is about the use of the "fog" to explain, excuse, rationalize infidelity. 
It can't be both ways. If infidelity is the product of a rational mind, then the "fog" cannot exist. If infidelity is irrational and cannot be controlled, then no cheater is guilty of any crime or sin. Because they were not rational. It is a relationship insanity plea.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie, irrational is not the same thing as insane. Just because a remorseful cheater is expressing the rationale behind their choices and it didn't add up, does not absolve anyone of the ownership of their choices.

A number of DS and LS on this thread have agreed that the fog was indeed one aspect of the affair, that is all that really matters. It doesn't mean that all cheaters experience it, nor does it mean that some cheaters wouldn't try to use it as an excuse (whether they experienced it or not)


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> Rookie, irrational is not the same thing as insane. Just because a remorseful cheater is expressing the rationale behind their choices and it didn't add up, does not absolve anyone of the ownership of their choices.
> 
> A number of DS and LS on this thread have agreed that the fog was indeed one aspect of the affair, that is all that really matters. It doesn't mean that all cheaters experience it, nor does it mean that some cheaters wouldn't try to use it as an excuse (whether they experienced it or not)


Believing in something isn't proof it exists, any more than disbelieving factual evidence is proof that it doesn't. I fully agree that some people BELIEVE that the "fog" exists. We have ample proof of that, at least.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Believing in something isn't proof it exists, any more than disbelieving factual evidence is proof that it doesn't. I fully agree that some people BELIEVE that the "fog" exists. We have ample proof of that, at least.


The "fog" I'm talking about is a concept, one that describes the disconnected behaviors of a cheating spouse. It is not a meteorological phenomena, can't be measured using a barometer or hygrometer, doesn't need scientific evidence, merely testimony to establish it as real.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

the more we talk the more I think the term the fog isnt useful in any capacity at all. 

yes obviously the affair felt good or you wouldn't have done it. 

yes there's some chemistry in falling in love. 

And yes people show a preference for the object of their affection. It trumps the spouse and sometimes the kiddies too.

If you fall out of love or decide you can't make it work with the AP is the fog broken? No. You just made another decision based on what's best for you. Everyone else is secondary.

What does the fog exactly explain? Why have a term for it?

Going back to the family is a decision that the benefits of being there outweigh the drawbacks. Why? Money usually and appearances. Your heart can still ache for the AP but they are now thrown under the bus. Smart BSs require no contact. That helps the heart of the WS heal faster I guess. But the AP just caught the same pain that the BS experienced all because the WS is ok with throwing people under the bus.

Character drives all of this.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Clipclop, I have already written in several comments on here about how useful the concept of the fog was in helping ME decide how I was going to act when my ex W was having her affairs.

I first heard about the term not long after first finding TAM, (when I googled "ILYBINILWY". And immediately the term resonated with me and was the Aha moment I needed to realize how futile my desperate attempts at trying to talk, beg and plead her back were. Understanding her as being in such a fog gave me the resolution to do my 180, and remain emotionally strong amidst her irrationality (and there was no AP to throw under the bus, it was a string of NSA FB's for her, of which she had just recently discovered were an endless supply)


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Yeah, but all it really did is tell you she fell in love with someone else.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> Yeah, but all it really did is tell you she fell in love with someone else.


? No not at all. She was in love with the idea of leaving me and being free (even though I never did anything to make her feel captive). She needed some kind of irrationality in order to leave the path and find the fog she sought.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> Sorry, I'm not buying it. By your own admission you made the choices, but then again, your choices were sometimes governed by the "fog" and sometimes by reason. How convenient. A built-in alibi. I know you say that your decisions were made by you, but you give yourself an "out" by describing your feelings as something apparently (at Times) beyond your control. So what controlled them? If not your rational mind?
> My point is to try to cut through the myth of the "fog' and expose it for what it really is, a series of selfish ideas, that do not stand up to scrutiny, and apparently (for some people) can be turned on and off like a radio.
> A lot of posters have spent a lot of time typing about brain operations, chemicals, addiction, etc, etc, etc. ALL of which can and do happen to every single person on earth, in some form or another. We all want a pleasurable life, and if truth were told, we all have some form of addiction or other. Whether it is sex, drugs , golf or food or anything that can be pleasurable can also be addictive. It isn't about the pleasure, it is about the use of the "fog" to explain, excuse, rationalize infidelity.
> It can't be both ways. If infidelity is the product of a rational mind, then the "fog" cannot exist. If infidelity is irrational and cannot be controlled, then no cheater is guilty of any crime or sin. Because they were not rational. It is a relationship insanity plea.


Rookie, let's try this explanation:-

The fog can be a result of broken people doing broken, dumb things. (I was broken and I did broken, dumb things.)


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> There is a rational function at work: thinking they will simply do what they want and not get caught.


Get caught? Get_ caught_? Why would I get caught? Well, I wasn't doing anything wrong. Was I? :scratchhead:

That's where people in the fog can be. I know I was.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

MattMatt said:


> Get caught? Get_ caught_? Why would I get caught? Well, I wasn't doing anything wrong. Was I? :scratchhead:
> 
> That's where people in the fog can be. I know I was.



Don't believe you.

If you didn't think it was wrong, why was it a secret?

Why weren't there conversations like, "Hey, I met this gal, and she is really pretty and into me, and I think I'm going to ask her out...".

LOL.

I believe you might tell yourself this, but I think you are underestimating the intelligence of everybody else, and you are overestimating your ability to manipulate impressions.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

What if I said that we are wasting all our time debating the definition and existence of "the fog". What if I say that psychologists, counsellors, and therapists have already been studying the whole phenomenon for well over a century, and in fact the concept of the fog is widely accepted as one of the main principles of human psychology, it has been not only a conceptual idea but one which has been used in therapy, has been used by corporations and marketing companies, and by social-engineering from advocacy groups.

"The Fog" is just a term that us in the world of marriage forums have attached to, with the actual more widely known name (which I think another poster on this thread already identified) of *Cognitive Dissonance*.

If you really just want to understand what we mean by the fog, just google cognitive dissonance. (wikipedia has a thorough explanation, or there are many other well-written articles that apply more to marriage and relationships).


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Lon said:


> What if I said that we are wasting all our time debating the definition and existence of "the fog". What if I say that psychologists, counsellors, and therapists have already been studying the whole phenomenon for well over a century, and in fact the concept of the fog is widely accepted as one of the main principles of human psychology, it has been not only a conceptual idea but one which has been used in therapy, has been used by corporations and marketing companies, and by social-engineering from advocacy groups.
> 
> "The Fog" is just a term that us in the world of marriage forums have attached to, with the actual more widely known name (which I think another poster on this thread already identified) of *Cognitive Dissonance*.
> 
> If you really just want to understand what we mean by the fog, just google cognitive dissonance. (wikipedia has a thorough explanation, or there are many other well-written articles that apply more to marriage and relationships).



I'd say you are reaching, and what's being implied on this thread with pseudoscientific "fog" does not comport with the definition of congnitive dissonance  But some responses might be good examples of cognitive dissonance.

I don't doubt there's a lot of evidence to support the idea of cognitive dissonance (just on this thread alone--smile), and I would include your response


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



TimeHeals said:


> I'd say you are reaching, and what's being implied on this thread with pseudoscientific "fog" does not comport with the definition of congnitive dissonance  But some responses might be good examples of cognitive dissonance.
> 
> I don't doubt there's a lot of evidence to support the idea of cognitive dissonance (just on this thread alone--smile), and I would include your response


I'm not reaching, but most cheating spouses are when they rewrite marital history, blameshift their choices onto their spouse, go to the extent of extreme compartmentalization, deny facts, outright lie, avoid communication, seek out enablers, fence sit and cake eat.

What is it then when people who have never demonstrated any of those irrational behaviors, even after years or decades of intimacy with them suddenly act this way? In not saying it is an excuse, it is just the one huge red flag that the person is having to overcome a glaring inconsistency in their character.

You don't think a cheater isn't going to extreme lengths in their mind to reconcile this discrepancy? My ex even burst out into shingles during her affair, yet still would never admit she ever did a single thing wrong to me.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Lon said:


> I'm not reaching, but most cheating spouses are when they rewrite marital history, blameshift their choices onto their spouse, go to the extent of extreme compartmentalization, deny facts, outright lie, avoid communication, seek out enablers, fence sit and cake eat.
> 
> What is it then when people who have never demonstrated any of those irrational behaviors, even after years or decades of intimacy with them suddenly act this way? In not saying it is an excuse, it is just the one huge red flag that the person is having to overcome a glaring inconsistency in their character.
> 
> You don't think a cheater isn't going to extreme lengths in their mind to reconcile this discrepancy? My ex even burst out into shingles during her affair, yet still would never admit she ever did a single thing wrong to me.


No, I think many of those things do fit the description of cognitive dissonance. If your argument was that a lot of what people say and do is better explained by the idea of cognitive dissonance, I'd be inclined to agree with you. If you threw in, more generally, poor coping strategies and poor boundaries, I'd be even more inclinded to agree. If you added a sense of entitlement even at the expense of others close to them and a tendency to be highly manipulative, we'd be almost totally in agreement.

I don't think the mythical fog fits the description is all.

As for the shingles episode, the jury is out on that one. The Herpes Zoster virus is alive and within her (like most of us), and I don't think immune suppression is well understood. Folks used to speculate that stress caused ulcers. Turns out to be a bacteria.

There's a reason you won't find "the Fog" in text books


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

MattMatt said:


> Get caught? Get_ caught_? Why would I get caught? Well, I wasn't doing anything wrong. Was I? :scratchhead:
> 
> That's where people in the fog can be. I know I was.


This isn't an example of the fog as I understand it. This is just arrogance. Sorry MattMatt. I didn't mean to call you in particular, out. I apologize. 


For me, it's more the lovey dovey sickly sweet bull crap thoughts about how well he or she knows me after six months of knowing each other and never living together or dealing with family and in-law issues, how much I am in love with this new person who knows me so well and how I would protect them to the ends of the earth, even though they tore apart the family I professed to love for the last 20? years. I won't give my AP up ever. S/He is perfect for me. 

This is almost exactly what the two of you might have felt when you first got together, before you were married. It can also be found in the short period of time right after two start to reconcile and have sex the first time. What was the term? Anyway, it lasts for a shorter period of time with two who are reconciling. 

With new affair partners or a new relationship, it generally lasts about two years, under normal circumstances. 

This is what I believe is meant by, "the fog", which is not a scientific term and likely will be difficult to find. I looked for it. Those articles were not readily available anymore. It's also used in a more derrogatory way than, "the honeymoon period", since we are talking about the breakup of a marriage by physical infidelity, in most cases.

Edit: It does have a basis in biological fact. There are chemicals released during sexual intercourse, in the brain by our pituitary glands. They can make us feel happy or sad or angry, comforted or anxious. Is that disputable? They enhance our emotions. Emotions are running rampant in an affair, no matter which side you are on. I think we can agree on that.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> The "fog" I'm talking about is a concept, one that describes the disconnected behaviors of a cheating spouse. It is not a meteorological phenomena, can't be measured using a barometer or hygrometer, doesn't need scientific evidence, merely testimony to establish it as real.


I see, sort of like Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster. You can't measure it, or even know it's there, but it exists. OK, You are entitled to believe anything you want.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> I see, sort of like Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster. You can't measure it, or even know it's there, but it exists..


UFO abductions, ghost sitings, demonic possession, the curative properties of homeopathy, etc, etc.

More flavors of this than Baskin Robbins has for ice cream


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



TimeHeals said:


> No, I think many of those things do fit the description of cognitive dissonance. If your argument was that a lot of what people say and do is better explained by the idea of cognitive dissonance, I'd be inclined to agree with you. If you threw in, more generally, poor coping strategies and poor boundaries, I'd be even more inclinded to agree. If you added a sense of entitlement even at the expense of others close to them and a tendency to be highly manipulative, we'd be almost totally in agreement.
> 
> I don't think the mythical fog fits the description is all.
> 
> ...


I did not say that the fog, or cognitive dissonance wasn't the only thing affecting a cheater by any means. I absolutely agree that poor boundaries, entitlement, manipulativeness and even limerence for the AP, also play a role, but when I use the term fog, or cognitive dissonance, I'm only using it to look at one dimension.

And like I said you won't find the fog in text books and that's because it goes by cognitive dissonance.

As for the outbreak, it is very commonly attributed to a weakened immune system which is highly correlated to stress and anxiety, the same two things usually present when cognitive dissonance is.

I'm not trying to stretch, just relate my experience to things known to correlate with affairs.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Why didn't they behave like that before? They weren't ready.

consider a situation where a spouse finally decides to leave and there is no other person involved. They can act just the same way if there is enough pent up frustration and resentment. They can harden their heart to be able to get through the emotions evoked by divorce.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> I see, sort of like Bigfoot or the Loch Ness monster. You can't measure it, or even know it's there, but it exists. OK, You are entitled to believe anything you want.


I was thinking more like algebra, you can't touch it or weigh it, but it has tremendous conceptual value and provides useful information which you can use for real life problems.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Lon said:


> ]
> 
> As for the outbreak, it is very commonly attributed to a weakened immune system which is highly correlated to stress and anxiety


First, correlation does not imply causation.
Second, you're overstating the correlation.
Third, you're depending on accurate self reporting when asking a question like, "Have you been under more stress lately?" that is prone to confirmation bias and is generally not reliable.
Fourth: it is the default explanation for anything not really understood in medicine, and ... well ... getting hysterical isn't going to help, so calm down.

I mentioned ulcers because the "correlation" was similar  Turned out to be completely wrong to imply stress caused ulcers, but oh well. They treat that with an antibiotic.

Similarly, there are anti-virals and even a failry effective vaccination against shingles. When you start dealing with immune response, we're just now emerging from the dark ages in immunology.

My bet is that in the not terribly distant future (maybe before I die even?) we'll be creating more and more bespoke antibodies by actually looking at the genetic/genomic mechanisms at work with particular illnesses (this is already being done with a few cancer/tumor genotypes), and then folks will look back and laugh at the many shaman who routinely speculated, "Stress?".


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

clipclop2 said:


> Why didn't they behave like that before? They weren't ready.
> 
> consider a situation where a spouse finally decides to leave and there is no other person involved. They can act just the same way if there is enough pent up frustration and resentment. They can harden their heart to be able to get through the emotions evoked by divorce.


Personally I think those behaviors, more specifically those short term change in behaviors, are attributable to a very specific reason. I also think that even if people want to change, and need to harden their hearts to do so, they still usually won't do anything about it until something triggers it.

It also explains why for many people that cheat, after life returns to a state of "normal" (ie after "the fog" clears) they go back to behaving pretty much the same way they were before the culmination of their affair, either reconciled or divorced, with the results of a lesson learned under their belt (or perhaps they just rugswept and those behaviors are just lying there dormant ready to come out again decades later should they live that long).


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> Why didn't they behave like that before? They weren't ready.
> 
> consider a situation where a spouse finally decides to leave and there is no other person involved. They can act just the same way if there is enough pent up frustration and resentment. They can harden their heart to be able to get through the emotions evoked by divorce.


True, but this has nothing to do with "the fog". It's just deciding to change your life based upon what is occurring or has occurred. There is no one else that we compare to the spouse. There is nothing to drive us to this deluded state of mind(in cases without abuse), like an AP who we really don't know yet. 

Think about it. If someone came to you and asked what you thought about their new boy/girlfriend who they were considering marrying after just six months of knowing each other, wouldn't you tell them to wait at least two years to get to know each other better? Wouldn't you tell them to find out about past relationships and how they broke up, if they have children and how they treat them, where they work and how long it's been, whether they regularly visit family and friends and who they are? 

I think that stuff is normal when two are considering a long-term committed relationship like marriage. I know I've told people to wait and get to know each other. Now add in a spouse and when that same person says, well, they aren't divorced yet, what would you think then? 

They can't be thinking properly. It has to be hurt, issues, emotional or physical stress among many more possibilities, right? Couldn't it then be considered cognitive dissonance with other added problems? 

I mean, you would never, at least from the posts I've read of yours, tell someone to marry the AP right after a divorce and before any healing takes place. I can't imagine you telling someone who just got divorced and is a BS to marry the first person they "fall in love with". 

Why would anyone believe the spouse in an affair is thinking clearly about the AP? Why is that so tough to figure out? I'm not sure? Of course, there is always a chance they did figure it out. There are those who have married an AP and it worked. I don't think it's all that common. Is it?


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

2ntnuf said:


> This isn't an example of the fog as I understand it. This is just arrogance. Sorry MattMatt. I didn't mean to call you in particular, out. I apologize.
> 
> 
> For me, it's more the lovey dovey sickly sweet bull crap thoughts about how well he or she knows me after six months of knowing each other and never living together or dealing with family and in-law issues, how much I am in love with this new person who knows me so well and how I would protect them to the ends of the earth, even though they tore apart the family I professed to love for the last 20? years. I won't give my AP up ever. S/He is perfect for me.
> ...


I think MattMatt's "arrogance" or naivety in feeling like he wasn't doing anything wrong was just one critical way in which he was reconciling the cognitive dissonance. He knew that what he was doing was wrong, but he didn't want it to be wrong, so that is the path he let his mind wander on.

As for the intense feelings from the serotonin, dopamine and other brain chemistry that goes with sex with someone new (I personally don't think it requires sexual intercourse, just gratification with someone new) I think that surely is a strong force that pushes someone into the affair fog and makes them want to stay there. But as I said, I define those two aspects separately.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Lon said:


> I think MattMatt's "arrogance" or naivety in feeling like he wasn't doing anything wrong was just one critical way in which he was reconciling the cognitive dissonance. He knew that what he was doing was wrong, but he didn't want it to be wrong, so that is the path he let his mind wander on.
> 
> As for the intense feelings from the serotonin, dopamine and other brain chemistry that goes with sex with someone new (I personally don't think it requires sexual intercourse, just gratification with someone new) I think that surely is a strong force that pushes someone into the affair fog and makes them want to stay there. But as I said, I define those two aspects separately.


Yeah, sorry MattMatt. 

Anyway, I do know that those chemicals are released during any good feelings and there is bonding beyond intercourse. I'm not saying that doesn't happen. I just know that intercourse, when it's good(a somewhat relative term if you are in a troubled marriage since any might be good), really seals those thoughts in many cases.


----------



## SamuraiJack (May 30, 2014)

The Fog…as it’s known here is actually a result of long-term rationalization in response to pleasure and the perception of unmet needs.

Over the long term, each successful rationalization leads the affair person further away from the truth, all the while being masked by the pleasure that the contact with the AP brings.

The odd thing about this is that the greater the pleasure coming from the activity, the easier it is for the mind to override basic sense. In the beginning its very small adjustments, rationalizations, and minor changes in moral codes. 

This is all for a feeling that has been compared to morphine in its intensity. The love high.

As the need for more chemical satisfaction builds, so does the rationalization process to get that love high.

Things that were foreign behavior a few months or even weeks ago suddenly seem “perfectly natural”.

Why? Because the brain LOVES that high…and it can change its methods of doing things to get that high.

Most of the time this is figuring out ways to be with the AP.



It is powerful and the longer it takes to build the less likely they are to realize its running their lives. It going slower is actually worse for them because of the gradual build. At least with a rapid rise they still might say “why did I feel it was okay to do this?”



I am willing to be that there are people who are more susceptible to this than others. I would also be willing to be that there are those who know about it, understand what may happen, and willingly embrace it anyway. Those might be the ones who we are looking at as “deliberate, Hurtful or just plain don’t care”.



The mechanism for this process is probably the most fascinating thing. It’s a gradual process that less aware people will fall into fairly easily. 

But make no mistake, the reward for this process is VERY powerful and can seemingly override common sense. Like a frog in a gradually heated bath, it is insidious and by the time you realize what has happened it’s too damn late.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

SamuraiJack said:


> ...But make no mistake, the reward for this process is VERY powerful and can seemingly override common sense. Like a frog in a gradually heated bath, it is insidious and by the time you realize what has happened it’s too damn late.


Yes, bingo. When that distancing takes place over a long time, the left behind loyal spouse is also falling into their own shroud, and is tolerating behaviors that they never would have before, the lack of intimacy and communication is also becoming normalized on their end. When applied deliberately it is often referred to as Gaslighting - I think many of us that eventually snap out of it feel like we were gaslighted, but we also feel humiliated that we allowed it to happen.

I think when this process happens more rapidly you get a loyal spouse who begins to question their own sanity. Their gut is telling them something is up because it hasn't yet been normalized to the new.

And when it happens rapidly, you see people coming on here like WTF!? my spouse was normal just a couple weeks ago, and now she is completely moved on. They got genuine "I love you"s just days before, and now suddenly their WS says they've had unmet needs for too long, and have decided that this new person is the way for them to go, and that "too much water has passed" (a saying I particularly hate when used that way since it completely perverts the actual meaning of water under the bridge)

It's absolutely crazy to see a spouse in an affair when the fog comes on that strong for them, I've seen it a few times in my life, and while I know it is character flaws at the root cause, its a spectacle how distorted reality can become when it culminates.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

SamuraiJack said:


> Like a frog in a gradually heated bath, it is insidious and by the time you realize what has happened it’s too damn late.



The "frog in the slowly heated pot" myth is also a zombie myth that will not die despite many researchers and zoologists pointing out it just isn't true.

A frog in a slowly heated pot will try to escape, especially as the pot gets above a temperature that is confortable. If it cannot escape as the water gets more and more hot, its attempts will become more and more frantic until it expires.

If you put it in a pot that is already boiling, it will just die.

Boiling frog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

I wish that the myth that "wikipedia was a valid source of information" would die. Schools and research don't allow it as a valid source, so should we not. When anyone at anytime can post their thoughts as fact, it definitely calls into concern the validity of a source. Yes lots of the information on it's site is valid, factual, well documented, and verifiable, but equally as much is not. If we need to go to another source to validate the information, why not just go to that source in the first place??


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Squeakr said:


> I wish that the myth that "wikipedia was a valid source of information" would die


I wish you had looked at the referenced articles.

Oh well, wish in one hand.....


_Second, a frog would notice the water getting hot. Dr. Victor Hutchison, a herpetologist at the University of Oklahoma, has dealt with frogs throughout his professional life. Indeed, one of his current research interests is “the physiological ecology of thermal relations of amphibians and reptiles.” Professor Hutchison states, “The legend is entirely incorrect! The ‘critical thermal maxima’ [the maximum temperature an animal can bear] of many species of frogs have been determined by several investigators. In this procedure, the water in which a frog is submerged is heated gradually at about 2 degrees Fahrenheit per minute. As the temperature of the water is gradually increased, the frog will eventually become more and more active in attempts to escape the heated water.”_


Oh the pathos of of Frogs and Fogs  lol. You guys crack me up.

What's up next? Astrology: better than Science?


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

TimeHeals said:


> I wish you had looked at the referenced articles.
> 
> Oh well, wish in one hand.....


I did. Nice of you to (as usual) just put someone down for stating a fact because it differs from your thoughts and ALWAYS assume you know what is going on with others. That was the reason for my skip the middle man comment. 

I am so sick of arguing things based upon wikipedia. Sorry but wikipedia carries as much weight as "I believe" statements do, and because of this I am justified in stating why not skip the middle man and just post the verified sources. If you were citing a source for school work, you wouldn't cite wikipedia and then tell the instructor to "read the referenced articles themselves" and expect to get a good grade. The ideal behind citing is to do the actual research and cite reliable sources and not just the craigslist/ cliff notes of publications.

Oh well, take the easy way out while wishing in you hand....


----------



## SamuraiJack (May 30, 2014)

What is see is someone attacking the metaphor while not actually lending anything to the actual conversation.

I'm guessing that because you have a different world view on betrayal that you cannot give any credence to something outside your scope of experience.

My condolences.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Squeakr said:


> I did. Nice of you to (as usual) just put someone down for stating a fact..



Umm dude, tis not a fact.

That's kind of the point. The frog doesn't sit there and die quietly.

It's a myth. Myths serve a purpose: they provide some sort of narrative, but the FACT is frogs don't do that, and myths aren't in the business of providing facts. No Giant Blue Ox tagging along with Paul Bunyan.

We should be clear on terms here. The word "fact" has a meaning, you know?


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Squeakr said:


> I wish that the myth that "wikipedia was a valid source of information" would die. Schools and research don't allow it as a valid source, so should we not. When anyone at anytime can post their thoughts as fact, it definitely calls into concern the validity of a source. Yes lots of the information on it's site is valid, factual, well documented, and verifiable, but equally as much is not. If we need to go to another source to validate the information, why not just go to that source in the first place??


I could have cited several articles and summarized it if I had all day and/or was writing a research article. However I just wanted to write an opinion on a web forum and show that my comments aren't complexly ludicrous. If you care to follow up the sources cited on the wiki go for it, but this isn't psychology 300. There is a century worth of articles written about cognitive dissonance and what I wrote will jive with much of it.

Nothing worse than someone trying to discredit another for sharing information that for many subjects is a very comprehensive starting point.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

SamuraiJack said:


> What is see is someone attacking the metaphor while not actually lending anything to the actual conversation.
> .


Interesting. What I see is people clinging to pseudoscience (e.g. the Fog), myths (the slowly boiled frog), and citing both as facts, and even getting beligerant in defense of them


----------



## SamuraiJack (May 30, 2014)

TimeHeals said:


> Interesting. What I see is people clinging to pseudoscience (e.g. the Fog), myths (the slowly boiled frog), and citing both as facts, and even getting beligerant in defense of them


Okay so drop the frog and substitute the goldfish in the freezer...or any other slow building detrimental effect.
Stop derailing the conversation and deal with the item at hand.

INSTEAD of attacking the metaphors they use to bring it to the table.

People who do that are usually clinging to a false truth and just wont admit it...


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

TimeHeals said:


> Umm dude, tis not a fact.
> 
> That's kind of the point. The frog doesn't sit there and die quietly.
> 
> ...


I do know that do you? I never mentioned then nor now anything about the frog, so stop arguing that fact. I am stating that wikipedia is not a credible or reliable source, and that is a fact as it is not accepted by ANY university or school as reputable. that is all I was stating (have proof to the opposite of this then please do post them). Never questioned the frog sources, cited articles or the lie. Reread what I posted and it relates entirely to wikipedia. Until this posting I never even mentioned a frog. Get your "facts" straight.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

I'd like to know why people are getting attacked based on their experiences and opinions. If you have a differing opinion simply state it and move on. Your opinion doesn't become more correct if you bash someone else's. Your experiences don't become more relevant if you run down someone else's.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

EI said:


> So, do you have anything of actual value to add to the conversation, or are you just here for the party favors, Tigger? Good vs. bad, right vs. wrong, opinion vs. fact; aside from making snarky comments to individuals with whom you disagree, what sage advice do you have to offer to the members of TAM?


Have you ever seen him offer anything that could be remotely construed as helpful?

Neither have I. Here's just here to bait people and stir up sh!t.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

TimeHeals said:


> Don't believe you.
> 
> If you didn't think it was wrong, why was it a secret?
> 
> ...


But it *wasn't* a secret! My wife knew of my meetings with the OW. It was all perfectly innocent, connected with our hobby, so what could possibly be wrong? What could possibly *go* wrong? 

My wife knew the OW. We'd all known each other for a good few years, meeting up years previously at the same time, as it happens.They were, at one time, friends.

So, it wasn't a case of my meeting someone new, just an established friendship that took a very bad turn.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> This isn't an example of the fog as I understand it. This is just arrogance. Sorry MattMatt. I didn't mean to call you in particular, out. I apologize.
> 
> 
> For me, it's more the lovey dovey sickly sweet bull crap thoughts about how well he or she knows me after six months of knowing each other and never living together or dealing with family and in-law issues, how much I am in love with this new person who knows me so well and how I would protect them to the ends of the earth, even though they tore apart the family I professed to love for the last 20? years. I won't give my AP up ever. S/He is perfect for me.
> ...


My problem was that after my wife's affair I pretty much spent a long, long time in an alcoholic haze.

I was hurting and sought solace in the wrong ways and in the wrong place.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

MattMatt said:


> My problem was that after my wife's affair I pretty much spent a long, long time in an alcoholic haze.
> 
> I was hurting and sought solace in the wrong ways and in the wrong place.


I think if I had any wits about me, I might have done the same. As it was, I could barely function. I did my partying after the first marriage ended. I would guess I could have been classified as an alcoholic? I don't know. I know I did a lot of bar hopping and late nights playing billiards(pool) while drowning my sorrows in beer and whiskey, tequila, vodka, ah yeah.


----------



## RV9 (Sep 29, 2014)

How does one differentiate between love and 'fog'?


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

Rohitvikash said:


> How does one differentiate between love and 'fog'?



One cannot that's why this debate is so nebulous


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

About two years from the date you first knew you were, "the one", seems to be what is touted or the first time she tells you she has a headache, whichever comes first.  just kidding

Edit: I posted a link to psychcentral that talks about love and what it is according to them. That's a fairly decent citation. It ain't Wiki.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

my contention is that the fog is just another word for love. 

its only cold fog because it has a negative connotation because it's cheating. 

trying to get someone out of the so-called fog is doing the same thing that the affair partner did to the marriage again with the opposite connotation of it being good and acceptable because it's to recover a marriage versus to steal someone's spouse away. 

the tactics are often different meaning the 180 and playing hardball because you have to try to make it uncomfortable for the affair to last. In other words you meddle in the affair to try to make it really uncomfortable enough that the wayward wants to come back because the affair has suddenly become too much pain or effort or to expensive in terms of money or time or social standing.

you can only nice them back if they aren't too far gone.

breaking an affair is psychological manipulation. 

regarding people who marry a fair partners and how well those relationships last I think that's another one of those things where the relationship not lasting can't necessarily be correlated to it being because the relationship began with an affair. second marriages fail at a higher rate in general.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> breaking an affair is psychological manipulation.


Breaking an affair is simply driving home the consequences. Nothing manipulative about it. You find out as much truth as you can then you blow up the fantasy by exposing it to every one that matters to the cheater.

Deception on the other hand is textbook psychological manipulation.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

thanks for the interesting thread, Rookie


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

xakulax said:


> One cannot that's why this debate is so nebulous


Dude, lets face it, love is just natures way of tricking us into reproducing. Most of these stories involve the whole " Sex became less frequent after our 2nd, 3rd, 4th child was born". If sex felt as good as say yawning or breathing nobody would dare want to have children. The pleasure part of sex is mother natures way of making sure the job gets done!!

The love part is also natures way of ensuring the most sustainable atmosphere of living is created for child raising. The affair fog may simply be an uncontrollable urge not yet purged from our DNA by societies so called evolution. Some people can resist or even fight this, others cannot, which is why all rational thinking and consequences be damned so the soul mate other person is mated with. Of course telling a wayward that the exact same problems they had together will inevitably be encountered as well as new ones. 

Ergo; Cheaters suck and they get what they deserve one way or another.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

Rohitvikash said:


> How does one differentiate between love and 'fog'?


See the link in my sig below. They are very similar and the main difference is the displacement of the earlier neural connections which translates into lessening of the feelings for the spouse and possible rewriting of history.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

MattMatt said:


> But it *wasn't* a secret


Unless you have/had an open marriage, I don't believe you again. No secrets. Lol


Not a surprise though.

I really dig the passive voice on ' it took a bad turn' though. Right out of Manipulative Personality 101. 

Sounds so much better than 'I decided' and 'I lied'.


----------



## jim123 (Sep 29, 2012)

TimeHeals said:


> Unless you have/had an open marriage, I don't believe you again. No secrets. Lol
> 
> 
> Not a surprise though.
> ...


If the fog is not real what is? Is it the devil, are all WS just evil?


----------



## bandit.45 (Feb 8, 2012)

EI said:


> I think it's fair to say that the veteran members of TAM would agree that MattMatt is one of the most beloved members on this forum. You, apparently, feel a sense of entitlement to sarcastically pop off to any/all WS's, as well as to any BS's, who don't agree with your brand of BS entitlement. I have yet to see a single post that you've made on TAM that actually offered something of value to the conversation at hand.
> 
> It's clear from your response to MattMatt that you actually know nothing about him or his situation. You read a handful of posts about a specific WS, and from there you think you have them ALL figured out. So, let me try that line of thinking on you. This is what I've figured out:
> 
> ...


KAPOW!!! 

That gave me an afro! :fro:


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

EI said:


> **rookie, I love you to pieces, but I think you're being an intentionally contrary and stubborn ol' ��. * I know you're smarter than this. I never gave myself an out. I never said my actions were beyond my control. I've said exactly the opposite, multiple times, in multiple posts, throughout this thread.
> 
> I even said that, at the time, I liked the fog (the feel good chemicals produced by the affair) and that I chose to keep returning to the source of my fog. I have repeatedly said "I chose my actions." I think that is the same as saying *it is a series of selfish ideas..........
> 
> ...


So now I'm too stupid to understand such an abstract concept as the "fog"? I see.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

OK, we are beginning to descend into the petty. I suggest we all stop the personal attacks and stick to debate. Timeheals and MattMatt are both good posters and their opinions have validity.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Rohitvikash said:


> How does one differentiate between love and 'fog'?


Well, apparently love is love, and the "fog' is anything the WS or BS want it to be, if it will help to explain or excuse the cheating behavior.
It befuddles their minds....but it doesn't
It is under their control......but not always
It is rational....but it is irrational
it's real... but unprovable sensually
Plus, it is a concept sooo deep as to only be understandable to the superior intellects of those who believe in it.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

If you are openly friends with your EA partner it is out in plain sight. It happens far too often. It really does start out innocent but feelings develop as you share more and more with the friend until it crosses into a sort of dependence on their presence in your life. Real feelings develop slowly and organically because you aren't staying aware of the danger. You might not even be attracted to them physically but their personality catches you. Thinking you aren't into that body type or face makes it seem safer than it really is.

What happened with MattMatt isn't exactly unusual.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Well, apparently love is love, and the "fog' is anything the WS or BS want it to be, if it will help to explain or excuse the cheating behavior.
> It befuddles their minds....but it doesn't
> It is under their control......but not always
> It is rational....but it is irrational
> ...


No. "In my opinion" love has more to do with comfort, responsibility and long term feelings. In brain chemical terms I believe that would be oxytocin. The fog is more like limerace, infatuation our any other terminology you want to use. I think love allows for more realistic thinking whereas infatuation creates more of a fantasy quality and isolates the thoughts on the individual target. What I'd like to know is why the concept is so difficult for you to understand. There is so much information available to read and learn that it seems almost impossible for any rational person to not get it. How can you claim to support fWS here on TAM and in the same breath bash and deny everything they've experienced and felt?


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

EI, you can defend Matt with the facts rather than tearing into the person because they don't understand. It isn't right to beat up someone with the " you haven't healed" bat. It is akin to saying " just get over it." As I said before, that kind of thing coming from a former wayward leaves a very bad taste indeed.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> I'd like to know why people are getting attacked based on their experiences and opinions. If you have a differing opinion simply state it and move on. Your opinion doesn't become more correct if you bash someone else's. Your experiences don't become more relevant if you run down someone else's.


BFree, when you use your experiences to "prove" or "disprove" an abstract concept such as the "fog" you are inviting criticism. Nobody here is minimizing your or anybody else's experiences or feelings. But they don't PROVE anything, except that YOU believe in the concept. I use my own experiences the same way as you do, to explain my beliefs and the reasons for them, so my experiences are just as open to criticism as your are. I disagree with your beliefs, but am sympathetic to your experiences.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> No. "In my opinion" love has more to do with comfort, responsibility and long term feelings. In brain chemical terms I believe that would be oxytocin. The fog is more like limerace, infatuation our any other terminology you want to use. I think love allows for more realistic thinking whereas infatuation creates more of a fantasy quality and isolates the thoughts on the individual target. What I'd like to know is why the concept is so difficult for you to understand. There is so much information available to read and learn that it seems almost impossible for any rational person to not get it.


You think that because I disagree with you that I do not understand the concept? How patronizing of you. If somebody would have said the same thing to you, you would have been insulted.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> BFree, when you use your experiences to "prove" or "disprove" an abstract concept such as the "fog" you are inviting criticism. Nobody here is minimizing your or anybody else's experiences or feelings. But they don't PROVE anything, except that YOU believe in the concept. I use my own experiences the same way as you do, to explain my beliefs and the reasons for them, so my experiences are just as open to criticism as your are. I disagree with your beliefs, but am sympathetic to your experiences.


But if as you say it is my opinion why should I be attacked? There is plenty of scientific data out there to "prove" that infatuation is a real and measurable thing. I don't need to prove anything. Why should my or any other poster's opinions, feelings and experiences be subject to attacks?


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Bfree, it is because the same feelings are also considered legit in other circumstances. They are good feelings when it was for the BS and now because those feelings are pointed toward someone else they are bad. They are delegitimized. Judged as being crazy, ridiculous, etc. 
The person fell in love with someone else. That's all there is to it. They watched it happen and didn't do their best to stop it. Everything after that makes sense. It isn't crazy to want to be with the person you love. Being willing to sacrifice for that person is part of how you show love. There is nothing crazy about it. 

Calling it the fog because it is painful and expensive to the BS is bogus. Breaking up a love affair to win them back is indeed meddling in a psychological way. Make the affair painful. Stack the deck in your favor. You can't out love the AP. So you use a big stick instead.

If these people were all single you would call the BS a jerk for not letting go and accepting that they are not wanted any longer. If this were a dating situation you'd have to accept you were dumped. But that doesn't even work because long term relationships without that paper still go through the same thing when there is a third party.

Look, the cheater is acting out of love for the AP. nothing more.

It isn't fog. Just because it is "expensive" for the cheater to make that choice doesn't make it not a choice. If BSs didn't raise the cost as a means of getting the wayward back they wouldn't have any tools at all to fight this. As we know few people can nice a partner into staying.

Nobody acts out of character. The situation decides the behavior based on character. And anyone who does it once can do it again. They have proven it is in their character. Through sheer will that can decide to fight that aspect of their character, but it is always there.

It's like the Beatles line: There's nothing you can do that can't be done.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> No. "In my opinion" love has more to do with comfort, responsibility and long term feelings. In brain chemical terms I believe that would be oxytocin. The fog is more like limerace, infatuation our any other terminology you want to use. I think love allows for more realistic thinking whereas infatuation creates more of a fantasy quality and isolates the thoughts on the individual target. What I'd like to know is why the concept is so difficult for you to understand. There is so much information available to read and learn that it seems almost impossible for any rational person to not get it. How can you claim to support fWS here on TAM and in the same breath bash and deny everything they've experienced and felt?


BTW, I have never "bashed" anyone. I have never attacked anybody or their experiences, at any time. I am critical, but not disrespectful. Like many others, you seem to think that because I believe in fair play for all posters, that implies that I AGREE with them.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> But if as you say it is my opinion why should I be attacked? There is plenty of scientific data out there to "prove" that infatuation is a real and measurable thing. I don't need to prove anything. Why should my or any other poster's opinions, feelings and experiences be subject to attacks?


NOBODY is attacking YOU. They are disagreeing with your opinion. Can you not differentiate between the two? An analogy:
Doctor, you have made a mistake. Doctor, you are too stupid to see your mistake. which is critical and which is an insult? You can feel sympathy for somebody and still disagree with them.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Well, apparently love is love, and the "fog' is anything the WS or BS want it to be, if it will help to explain or excuse the cheating behavior.
> It befuddles their minds....but it doesn't
> It is under their control......but not always
> It is rational....but it is irrational
> ...










bfree said:


> But if as you say it is my opinion why should I be attacked? There is plenty of scientific data out there to "prove" that infatuation is a real and measurable thing. I don't need to prove anything. Why should my or any other poster's opinions, feelings and experiences be subject to attacks?


So if you understand the concept why do you continually post things like the above? Why do you use words like myth and pseudoscience when talking about the concept? Are you purposely being obtuse?


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> BTW, I have never "bashed" anyone. I have never attacked anybody or their experiences, at any time. I am critical, but not disrespectful. Like many others, you seem to think that because I believe in fair play for all posters, that implies that I AGREE with them.


I would suggest "in my opinion" that your replies to EI could be categorized as bashing. If she is comfortable with how she felt and B1 is comfortable with her explanations as to how she felt who are you, or me, or anyone else to question it? I feel you've bashed me for my opinions and how I've used my experiences with drugs to equate my understanding of the concept of the fog. Again, who are you to debate my feelings or experiences? They're mine and you are not entitled to question them without being called out on it.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

interesting how some people are so quick to claim they're being attacked but yet are the first one throw stones/personal attacks


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> So if you understand the concept why do you continually post things like the above? Why do you use words like myth and pseudoscience when talking about the concept? Are you purposely being obtuse?


The point I'm trying to make, is that those who believe in the "fog', will say anything and attribute it to the "fog". By your rationale, almost every aspect of human relationships can and has been given as proof of the existence of the "fog". Everything. In the old days, they called such a nebulous force the "miasma" or the "vapours".. As a means of explaining the unexplainable. How is your explanation any better? I think you are arguing just for the sake of it. I say you are using the "fog" to explain your thought processes during cheating. You say you are not. THEN you go on to do exactly what I said you were doing, and use the "fog" to explain your thought processes during cheating. so, what am I or anyone to think? The obvious conclusion is that you simply want to argue.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> I would suggest "in my opinion" that your replies to EI could be categorized as bashing. If she is comfortable with how she felt and B1 is comfortable with her explanations as to how she felt who are you, or me, or anyone else to question it? I feel you've bashed me for my opinions and how I've used my experiences with drugs to equate my understanding of the concept of the fog. Again, who are you to debate my feelings or experiences? They're mine and you are not entitled to question them without being called out on it.


Give me one example where I have attacked you, EI or anybody. I criticized your conclusions, but NOT personally insulted you or anybody. Both you and EI , however have personally insulted my intelligence. So...who is bashing....now?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Posters are descending to personal attacks, so I feel that this thread should be closed.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Argh! Ignore one another! 

But look bfree, even my spidey senses started tingling when a new psych term was introduced to this discussion and then started to be used as though it were a proven fact. Psychology at best is a pseudoscience. So many studies are poorly designed and have small populations and no effective means of control and are then interpreted and reported by people who shouldn't be reporting dog show results let alone experimental results it isn't funny. And it isn't funny. It is frustrating to anyone who has been properly trained in science.

What we are talking about is largely based on our interpretations and synthesis of information. We are nothing if not pattern matchers. We can build useful models that help is negotiate life and that are useful predictors but it isn't science, at least not yet.

Breaking up an affair involves not breaking through the fog but raising the cost of love so high that the wayward is not willing to pay it. That's all breaking through the alleged fog is. It isn't more real than the love the person felt. It just isn't worth the pain. We all know that the wayward still grieves the loss of their special little friend. That they have to do it silently is painful to both parties. That they must turn around and demonize the AP for the BS to feel safe is just more mumbo jumbo, like fog. All of this involves selective thinking. The AP is evil forevermore but the wayward was * just* in the fog and can be forgiven. If the wayward rewrites the affair partner to be all black that's ok because it makes the BS feel better even though it might not be reflected in truth.

Blah, blah, blah.

Understanding how people are doesn't get anyone away from the cold hard fact that the BS IF they buy the standard TAM requirements is also choosing to lie to themselves in order to reconcile. Why is that foggy thinking ok? 

Or maybe that's why TAM has so few success stories. The requirements on the BS are unrealistic. Maybe the reason most people who actually do reconcile leave here is because they can't drink the TAM coolaid.

We have got breaking affairs down pretty well. We suck at saving marriages.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

I may not be intelligent enough to understand such an amazing concept as the "fog". But I'm smart enough to know that this is the last thread I will ever start on TAM.  I have started two, recently, and have taken a huge amount of abuse, so why bother? :scratchhead:


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> I may not be intelligent enough to understand such an amazing concept as the "fog". But I'm smart enough to know that this is the last thread I will ever start on TAM.  *I have started two, recently, and have taken a huge amount of abuse, so why bother? *:scratchhead:


Perhaps that should clue you in on something.

But I seriously doubt it.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Debate can actually be fun you know.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Why can Mr. Blunt and I disagree, debate and yet learn from one another in a respectful manner but here and in other threads it escalates to uncomfortable levels?

I can not agree with someone's conclusions and yet still respect them enough not to use words like myth, pseudoscience, Bigfoot, loch Ness monster etc to describe their opinions. Can't you see how that makes someone feel? Can't you understand why that would upset other posters? It's arrogant to presume that your opinion is not only the only correct one but the only one that matters. You say you are insulted by me questioning your intelligence yet you continually post that you don't understand even though I've pointed you in several directions to read studies done on this specific topic. It's not new psychology. It's been researched to death for decades. Look it up.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

bfree said:


> Why can Mr. Blunt and I disagree, debate and yet learn from one another in a respectful manner but here and in other threads it escalates to uncomfortable levels?
> 
> I can not agree with someone's conclusions and yet still respect them enough not to use words like myth, pseudoscience, Bigfoot, loch Ness monster etc to describe their opinions. Can't you see how that mashes someone feel? Can't you understand why that would upset other posters? It's arrogant to presume that your opinion is not only the only correct one but the only one that matters. You say you are insulted by me questioning your intelligence yet you continually post that you don't understand even though I've pointed you in several directions to read studies done on this specific topic. It's not new psychology. It's been researched to death for decades. Look it up.


Dude, I'm done talking to you.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> Debate can actually be fun you know.


Yes, it can, but not with people who invest so much personally into it. 
I can easily see how some posters believe in the "fog'. I have been tempted to do so , myself. And contrary to some posters, I fully understand the concept, as a concept, but not as an actual rational occurance. The posts about cognitive dissonance were very interesting, and informative, but, of course, nobody could prove that cognitive dissonance and the "fog" were the same thing. Yet , apparently there is a mass of secret, factual information as to the existence of the "fog". That I am unaware of. Every bit of "scientific" info that has been linked, has been opinions. I have yet to see a bona fide medical or scientific journal or website that proves this amazing thing.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Actually, Clipclop, I started this thread with the intention of healthy debate. I feel now, that it has outlived it's usefulness, and rather than see anybody banned, I would like the mods to close it


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I just wish all of you would kiss and make up. I like you all in different ways and for different things.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

A big *smooch* to everyone.


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> I started this thread with the intention of healthy debate.


With all due respect, I don't believe that was the intention, as a debate is an interaction/ discussion based upon the exchange of differing viewpoints and opinions, but this is what in reality you are asking for instead of viewpoints, opinions and debate:



> Every bit of "scientific" info that has been linked, has been opinions. I have yet to see a bona fide medical or scientific journal or website that proves this amazing thing.


Like lots of things medical the majority are based upon speculation and opinions from trained professionals and not provable or repeatable. I saw this in an interview with a Dr the other day where he was linking ebola to the likes of cancer and said that "we have no way to verify the links and connections and therefor can only provide guidelines and opinions based upon our training. We have no proof that smoking, drinking, and asbestos cause cancer, but can say the risks are increased by those activities. The same with exposure to the ebola virus. *What we need to remember is that everyone has a different composition so testing and verification with all things medically related are not necessarily something that can ever be definitely verifiable due to these variances in the human composition and the test subjects*."

Due to this highlighted passage, there will never be verifiable proof, yet that is what you are asking for and not someone to explain their opinion and belief, as you are now saying was your intent (but was not the practice within the thread).


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Yes, it can, but not with people who invest so much personally into it.
> I can easily see how some posters believe in the "fog'. I have been tempted to do so , myself. And contrary to some posters, I fully understand the concept, as a concept, but not as an actual rational occurance. The posts about cognitive dissonance were very interesting, and informative, but, of course, nobody could prove that cognitive dissonance and the "fog" were the same thing. Yet , apparently there is a mass of secret, factual information as to the existence of the "fog". That I am unaware of. Every bit of "scientific" info that has been linked, has been opinions. I have yet to see a bona fide medical or scientific journal or website that proves this amazing thing.


Again, I pointed you toward Dr Helen Fisher. She has conducted extensive studies on the effects of dopamine, oxytocin etc on the brain. Read any one of her books but I suggest you start with "Anatomy of Love: The Natural History of Monogamy, Adultery, and Divorce." It's somewhat clinical but really breaks it all down well. The book was published in 1992 and she has followed up her study with more as technology and science has advanced. It answers all your questions and backs it up with actual clinical scientific research specifically on this topic.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> I just wish all of you would kiss and make up. I like you all in different ways and for different things.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Everybody is perfectly free to believe anything they want. I do not have answers to the questions, and don't have any questions needing answers, so if posters can debate without insults or meaningless troll posts, I see no reason that it cannot continue.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Well, apparently love is love, and the "fog' is anything the WS or BS want it to be, if it will help to explain or excuse the cheating behavior.
> It befuddles their minds....but it doesn't
> It is under their control......but not always
> It is rational....but it is irrational
> ...


The fog is not some catch all idea that is used for an excuse of any and all behavior for a DS.

The thing that befuddles you is that most of us are not defining it the same way but you are treating bfree and others as though they are using my definition, and vice versa. I and probably a few others think of it as cognitive dissonance, where some see it as infatuation for the AP.

So yes maybe it's not as clear cut a definition as you like, and yes it's confusing to know which definition of the fog to go by, but when putting it into context, just go to the CWI forums, a sympathetic ear will understand what a BS is talking about and will know how to use the term appropriately.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> The fog is not some catch all idea that is used for an excuse of any and all behavior for a DS.
> 
> The thing that befuddles you is that most of us are not defining it the same way but you are treating bfree and others as though they are using my definition, and vice versa. I and probably a few others think of it as cognitive dissonance, where some see it as infatuation for the AP.
> 
> So yes maybe it's not as clear cut a definition as you like, and yes it's confusing to know which definition of the fog to go by, but when putting it into context, just go to the CWI forums, a sympathetic ear will understand what a BS is talking about and will know how to use the term appropriately.


OK, Lon, if there is no clear cut definition for the "fog" how does anyone know it exists? It isn't confusing at all. If it cannot be defined, if there is no evidence of it except subjective opinion, , and if science does not confirm it, then it does not exist, except in the beliefs of individuals. I would accept ONE documented reference to the existence of the "fog', as such. Not another term or not some definition of something else. I don't believe in faith or opinion, with regards to my relationships , post affair, I only believe in facts and actions.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> OK, Lon, if there is no clear cut definition for the "fog" how does anyone know it exists? It isn't confusing at all. If it cannot be defined, if there is no evidence of it except subjective opinion, , and if science does not confirm it, then it does not exist, except in the beliefs of individuals. I would accept ONE documented reference to the existence of the "fog', as such. Not another term or not some definition of something else. I don't believe in faith or opinion, with regards to my relationships , post affair, I only believe in facts and actions.


Well - just like wikipedia is not a source, it is simply a summary of a collection of references, a starting point - so too can this term "the fog" be - it is a container, a reference to initiate discussion. There isn't a scientific peer-reviewed research paper about the fog because there doesn't need to be one, it's not a technical term nor even jargon, it's just slang.

I don't really know what you want to get at, every question you've asked has been addressed and its still not good enough. If you NEED a peer-reviewed scientific article, then take the advice we've given you, pick the meaning of the term fog as you want to understand it: and go to work - a few very general sources have actually been provided to you for various interpretations of the fog's meaning, be it "limerence", "infatuation", "love", "cognitive dissonance" etc. And if you feel you want to define the fog another way altogether go for it - personally I find the fog to be a recipe made from a little of each of those things, and like any recipe you will find variation among households, my grandma's borscht probably tastes nothing like your grandma's.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

EI said:


> I think it's fair to say < list on non-sequiturs>



Look, when somebody says "It just happened" or "then it took a bad turn", what they are doing is denying they had any agency subtly through manipulative language.

That's what manipulative and also disordered people do when discussing their culpability. They minimize, they blame-shift, and so on. These are unhealthy coping strategies at best, manipulative tactics at worst.

It is what it is. It ain't rocket surgery.

When somebody tries to tell me they had an affair and that no lying was involved, unless they are in an open marriage, I think you'd have to be fairly naive to believe their claim that they didn't lie.

When they follow that up with passive-voice statements denying their own agency (which is kind of what some folks use "the fog" narrative to do), then that suspcion begins to cement.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

TH, you missed the context of what Matt was trying to convey. It wasn't that he was justifying himself, he was saying that he lacked awareness of the consequences of his actions. He is not trying to escape blame, he is warning others that these kind of setups are not as innocent as a naive person wants to believe.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> TH, you missed the context of what Matt was trying to convey. It wasn't that he was justifying himself, he was saying that he lacked awareness of the consequences of his actions. He is not trying to escape blame, he is warning others that these kind of setups are not as innocent as a naive person wants to believe.


I have no objection to this at all. I know that Matt is illustrating the dangers of poor boundaries or lack of understanding. All of us need to guard against this sort of thing.


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

Lon said:


> TH, you missed the context of what Matt was trying to convey. It wasn't that he was justifying himself, he was saying that he lacked awareness of the consequences of his actions. He is not trying to escape blame, he is warning others that these kind of setups are not as innocent as a naive person wants to believe.


:iagree:

Yep, yep, yep! Exactly so.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> Well - just like wikipedia is not a source, it is simply a summary of a collection of references, a starting point - so too can this term "the fog" be - it is a container, a reference to initiate discussion. There isn't a scientific peer-reviewed research paper about the fog because there doesn't need to be one, it's not a technical term nor even jargon, it's just slang.
> 
> I don't really know what you want to get at, every question you've asked has been addressed and its still not good enough. If you NEED a peer-reviewed scientific article, then take the advice we've given you, pick the meaning of the term fog as you want to understand it: and go to work - a few very general sources have actually been provided to you for various interpretations of the fog's meaning, be it "limerence", "infatuation", "love", "cognitive dissonance" etc. And if you feel you want to define the fog another way altogether go for it - personally I find the fog to be a recipe made from a little of each of those things, and like any recipe you will find variation among households, my grandma's borscht probably tastes nothing like your grandma's.


I suppose that the "fog" CAN mean something similar to being "stoned" or being "High". Which can mean drunk, or drugged or some other kind of induced altered mental state. In that context ONLY, I have no objection to the term. But, if that is the case, and the "fog" is a description of an altered sense of reality, then why cannot it be used as an excuse? 
It has always been conventional wisdom, that drinking is no excuse for cheating, yet many people use the "fog" as just such an excuse. If the altered state is mentally induced by brain chemicals or by alcohol or drugs, what is the difference? How is it better to say that "I was in the fog" than it is to say "I was drunk"? 
I guess that I am profoundly suspicious of any universal catch-all term, such as the "fog". Which, according to a variety of posters can , quite literally mean just about anything you want it to. The TT possibilities of the "fog" would be endless.
I also realize that I am not the the best person to try to convince. After Dday, I was going to divorce Sweetie, whether she was as foggy as London Town, or as clear as a bell. And if anything good comes from this thread it would be to show to other BS's, that if their WS starts talking about the fog, run, don't walk, to the nearest divorce lawyer.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

I remember another WS poster , who said that when asked a question by his BS, said that he was "foggy" at the time, as if that explained it .


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> I suppose that the "fog" CAN mean something similar to being "stoned" or being "High". Which can mean drunk, or drugged or some other kind of induced altered mental state. In that context ONLY, I have no objection to the term. But, if that is the case, and the "fog" is a description of an altered sense of reality, then why cannot it be used as an excuse?
> It has always been conventional wisdom, that drinking is no excuse for cheating, yet many people use the "fog" as just such an excuse. If the altered state is mentally induced by brain chemicals or by alcohol or drugs, what is the difference? How is it better to say that "I was in the fog" than it is to say "I was drunk"?
> I guess that I am profoundly suspicious of any universal catch-all term, such as the "fog". Which, according to a variety of posters can , quite literally mean just about anything you want it to. The TT possibilities of the "fog" would be endless.
> I also realize that I am not the the best person to try to convince. After Dday, I was going to divorce Sweetie, whether she was as foggy as London Town, or as clear as a bell. And if anything good comes from this thread it would be to show to other BS's, that if their WS starts talking about the fog, run, don't walk, to the nearest divorce lawyer.


Again as most other commenters have said, I have not seen one example of a cheater where it was an accepted excuse to say they were in the fog, certainly not on this forum (I have seen a few remorseless cheaters coming to this site for validation but they don't usually stick around long). So can you please stop going in circles about that point?

I do agree however, that if a DS chooses to deliberately dwell in a fog it is a very critical obstacle to a successful relationship.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> Again as most other commenters have said, I have not seen one example of a cheater where it was an accepted excuse to say they were in the fog, certainly not on this forum (I have seen a few remorseless cheaters coming to this site for validation but they don't usually stick around long). So can you please stop going in circles about that point?
> 
> I do agree however, that if a DS chooses to deliberately dwell in a fog it is a very critical obstacle to a successful relationship.


I think that you distinguish between an excuse and an explanation. I don't. Sweetie never once tried to explain her conduct by using the "fog' as an example of her thought processes, during her affair.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

Rookie4 said:


> I think that you distinguish between an excuse and an explanation. I don't. Sweetie never once tried to explain her conduct by using the "fog' as an example of her thought processes, during her affair.


Nope, all she did was illustrate it (from what I've heard) by saying things to you and about you that was completely out of character for her.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I maintain that it was in her character. If it were not she wouldnt have been there in the first place.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> I maintain that it was in her character. If it were not she wouldnt have been there in the first place.


I wonder if she would agree. I kinda doubt it.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> I think that you distinguish between an excuse and an explanation. I don't. Sweetie never once tried to explain her conduct by using the "fog' as an example of her thought processes, during her affair.


But YOU were the one that mentioned DSs who bring up being foggy as a reason/excuse/explanation and if this was the case that the LS should run. I was agreeing with that, but have never actually seen that nor can foresee it ever being common at all. DSs don't need excuses because they are in the fog and can't perceive themselves as doing any wrong (despite the fact, and I truly hope you and I can agree on atleast this, they are doing wrong).


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Most people know they are doing wrong. Most.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> Most people know they are doing wrong. Most.


Oh, c'mon, CC2. You didn't just join here yesterday. You've been around here long enough to know better than that crap when adultery is involved!


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Deep down, they know. Thus all the lying, hiding and planning.


----------



## 3putt (Dec 3, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> Deep down, they know. Thus all the lying, hiding and planning.


Just like falling down drunks and drug addicts.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> Deep down, they know. Thus all the lying, hiding and planning.


Yes, deep down, but their actions don't match their beliefs (for all sorts of reasons that have between discussed on this thread) thus the cognitive dissonance, which almost always exhibits itself in some form or another, most commonly in what has been described on this forum ad nauseum as the fog.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> Deep down, they know. Thus all the lying, hiding and planning.


Interesting. I agree with you in this respect. Again, not having been a cheater....


can we find a better word btw. Not to go off on a tangent but I'm going to go off on a tangent. I am really getting tired of the words cheater and wayward. I'm starting to feel insulted using those words and I'm not even someone they are used to describe. Isn't there a better way to refer to people who have committed adultery? I just don't equate those terms when I think of the people I've come to know and respect both here and in my personal life.

Okay, back to business. I've never committed adultery but I always default back to the time I was at my lowest. Clip, you're right. Every time I got high, drunk, stoned, blitzed, etc I knew exactly what I was doing. I knew it was wrong on many levels. After I was high I didn't care but before I did it...I KNEW! So why did I do it? I was chasing the feeling. And that's not surprising because I was a drug addict. What is surprising is why did I stop? I mean I started knowing where it would lead. I may have rationalized my actions but clip is right, deep down I knew. I knew even I continued to abuse day after day after day. And every day I said I was going to stop. And every day I did it again. Yet one day I didn't. Looking back there really wasn't anything special about that day. It was just like so many others. Why then? I still don't know.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Adulterer sounds worse than wayward. It's almost like wayward implies you can return home. Adulterer? One and done. You are always an Adulterer. Cheater? Yeah, ok. Former cheater? Still loaded.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

How about disloyal, bfree? I have seen AC use that term instead of wayward.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Doesn't seem accurate enough.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Maricha75 said:


> How about disloyal, bfree? I have seen AC use that term instead of wayward.


That is a little better I suppose.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

bfree said:


> Interesting. I agree with you in this respect. Again, not having been a cheater....
> 
> 
> can we find a better word btw. Not to go off on a tangent but I'm going to go off on a tangent. I am really getting tired of the words cheater and wayward. I'm starting to feel insulted using those words and I'm not even someone they are used to describe. Isn't there a better way to refer to people who have committed adultery? I just don't equate those terms when I think of the people I've come to know and respect both here and in my personal life.
> ...


Suggestion:

Perfidious


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> Adulterer sounds worse than wayward. It's almost like wayward implies you can return home. Adulterer? One and done. You are always an Adulterer. Cheater? Yeah, ok. Former cheater? Still loaded.


Wayward sound like an adventure, Adulterer sounds like a sinner anxious to find a special corner in heII.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

2ntnuf said:


> Suggestion:
> 
> Perfidious


That's more flowery but still doesn't hit the mark. I just cannot "reconcile" using those terms when I think of some of the most important and respected people I know. I just can't do it.


----------



## antechomai (Oct 4, 2013)

Lon said:


> Wayward sound like an adventure, Adulterer sounds like a sinner anxious to find a special corner in heII.


I can't find the correct word.
"xyz" challenged.

There, it moves it from sin, past adventure, into a protected group.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I'm xyzzy challenged.


----------



## Served Cold (May 25, 2014)

Rookie4 said:


> I've been asked to start a thread about the , so-called, "fog. So here goes.
> Do you believe in it?
> I do not, except as infatuation, and an excuse mechanism, that allows people to be further deceived, and evade responsibility for their actions.
> What do you think?



Holy smokes....

Cheating is a deliberate choice. Cheaters cheat because that's what they want to do. 

Seriously, if it were a fog, how come cheaters clearly go to extremes in not getting caught. If there is such a thing as fog how do they manage a double life?

Those who lie, know they are lying. They're not under some fog like spell, they are aware of the risks and are proactive in lessening the risk of being caught.

Cheaters are gamblers who stack the deck. That's not a fog, it's a conscious act.


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> Doesn't seem accurate enough.


Disloyal doesn't seem accurate enough?? So, you would call someone who has not had any sort of sexual contact with the OM/OW an adulterer/adulteress? Sorry, but I would completely disagree with that. Which is why "wayward" and "disloyal" fit. Disloyal, more so. One who is disloyal is not honoring the vows, whether emotionally or physically. But one who has not had physical contact... more specifically, has not had any kind of secular contact, is disloyal, not an adulterer.


----------



## antechomai (Oct 4, 2013)

On a more serious note.

I know my EX would sit and play this one song over and over on the piano for months.

I finally asked "why do you play that?"
"It was his favorite song."

I think in the affair there is a chemical fog, but when it extends months afterwards, it might be loss and mourning.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

antechomai said:


> On a more serious note.
> 
> I know my EX would sit and play this one song over and over on the piano for months.
> 
> ...


That's the fog. Or leerrv(love ).


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



antechomai said:


> On a more serious note.
> 
> I know my EX would sit and play this one song over and over on the piano for months.
> 
> ...


It is mourning, but what the fog does is prevent them from realizing how hurtful it is to a committed spouse, and how inappropriate and damaging that extramarital attachment is to their marriage.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I never suggested adulterer for an EA. I'm actually fine with the term wayward. 

disloyal is too broad. you can be considered disloyal for not supporting your spouse in an argument with a third party for instance. It doesn't step up to the level of an EA or PA.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Maricha75 (May 8, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



clipclop2 said:


> I never suggested adulterer for an EA. I'm actually fine with the term wayward.
> 
> disloyal is too broad. you can be considered disloyal for not supporting your spouse in an argument with a third party for instance. It doesn't step up to the level of an EA or PA.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


The problem, here, though, is that EA and PA end up in the same group when talking about infidelity. Maybe the term "unfaithful" would be better? But that might be too broad, too.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

Adulterer is good enough for God... I am not smarter than Him.


----------



## meson (May 19, 2011)

Maricha75 said:


> The problem, here, though, is that EA and PA end up in the same group when talking about infidelity. Maybe the term "unfaithful" would be better? But that might be too broad, too.


Unfaithful is the term I use for my actions. I wasn't an adulterer, I didn't cheat but I did unfaithfully invest time and actions toward another woman.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

In my legal jurisdiction, adultery is qualified by the court as sexual intercourse with someone other than your spouse. An EA is not considered adultery. It matters if you wish to divorce since adultery is one condition that can be used to waive the 12 month waiting period after seperation for the court to grant a divorce decree.

My ex willingly signed an affidavit admitting she adulterated even though she maintains in her mind it wasn't adultery since she was checked out hence the marriage was only a paper document, the actual marriage was over. She was still in the fog, and insistent that she wanted divorce so I didn't procrastinate on that. Her lawyer obviously didn't think it made a big deal one way or the other.

Oh, and in my mind any form of disloyalty or unfaithfulness is cheating if there is any element of deceit or manipulation, be it an EA, a PA or just withholding needs. Cheating simply means not playing by the agreed upon rules.


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Lon said:


> In my legal jurisdiction, adultery is qualified by the court as sexual intercourse with someone other than your spouse. An EA is not considered adultery. It matters if you wish to divorce since adultery is one condition that can be used to waive the 12 month waiting period after seperation for the court to grant a divorce decree.
> 
> My ex willingly signed an affidavit admitting she adulterated even though she maintains in her mind it wasn't adultery since she was checked out hence the marriage was only a paper document, the actual marriage was over. She was still in the fog, and insistent that she wanted divorce so I didn't procrastinate on that. Her lawyer obviously didn't think it made a big deal one way or the other.
> 
> Oh, and in my mind any form of disloyalty or unfaithfulness is cheating if there is any element of deceit or manipulation, be it an EA, a PA or just withholding needs. Cheating simply means not playing by the agreed upon rules.


You must add, "to gain an advantage", for that to be true by the definition.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

Chronicles 7:14*- If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land

Maybe we can call those that atoned for their transgression and healed the ones they betrayed redeemed spouses.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

God's forgiveness isn't the same as a betrayed spouse's forgiveness.


----------



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> By ClipClop
> God's forgiveness isn't the same as a betrayed spouse's forgiveness


.

Maybe not but both forgiveness do away with revenge and negative thoughts and actions against the WS. That releases the BS from negative emotions, thoughts, and actions within himself/herself and that helps the BS!


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> But YOU were the one that mentioned DSs who bring up being foggy as a reason/excuse/explanation and if this was the case that the LS should run. I was agreeing with that, but have never actually seen that nor can foresee it ever being common at all. DSs don't need excuses because they are in the fog and can't perceive themselves as doing any wrong (despite the fact, and I truly hope you and I can agree on atleast this, they are doing wrong).


I think, regardless of the "fog" that most, if not all WS's , at some level know they are doing wrong, even unremorseful ones will make excuses for themselves. If they didn't believe that they were doing wrong, why make excuses?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Served Cold said:


> Holy smokes....
> 
> Cheating is a deliberate choice. Cheaters cheat because that's what they want to do.
> 
> ...


You might as well forget it. Posters will come up with a million creative reasons you are wrong.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Rookie do you realize that comments like that are passive-aggressive?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> Rookie do you realize that comments like that are passive-aggressive?


But accurate


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

So what? And at the expense of what? You snipe and make it difficult for people not to want to defend themselves but you have this little out that you didn't attack anyone specifically. That is why passive aggressive is so distasteful. It is a ***** way of dealing with things. It reminds me of gaslighting a bit.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Actually I agree with Served Cold's post, but I'm sure I'm in the minority. But then again, I'm an advocate of personal responsibility , while most posters will always leave themselves an "out". Which is pretty much my opinion of the "fog'. It's pretty amazing how unfoggy cheaters can be when it looks like they are going to get caught. But of course, that very nebulousness is just another characteristic of the "fog'. It reminds me of Catch 22.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> So what? And at the expense of what? You snipe and make it difficult for people not to want to defend themselves but you have this little out that you didn't attack anyone specifically. That is why passive aggressive is so distasteful. It is a ***** way of dealing with things. It reminds me of gaslighting a bit.


I really don't care if you approve or not. If it isn't the truth , then say so. Actually, CC, it really doesn't matter . This is one of those threads where nobody is going to change anybody else's mind, so it isn't worth the arguing. You can believe what you want to.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> I really don't care if you approve or not. If it isn't the truth , then say so. Actually, CC, it really doesn't matter . This is one of those threads where nobody is going to change anybody else's mind, so it isn't worth the arguing. You can believe what you want to.


See that's the point. When Mr Blunt and I debated neither one of us changed the other's mind. But we had a cordial discussion where we both expressed our views and finally agreed to disagree. I don't agree with some of what clip says but I can understand what is being said and respect that. Respect my opinions and I'll respect yours even if we disagree. And through the process maybe we can all learn something.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

I'm afraid you aren't taking responsibility for your own behavior Rookie. You do things like this and someone replies defensively and you blame them for walking into the bullet instead of seeing that the bullet should have never been fired in the first place.

I hate to say it but you are doing exactly what you claim is unacceptable for others. And I'm only saying it because you don't appear willing to examine what you are doing.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Bfree, I'm shocked and dismayed that you don't agree with everything I say. I panicked when Rookie was going to close the thread because I was sure I was inches away from winning this thing and taking over the whole tri-state area!


----------



## ScarletBegonias (Jun 26, 2012)

EI said:


> ... the fog did not cause my cheating. Cheating caused the fog (feel good endorphins.) I liked the fog and I chose to continuously return to the source. ...


This actually makes the most sense to me out of every thing else I've read.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

EI has a way of speaking elaborately and yet getting her point across in a very direct manner. I wish I could chain her to her computer and have her post here 24/7 but there's this little problem...she has a life outside of TAM.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> I'm afraid you aren't taking responsibility for your own behavior Rookie. You do things like this and someone replies defensively and you blame them for walking into the bullet instead of seeing that the bullet should have never been fired in the first place.
> 
> I hate to say it but you are doing exactly what you claim is unacceptable for others. And I'm only saying it because you don't appear willing to examine what you are doing.


I'm afraid that you are trying to start an argument, so I will only state the obvious. Name another poster who has repeatedly asked for fair play for all posters. Name another poster who has repeatedly stated that everyone is entitled to their opinion. Name another poster who has started a thread specifically inviting WS's to visit TAM. Name another poster who has stated in this and other threads that I'm only voicing my opinion. I won;t wait, because you can't.


----------



## SamuraiJack (May 30, 2014)

I grabbed this from another site. Its basically a quick distillation of the chemical process involved in affairs.
I THINK it might be some folks closer to a common area. 

I am of the opinion that affairs come in several different flavors.
This may help explain some of the seemingly out of control ones.

Anatomy of an Affair - The Chemistry of Love - Marriage AdvocatesMarriage Advocates


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

EI said:


> Try this on for size, rookie. I agree with every word of Served Cold's post. If you've read any of my posts in this thread you will not find one that contradicts that statement. I have repeatedly stated that the fog did not cause my cheating. Cheating caused the fog (feel good endorphins.) I liked the fog and I chose to continuously return to the source.
> 
> So, who are you referring to when you say that "Posters will come up with a million creative reasons that you are wrong."? Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel as though you're referring to me. Even in my earliest days on TAM, when I was in a much different state of mind than I am now, I always owned the fact that I chose to have an affair. I never said that it "just happened," or that "one thing led to another." I never said that poor boundaries were to blame, or that I was a victim of the fog, or a victim of the OM, (quite the contrary) or any other kind of magic spell.
> 
> What I was a victim of, was a miserable marriage and a husband who, for far too long, refused to do a damn thing about it. Now, if you want to try to pick THAT apart, go for it, because I'll take on anyone who wants to challenge that. I did everything I possibly could have, short of setting myself on fire, to try to fix my marriage, before my A. When those extensive and exhaustive efforts failed, what I didn't do was wait until I could get a divorce before I began a new relationship. And, you know what, I told B1 that I wasn't going to wait. But, that doesn't make what I did right. Now, how much more "owning my choice" and not "blaming the fog" can I give?


My post was not directed at you, nor at anyone in particular.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> I maintain that it was in her character. If it were not she wouldnt have been there in the first place.


So, now you know my ex wife better than I do?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

SamuraiJack said:


> I grabbed this from another site. Its basically a quick distillation of the chemical process involved in affairs.
> I THINK it might be some folks closer to a common area.
> 
> I am of the opinion that affairs come in several different flavors.
> ...


I have no problem with any of this. I had no problem with it the first 20 times posters linked it or related it. I repeatedly said so. But agreeing with this , does not constitute an automatic belief in the "fog". does it? If by "fog" you were only talking about attraction and pleasure, I would probably be inclined to agree. But that is not all posters are saying, is it? They are also attributing to the "fog" other qualities that I do not believe it possesses. I agree that affairs come in all shapes and sizes. I also agree that some posters use the "fog" as an excuse and others do not. I also agree that some posters use the "fog" to explain the WS state of mind, during the affair, and sometimes the BS state of mind after the affair.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

I think, perhaps, a large part of the problem is that posters are discussing too many different aspects of the "fog', at the same time. So....lets be specific.
How many posters believe that the "fog' is an altered state of mind? It would help to identify yourself as a WS, BS or bystander.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Rookie, you didn't address my calling you out. I'm not trying to start an argument. I made observations that you side stepped. Why? You call for fair play on one hand but don't play nicely with others yourself. Why? 

You fire shots and want to get off scott free like the waywards you condemn. I'm asking you to face the truth that you are combative but in a way that lets you and only you not have to accept responsibility.

I know you don't care what anyone else thinks. That also gets you off the hook.

Rookie's get out of jail free card.

Man, I tried. I think I will put you on ignore because while I agree with most of you on this topic I find you take the fun out of talking with the others.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

clipclop2 said:


> Rookie, you didn't address my calling you out. I'm not trying to start an argument. I made observations that you side stepped. Why? You call for fair play on one hand but don't play nicely with others yourself. Why?
> 
> You fire shots and want to get off scott free like the waywards you condemn. I'm asking you to face the truth that you are combative but in a way that lets you and only you not have to accept responsibility.
> 
> ...


 Clipclop, I believe that if you want to look, I have already admitted on other threads that I am combative, and many posters already knew that. If attacked, I defend. You are prefectly free to "ignore" me if you choose, but if you want me to respond to you"calling me out' the you need to practice what you preach. I will answer all of your questions if you will answer all of mine.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

BTW, if you look, you will find that if I am wrong, and it is proven so, I am mature enough to admit it, and have done so. How about you?


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> I think, perhaps, a large part of the problem is that posters are discussing too many different aspects of the "fog', at the same time. So....lets be specific.
> How many posters believe that the "fog' is an altered state of mind? It would help to identify yourself as a WS, BS or bystander.


BS here, I think there might be some sort of altered state but it maybe more from infatuation, I am not sure.

they say a BS can be in some sort of FOG too... like not know what to do... indication, panic, crushed.... and probably not the right term to be used here.

I never like the term and maybe it is used wrong some times.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

BTW, I have apologized to other posters either privately or publically, whenever I have been proven wrong or insensitive. You and I have not interacted much . I have both agreed and disagreed with other posters, but if they are honest, Bfree, EI, Blunt and several other old time posters know that I have done so. And am perfectly willing to admit to my numerous failings. Lol I know of few who have more.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

EI said:


> Thank you, bfree, I genuinely appreciate the sentiment. But, I actually have something waaaaay better than a life, these days, I have a grandson! 💗 My mom always used to say "If you think you love your children, you can't even imagine how much you're going to love your grandchildren!
> 
> I have the awesome "job" of hanging out with this little boy, a couple of days a week, while his Mommy is at work.
> 
> ...


My son had curls, too. Many , many , many years ago. I truly miss having young children. My grand child isn't old enough to play, yet. But it is something I am very much looking forward to.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> I think, regardless of the "fog" that most, if not all WS's , at some level know they are doing wrong, even unremorseful ones will make excuses for themselves. If they didn't believe that they were doing wrong, why make excuses?


path of least resistance?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

I have heard it said that you get your hair from your mothers side, and it must be true, because my first wife had curly hair. The slightest humidity and she would frizz-up like a cashmere sweater, and when my son was a toddler, he looked like a minature, brunette, version of Carrot Top. Adorable. Sweetie, on the other hand, had straight hair and my daughters have the same.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> path of least resistance?


Good idea, and very possible.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> I have no problem with any of this. I had no problem with it the first 20 times posters linked it or related it. I repeatedly said so. But agreeing with this , does not constitute an automatic belief in the "fog". does it? If by "fog" you were only talking about attraction and pleasure, I would probably be inclined to agree. But that is not all posters are saying, is it? They are also attributing to the "fog" other qualities that I do not believe it possesses. I agree that affairs come in all shapes and sizes. I also agree that some posters use the "fog" as an excuse and others do not. I also agree that some posters use the "fog" to explain the WS state of mind, during the affair, and sometimes the BS state of mind after the affair.


Maybe it would have helped the conversation if someone posted this early on in this thread:

From Dictionary.com:

metaphor
[met-uh-fawr, -fer]

noun
1.
a figure of speech in which a term or phrase is applied to something to which it is not literally applicable in order to suggest a resemblance, as in “A mighty fortress is our God.”.

2.
something used, or regarded as being used, to represent something else; emblem; symbol.

(hint: "fog" as the way it is used commonly on this website is a metaphor)


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> Maybe it would have helped the conversation if someone posted this early on in this thread:
> 
> From Dictionary.com:
> 
> ...


Probably so. A metaphor can mean anything the speaker wants it to mean. My GF says that "her back hurts" to mean that she is horny and we need to leave off whatever we are doing and go somewhere and fool around. God help us if she ever actually has a back ache.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Although, Lon, when people are describing the "fog" sometimes they are speaking metaphysically instead of metaphorically. LOL


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> Probably so. A metaphor can mean anything the speaker wants it to mean. My GF says that "her back hurts" to mean that she is horny and we need to leave off whatever we are doing and go somewhere and fool around. God help us if she ever actually has a back ache.


If back pain is a metaphor for sex with your GF, you are doing it wrong 

But that would be a good example of code.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> Although, Lon, when people are describing the "fog" sometimes they are speaking metaphysically instead of metaphorically. LOL


On TAM, in 99.8% of cases (with the exceptional .2% being this thread) it is the metaphorical view of the word fog that is being used.

edit: though I'm surprised someone that seems so abstractionally befuddled as you would bring up metaphysics.


----------



## SamuraiJack (May 30, 2014)

Either way, I think we all agree that in SOME cases, the WS can be affected by a very difficult to describe condition that obscures their ability to see truth.

But I whole heartedly agree that some people scapegoat it for all it's worth. I imagine that some would be more vulnerable to it depending on the mindset. 
Walking Disney followers come to mind...that "love is so powerful you cant fight it " mindset.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> On TAM, in 99.8% of cases (with the exceptional .2% being this thread) it is the metaphorical view of the word fog that is being used.
> 
> edit: though I'm surprised someone that seems so abstractionally befuddled as you would bring up metaphysics.


See it does no good to try to be nice, if posters will still insult you. But , at least I did try.


----------



## nightmare01 (Oct 3, 2014)

In a sense _the fog_ might be the lie a WS tells themselves to justify their actions. Maybe they see the destruction their affair caused and so want to believe that the affair had some deeper meaning than just bumping uglies for the fun of it.

Sometimes the fog is the remaining feelings the WS has developed for their AP. IMO most of the time affairs are real relationships (with the exception of ONS), and there are feelings involved that take awhile to dissipate. So the fog may be those lingering feelings.

I hope that those feelings eventually go away. No BS can ever be sure they do.. and I think that's one of the things we have to deal with.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

nightmare01 said:


> In a sense _the fog_ might be the lie a WS tells themselves to justify their actions. Maybe they see the destruction their affair caused and so want to believe that the affair had some deeper meaning than just bumping uglies for the fun of it.
> 
> Sometimes the fog is the remaining feelings the WS has developed for their AP. IMO most of the time affairs are real relationships (with the exception of ONS), and there are feelings involved that take awhile to dissipate. So the fog may be those lingering feelings.
> 
> I hope that those feelings eventually go away. No BS can ever be sure they do.. and I think that's one of the things we have to deal with.


I think you are right in the case of LTR's. It would seem that there has to be at least some emotional investment, besides the slap and tickle.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> See it does no good to try to be nice, if posters will still insult you. But , at least I did try.


What? If my saying that you seem abstractionally befuddled was an insult to you, then sorry. It wasn't meant to insult, it was in jest about bringing metaphysics into the discussion, particularly for someone like you that seems to like absolutes and scientific facts.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

I can only use my own situation as a guide, but I think that is one of the hardest obstacles a WS has to overcome, is explaining his/her feelings for the AP, to his/her BS. This is where some people use the "fog' as an excuse, to avoid having to explain these feelings to their BS or to "minimize " it. Like old Mary Poppins, the "fog" can be used as a spoon full of sugar.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> What? If my saying that you seem abstractionally befuddled was an insult to you, then sorry. It wasn't meant to insult, it was in jest about bringing metaphysics into the discussion, particularly for someone like you that seems to like absolutes and scientific facts.


Ok, not a problem. Sometimes it's hard to type a joke.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

I'm a BS. My ex W wasn't in any fog. She was just a cruel selfish promiscuous woman. I've never experienced the fog myself (aside from drug or alcohol induced fog.) I can't even say I've ever been totally infatuated because as much as I feel my budding relationship with my wife helped keep me from backsliding back into drugs and alcohol I was on high alert due to trust issues leftover from my first marriage. As "in love" as I was I was logically and ruthlessly evaluating her and our relationship continuously. All of my knowledge and beliefs about the fog come from my reading authors like Dr Helen Fisher and directly from redeemed spouses (yup I'm using it) like Morrigan and from other BS's like Beowulf. I believe it exists. I do not believe it is an excuse in any way shape or form. I feel it's just another unfortunate complication in what is almost always a very complicated situation when infidelity is present.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Rookie, I may have missed it but did you exfww (sweetie) use the term FOG as to try an explain her affair?
they way i read it she didn't but i may have missed it

I think some WS that can compartmentalize very well can stay out of the "fog"
again i may be using the term completely wrong here


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> I can only use my own situation as a guide, but I think that is one of the hardest obstacles a WS has to overcome, is explaining his/her feelings for the AP, to his/her BS. This is where some people use the "fog' as an excuse, to avoid having to explain these feelings to their BS or to "minimize " it. Like old Mary Poppins, the "fog" can be used as a spoon full of sugar.


When I was trying to communicate with my ex during/after her PAs, she was trying to explain that she had no feelings but of course I knew that it was not entirely true - either way I know now that if I was cheated on again I would not be an audience for my cheating partner to talk about her "rewarding" feelings for her affair.

Though I think I get what you are saying about the cheater using those rewarding feelings as a spoonful of sugar. My ex used the same kind of logic when she was leaving me - instead of being sad about the end of our marriage, about the hardship we both were facing because of her choices, the vast developmental obstacles she was placing before our child and the fact that she was acting completely without morals - she was elated, whereas I was consumed with grief.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

bfree said:


> I'm a BS. My ex W wasn't in any fog. *She was just a cruel selfish promiscuous woman*. I've never experienced the fog myself (aside from drug or alcohol induced fog.) I can't even say I've ever been totally infatuated because as much as I feel my budding relationship with my wife helped keep me from backsliding back into drugs and alcohol I was on high alert due to trust issues leftover from my first marriage. As "in love" as I was I was logically and ruthlessly evaluating her and our relationship continuously. All of my knowledge and beliefs about the fog come from my reading authors like Dr Helen Fisher and directly from redeemed spouses (yup I'm using it) like Morrigan and from other BS's like Beowulf. I believe it exists. I do not believe it is an excuse in any way shape or form. I feel it's just another unfortunate complication in what is almost always a very complicated situation when infidelity is present.


So then basically her treatment of you was your just deserts for choosing to marry someone who was clearly not marriage material?


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

convert said:


> Rookie, I may have missed it but did you exfww (sweaty) use the term FOG as to try an explain her affair?
> they way i read it she didn't but i may have missed it
> 
> *I think some WS that can compartmentalize very well can stay out of the "fog"*
> again i may be using the term completely wrong here


I think compartmentalizing is actually a common coping method for dealing with cognitive dissonance and is more often a way for them to remain IN the fog.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Lon said:


> I think compartmentalizing is actually a common coping method for dealing with cognitive dissonance and is more often a way for them to remain IN the fog.


good point, I had it backwards or was thinking the wayward spouse that compartmentalize tends to make it seem the marriage is good, well they sometimes are harder to catch anyway


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Lon said:


> So then basically her treatment of you was your just deserts for choosing to marry someone who was clearly not marriage material?


Yeah, pretty much. I was reckless choosing her and my people picker was malfunctioning.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



convert said:


> good point, I had it backwards or was thinking the wayward spouse that compartmentalize tends to make it seem the marriage is good, well they sometimes are harder to catch anyway


I agree, waywards that are good at compartmentalizing can certainly make bad decisions convincingly look rational. We may not suspect there is an ounce of fogginess, because we can't peer into the compartment where they store all the chaos.

Or it could just be because their is no fog and they just lack morals and compassion.


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

convert said:


> Rookie, I may have missed it but did you exfww (*sweaty)* use the term FOG as to try an explain her affair?
> they way i read it she didn't but i may have missed it
> 
> I think some WS that can compartmentalize very well can stay out of the "fog"
> again i may be using the term completely wrong here


Ok. This made me laugh out loud. He has called her sweetie and you said sweaty and this took on a whole different meaning and the picture that came to mind made me laugh.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Squeakr said:


> Ok. This made me laugh out loud. He has called her sweetie and you said sweaty and this took on a whole different meaning and the picture that came to mind made me laugh.


sorry, I fixed it

even when i spell it right it is wrong


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

convert said:


> sorry, I fixed it


I enjoyed it, as I needed the laugh and that hit the spot. :smthumbup::rofl:


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

bfree said:


> Chronicles 7:14*- If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land
> 
> Maybe we can call those that atoned for their transgression and healed the ones they betrayed redeemed spouses.


Did the BS touch the tassel of their cloak?  Sure...


----------



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> *Originally Posted by SamuraiJack *
> Either way, I think we all agree that in SOME cases, the WS can be affected by a very difficult to describe condition that obscures their ability to see truth.
> 
> But I whole heartedly agree that some people scapegoat it for all it's worth. I imagine that some would be more vulnerable to it depending on the mindset.
> ...


*What a powerful, truthful, honest, brave statement made by EI!*

Although my wife’s A was different than EI I can tell you that EI’s statement of 
*“I chose not to allow the truth to get in the way of my fog.”*
Is solid truth, at least for my situation?

My wife was fully aware when she made her free will choices to get involved in an A, no excuses. After she got in deep for a long time she was whacked. There have been a lot of definitions of the Fog on this thread so I will give mine.* As I said, after my wife made free will cognizant choices to get involved then, she was FULL GOOSE BOZO! She made as about as much sense as Charles Manson! You all can use the word Fog but mine is FULL GOOSE BOZO!*


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

convert said:


> Rookie, I may have missed it but did you exfww (sweetie) use the term FOG as to try an explain her affair?
> they way i read it she didn't but i may have missed it
> 
> I think some WS that can compartmentalize very well can stay out of the "fog"
> again i may be using the term completely wrong here


Convert, Sweetie was probably the least "foggy" person on earth. Her anger was too much for her to have any infatuation, and she used the affair as a weapon, against me. She treated me pretty badly and my one consolation is that she treated the OM even worse. She called him a "worm".


----------



## 2ntnuf (Jul 14, 2012)

Mr Blunt said:


> .
> 
> Maybe not but both forgiveness do away with revenge and negative thoughts and actions against the WS. That releases the BS from negative emotions, thoughts, and actions within himself/herself and that helps the BS!


The problem is, you aren't addressing the ongoing, lifelong struggles with anxiety, PTSD, abandonment issues, etc. You are only addressing the anger the BS feels towards the WS. It's much tougher to forget the things done that caused lifelong damage. 

I think you mean letting go of the desire to payback the WS? I'm not sure, because moving on, in some cases, isn't quite possible in the standard sense of the term. Those folks may always feel resentment toward their FWS. 

If the BS cannot release those feelings or recover from the damage caused, they may not be able to forgive and forget. They may always find that they have an anxiety attack when they see the former spouse. 

What then? How does one reconcile that? Move away? How will that help when the anxiety attacks and ensuing resentment will be there again in other circumstances that trigger memories of the original offenses that caused the damage? 

This is easier if two have found they can talk and get past issues worked out. I don't mean reconcile their marriage, just their issues. In other words, at least agree to disagree. Otherwise, I don't think it's likely that a person can completely forgive. I think there will always be resentment. I think folks just don't talk about it.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> When I was trying to communicate with my ex during/after her PAs, she was trying to explain that she had no feelings but of course I knew that it was not entirely true - either way I know now that if I was cheated on again I would not be an audience for my cheating partner to talk about her "rewarding" feelings for her affair.
> 
> Though I think I get what you are saying about the cheater using those rewarding feelings as a spoonful of sugar. My ex used the same kind of logic when she was leaving me - instead of being sad about the end of our marriage, about the hardship we both were facing because of her choices, the vast developmental obstacles she was placing before our child and the fact that she was acting completely without morals - she was elated, whereas I was consumed with grief.


Well, I'm sorry to hear that, but it isn't like Sweetie at all. She received no pleasure from her affair, unless it would be the same pleasure that a bad kid derives from pulling the wings off insects. After her anger cooled, she was grief stricken about what she had done, and that acted as motivation for her personal improvement. She is a wonderful person now, and I have a very good friendship with her.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> I agree, waywards that are good at compartmentalizing can certainly make bad decisions convincingly look rational. We may not suspect there is an ounce of fogginess, because we can't peer into the compartment where they store all the chaos.
> 
> Or it could just be because their is no fog and they just lack morals and compassion.


Well, Sweetie didn't lack for morals, but her morality was the same as the Spanish Inquisition. And, at times , she could be very compassionate, but when she was angry , she was seldom completely rational. So go figure.


----------



## Lon (Jun 6, 2011)

Rookie4 said:


> Well, I'm sorry to hear that, but it isn't like Sweetie at all. She received no pleasure from her affair, unless it would be the same pleasure that a bad kid derives from pulling the wings off insects. After her anger cooled, she was grief stricken about what she had done, and that acted as motivation for her personal improvement. She is a wonderful person now, and I have a very good friendship with her.


That sadistic kind of pleasure/reward is specifically the kind I was talking about. An affair isn't a positive thing, but the brain chemicals one can experience while in an affair are the same kind that people can get from actual positive experiences. The physiology doesn't really know the difference, it just knows when rewarding sensations happen. It also knows when guilt and painful sensations happen.

I guess I really can't relate to your story about your GF - so she was just a bad person, or a person lacking certain morals before her affair, but you either didn't know this or else it didn't sway you from having relationship with her. Then she had affair because she had anger about things? but she was completely aware and not in the fog or compartmentalizing, she just did it and had no regard for the damage it caused you or your relationship. Then at some point after she suddenly, without outside influence, turned on some morals, felt the guilt, worked at changing herself and adopted these morals that she just didn't have before? What happened in her world to trigger all that, if you say the affair was simply a capacity of her previous character? What caused her anger to cool? Now you have a good relationship, would you say you trust her now? Did you trust her before and if so do you consider what she did a betrayal of that trust?


----------



## Mr Blunt (Jul 18, 2012)

> Originally Posted by Mr Blunt
> 
> Maybe not but both forgiveness do away with revenge and negative thoughts and actions against the WS. That releases the BS from negative emotions, thoughts, and actions within himself/herself and that helps the BS!
> 
> ...



I think you are right. I do not think that forgiveness will always resolve anxiety and abandonment issues. I say this because my sister’s ex-husband ruined her credit then got involved with another woman. She no longer has any resentment (anger-ill will) towards her ex-husband but she does have anxiety over financial issues as she now has remaining bad credit. In another case the daughter has no ill feeling for her father but she is affected by being abandonment when she was 3 years old. *The anxiety and abandonment does cause damage but the one who has been done wrong does not have anger and ill will towards the offender*.




> I think you mean letting go of the desire to payback the WS? I'm not sure, because moving on, in some cases, isn't quite possible in the standard sense of the term. Those folks may always feel resentment (anger—bitterness—hatred) toward their FWS


. 

I mean letting go of the desire to payback the WS *AND* the letting go of hatred, and bitterness, of the WS. My sister has none of this for her ExWS but instead has apathy for him.





I don't think it's likely that a person can completely forgive. I think there will always be resentment. I think folks just don't talk about it.

*This is where we disagree. True forgiveness gives up resentments-anger-ill-will regardless if the offender deserves it or not.*


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lon said:


> That sadistic kind of pleasure/reward is specifically the kind I was talking about. An affair isn't a positive thing, but the brain chemicals one can experience while in an affair are the same kind that people can get from actual positive experiences. The physiology doesn't really know the difference, it just knows when rewarding sensations happen. It also knows when guilt and painful sensations happen.
> 
> I guess I really can't relate to your story about your GF - so she was just a bad person, or a person lacking certain morals before her affair, but you either didn't know this or else it didn't sway you from having relationship with her. Then she had affair because she had anger about things? but she was completely aware and not in the fog or compartmentalizing, she just did it and had no regard for the damage it caused you or your relationship. Then at some point after she suddenly, without outside influence, turned on some morals, felt the guilt, worked at changing herself and adopted these morals that she just didn't have before? What happened in her world to trigger all that, if you say the affair was simply a capacity of her previous character? What caused her anger to cool? Now you have a good relationship, would you say you trust her now? Did you trust her before and if so do you consider what she did a betrayal of that trust?


I guess I have a hard time explaining her to an outsider, but she has always been a very moral person, but her morality was that of the Old Testament which preaches revenge than the New which preaches forgiveness. Whenever she felt "wronged" she was all about getting even. and she held a grudge longer than anyone I know. 
On the positive side, she was and is dropdead gorgeous, very loving, passionate and totally loyal or WAS totally loyal. She felt (with some reason) that we had drifted apart, I didn't love her, and my ambition was more important than her. In truth, she had every reason to feel that way. I was not a very empathetic husband , at that time. I was looking forward to fame and fortune. So, she got her revenge, but didn't like it, after she got it, and she lost the sense of the moral highground that she had immediately before the affair. She realized that her anger and sense of entitlement had caused the affair, and not my job or me. After that, the deluge of grief and self loathing, because she has always held herself to a much higher standard than other people..


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

immensely prideful.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> Convert, Sweetie was probably the least "foggy" person on earth. Her anger was too much for her to have any infatuation, and she used the affair as a weapon, against me. She treated me pretty badly and my one consolation is that she treated the OM even worse. She called him a "worm".


Rookie you have stated you wish you handled the situation after your DD a little different (in hindsight).
But I think you did ok with the circumstances.

you went balls to wall straight to devoice and I admire some of the guys and gals here that can do that sometimes.

I must admit I was a little disappointed when your R did not work out but you are in a great place now.

I wonder if she was "foggy" for lake of a better term, things might of went different?


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)




----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

convert said:


> Rookie you have stated you wish you handled the situation after your DD a little different (in hindsight).
> But I think you did ok with the circumstances.
> 
> you went balls to wall straight to devoice and I admire some of the guys and gals here that can do that sometimes.
> ...


I don't think so, Convert. It might have gone differently, if I had been a little more foggy, but she was already willing to do anything to get me back.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

pidge70 said:


>


My GF has a cat that looks just like this one, and seems to have the same attitude. We will be in bed, doing the dirty, and the damn thing will attack my feet. I HATE IT!!


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Well, everybody has had a good rant, nobody has convinced anybody, one way or the other, and this thread seems to be stuck in park. 
Soooo, In conclusion, how do I poll posters to see how many believe in the "fog", and how many feel it is bushwa? IDK how to do polls, on TAM. So what if I just ask how many posters are (FB's) or (NFB's)? (Fog believers or Non fog believers). Would that be OK?


----------



## skype (Sep 25, 2013)

Rookie:
Start a new thread, and under "additional options," there is a link to post a poll.

But I do not think you will change your mind even if you are the only one who votes in favor of the no-fog option.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Rookie, I may be wrong but one of the reasons for your stance on this topic is that you and sweetie were never in the fog?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

convert said:


> Rookie, I may be wrong but one of the reasons for your stance on this topic is that you and sweetie were never in the fog?


That might have some small influence, Convert, but I've always been a believer in personal responsibility, so anything that seems to contradict that idea , I would be suspicious of.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

skype said:


> Rookie:
> Start a new thread, and under "additional options," there is a link to post a poll.
> 
> But I do not think you will change your mind even if you are the only one who votes in favor of the no-fog option.


Thank you for the info, Skype. I am not looking to change anyones's mind or have my mind changed. I am just curious.


----------



## Lone Wolf (Sep 22, 2013)

I'm late joining the discussion here, but I believe in it. I'm a BS and I believe that my ex WW was in a fog. In fact, she may still be. Not justifying her actions nor making excuses, she still had her rationale and she is responsible for her actions, but her judgement was definitely out of line with her character from the choices she chose in the end, which destroyed our marriage and our family. You've probably all heard the same story and symptoms from many others, so this is no shock to those that have experienced it. She changed from a sweet loving person to a vile conceited person that I hardly knew literally from one day to the next. I'm not trying to convince anyone that the fog is real or not, just that I believe in it because of the experience I had with my situation, which basically tore my life apart.
By the way, I do not believe the fog caused the affair, but I do believe it was a result of it, and it only caused her to go deeper.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lone Wolf said:


> I'm late joining the discussion here, but I believe in it. I'm a BS and I believe that my ex WW was in a fog. In fact, she may still be. Not justifying her actions nor making excuses, she still had her rationale and she is responsible for her actions, but her judgement was definitely out of line with her character from the choices she chose in the end, which destroyed our marriage and our family. You've probably all heard the same story and symptoms from many others, so this is no shock to those that have experienced it. She changed from a sweet loving person to a vile conceited person that I hardly knew literally from one day to the next. I'm not trying to convince anyone that the fog is real or not, just that I believe in it because of the experience I had with my situation, which basically tore my life apart.
> By the way, I do not believe the fog caused the affair, but I do believe it was a result of it, and it only caused her to go deeper.


Well, Lone Wolf, you are in good company, as it seems that many others feel the same as you. I respect your opinion, but do not share it.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Well, regardless of whether the "fog" exists or not, discussing it certainly seems to have some power, doesn't it? . Several angry outbursts, attempted intimidations, some fractured TAM friendships, a few troll posts, and a lot of angst. 
It's good when we are required to consider other opinions, but always remember that this is just a forum, and isn't a philosophy final. LOL My thanks to all posters who participated, regardless of your opinions. It's been interesting.


----------



## Lone Wolf (Sep 22, 2013)

Thank you, Rookie. I haven't made many posts since joining, that was when everything was falling apart in my life and I was also working crazy hours from day to night. In hindsight, I probably should have posted more so that I could get direct advice. However, from the little free time I did have, I was able to read several stories here and from the advice and encouragement to other BS in similar situations from all the wonderful and helpful people here, I was able to slowly piece together my life again. It's not perfect and I am still recovering, but I am getting there. At least I've finally got a little courage to start making a few posts.


----------



## Jasel (Jan 8, 2013)

Haven't even bothered reading this thread, based on it's length I can imagine it's 29 pages of circular arguments that go absolutely nowhere (which is WAAAYY to common in a lot of the threads in this section btw). I think the "fog" is just a metaphor that's open to personal interpretation but has a similar set of characteristics.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lone Wolf said:


> Thank you, Rookie. I haven't made many posts since joining, that was when everything was falling apart in my life and I was also working crazy hours from day to night. In hindsight, I probably should have posted more so that I could get direct advice. However, from the little free time I did have, I was able to read several stories here and from the advice and encouragement to other BS in similar situations from all the wonderful and helpful people here, I was able to slowly piece together my life again. It's not perfect and I am still recovering, but I am getting there. At least I've finally got a little courage to start making a few posts.


I'm sure that your posts will be very helpful to others and look forward to them. I also hope you have a good time talking to some of the other great posters , here on TAM. Many of whom are truly nice people. ......Welcome!!


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Jasel said:


> Haven't even bothered reading this thread, based on it's length I can imagine it's 29 pages of circular arguments that go absolutely nowhere (which is WAAAYY to common in a lot of the threads in this section btw). I think the "fog" is just a metaphor that's open to personal interpretation but has a similar set of characteristics.


It's only circular if you can't find the corners.  And you just might be right.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Lester Flatt and Earl Scruggs - Foggy Mountain Breakdown (Original 1949) - YouTube My favorite kind of fog.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Mel Tormé - A Foggy Day - YouTube Mel Torme, "The Velvet Fog"


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Well, apparently there are still many posters who are wanting to continue the debate over the "fog'. So, now that the musical interlude is over, I'm down with it.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

rookie you posted this on the poll thread:
Well, Acoa, your safest bet would be to vote yes. Apparently, one of the most cunning attributes of the "fog" is that it can be defined in any way it's practitioners wish it to be. The very number and variety of definitions would fill a fair-sized book. And, of course, it's definition can and does change from minute to minute, according to the mood of the user. It is truly a remarkable condition.


And I agree. This is why I do not like the term


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

convert said:


> rookie you posted this on the poll thread:
> Well, Acoa, your safest bet would be to vote yes. Apparently, one of the most cunning attributes of the "fog" is that it can be defined in any way it's practitioners wish it to be. The very number and variety of definitions would fill a fair-sized book. And, of course, it's definition can and does change from minute to minute, according to the mood of the user. It is truly a remarkable condition.
> 
> 
> And I agree. This is why I do not like the term


Convert, I was mistaken , in commenting on the Poll thread, and I wish I had not done so, and won't do it again.
I understand why many posters DO beleive in the fog, and use it to explain their thought processes, during their affairs. (Notice I said, explain, NOT excuse)But each definition is significantly different for each poster, so much so , that there is no way to verify any of it, yet they are still righteously sure of it. I think that under the circumstances, I would be more worried about the facts of the affair, and less about the subjective issues.


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> That might have some small influence, Convert, but I've always been a believer in *personal responsibility*, so anything that seems to contradict that idea , I would be suspicious of.


absolutely, me too, but i think personal responsibility is getting very rare in this day and age


----------



## convert (Oct 4, 2013)

Rookie4 said:


> Convert, I was mistaken , in commenting on the Poll thread, and I wish I had not done so, and won't do it again.
> I understand why many posters DO beleive in the fog, and use it to explain their thought processes, during their affairs. (Notice I said, explain, NOT excuse)But each definition is significantly different for each poster, so much so , that there is no way to verify any of it, yet they are still righteously sure of it. I think that under the circumstances, I would be more worried about the facts of the affair, and less about the subjective issues.


I for one think both threads have some very valid points, I like the debate.

I do not like the term but do believe there is something to it but I agree with the poster that said when it comes down to it we (BS and WS) are still dealing with Infidelity and it [email protected] no matter how you cut it.


----------



## IIJokerII (Apr 7, 2014)

There are and have been lots of opinions as to whether a fog state of mind is legit or just an excuse used by waywards to justify their behavior. The affair fog is suitable if you compare it to the actual entity. Some forms of fog are light and easy to see thru and navigate while other instances a fog covering is like a dewy blanket preventing anything of chance or circumstances from getting thru or going far such as light and sound.

When a wayward gets into a fog state of mind several factors come into play. What was the marriage life like, what was the individuals life like and so on. With each negative or stressful aspect added the fog setting in now has a rate of speed and density. The affairee is now caught in the trap of their own design. 

The waywards want's become needs and with the needs being filled, like a drug or alcohol addict, the rationalization sets into full throttle and the compartmentalization is firmly placed at every possible avenue to ensure normalcy within the waywards reality. The dopamine is pumping and the only way to counter this is by truth, consequences and if the formers fail time, maybe.

Waywards who experienced this can relate to some degree that the fog does not excuse them from their own past actions but most will also not admit they, along with their AP indoctrinated themselves with the essential need that they both felt was in the AP's interest. Take a regular relationship among friends, people who support us and we bond with. Now, how many time have we vented about work, life, Marriage or anything. Now see how many of us gravitate to the ones that support our opinions or versions of our stories regardless of whether the facts are accurate or presented or not. Nobody wants to hear they are wrong or destructive.

This is also the reward system of the brain at work as well. How many of us can remember being excited to see a family member who lavished us in gifts or affection then only realize after disappointment that this expectation cannot be fulfilled, then follow this up with understanding at a later time. When affair's begin the cheating individual is rewarding themselves by this behavior regardless if it hurts or damages others or even in the end themselves. 

I do certainly agree that selfishness, arrogance, bitterness, disloyalty and a bevy of other actions and emotions are administered by waywards, but they are the individuals of the sum, and that sum is affair fog. Only after it is completely gone, however long it takes, does the wayward finally realize what they have done and at what cost.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



convert said:


> absolutely, me too, but i think personal responsibility is getting very rare in this day and age


I agree. Personal responsibility and honor.


----------



## Squeakr (May 1, 2013)

bfree said:


> I agree. Personal responsibility and honor.


I agree as well, but that is a far stretch to expect from some that have neither to begin with (or at least you thought they had it and then learned later that it was all an act and they never had it at all).


----------



## MattMatt (May 19, 2012)

This is guaranteed to get rid of the fog.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH2HmFPBQYQ

Can we stop now? Please?


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

MattMatt said:


> This is guaranteed to get rid of the fog.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH2HmFPBQYQ
> 
> Can we stop now? Please?


This thread can be closed at any time. I've no objection.


----------



## z_man (Nov 1, 2013)

The word fog is used as a metaphor to describe behavior of a cheating spouse driven by the dopamine generated from the illicit activities inherent in affairs.

Call it whatever you like, but the behavior is consistent with not thinking, seeing, or acting clearly, logically, or truthfully.


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

> *The "fog", myth or fact*.


The question is, should anyone care? Does it really matter to anyone if the "fog" is real or not?

As an x-BS, it doesn't matter to me. I don't care. Perhaps it matters more to WS/xWS to explain away what they did? I don't know.

For me, it matters not.


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

MattMatt said:


> This is guaranteed to get rid of the fog.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VH2HmFPBQYQ
> 
> Can we stop now? Please?


Absolutely love the extreme heat to dispel the fog.

What is good for the physical world is good for the emotional to, no?


----------



## ConanHub (Aug 9, 2013)

vellocet said:


> The question is, should anyone care? Does it really matter to anyone if the "fog" is real or not?
> 
> As an x-BS, it doesn't matter to me. I don't care. Perhaps it matters more to WS/xWS to explain away what they did? I don't.
> 
> For me, it matters not.


Good to see you back V. Really like your choice of avatar.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

I can't believe that this thread is still alive and kicking.


----------



## SevenYears (Jun 23, 2014)

Rookie4, I don't think this will kind of thread will ever die. 

I've mentioned it before but I don't like it when people mention the fog. It makes it seem like their WS is in an illusion and they really never wanted to leave the BS.

All the fog is them having feelings for someone else. They really like this person, maybe even love them. They want to have a relationship with them and if things go well they will drop the BS and start their new life with OM/OW. They keep the BS at first so they can have a backup plan. If they left straight away and things didn't work out they'll end up alone and don't want this. Especially if they think that they could end up being alone for the rest of their life.

BS doesn't want to believe that these are real emotions yet they are. Just because it didn't work out or OM/OW never had any intention of having a real relationship is unimportant. The WS did. Another way of looking at this is to look at past relationships you have had. You were in love with them but things didn't work out. This doesn't mean that you were in the fog for all of them. If you are going to believe this then you have to say everyone is in a fog for all relationships past and present.

An example of a how a lot of WS think is the way an ex friend of mine is. If he was in a relationship and met someone else he would date them while continuing with the current girlfriend to see if things are going to work out. He hates being single. If things went well he would dump the former girlfriend and start anew with the OW. And if it didn't he would stay. And he would do it again if someone new came along. And yes he even told me this. Really annoyed me. This way he would not have to be single. He would even do this when he knew he didn't want to stay with his current girlfriend. All that mattered was that he had someone with him.


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

SevenYears said:


> BS doesn't want to believe that these are real emotions yet they are.


Oh I don't think BS don't want to believe this. I think they know it. But if most are like me, we simply don't care. Its irrelevant to the outcome I would go for once finding out.

Its like wondering about the mindset of a murderer. I don't care what his/her mindset is. I just want them locked up.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

SevenYears said:


> Rookie4, I don't think this will kind of thread will ever die.
> 
> I've mentioned it before but I don't like it when people mention the fog. It makes it seem like their WS is in an illusion and they really never wanted to leave the BS.
> 
> ...


Don't say that, Seven. I was hoping it would die of natural causes.


----------



## bfree (Sep 30, 2012)

*Re: Re: The "fog", myth or fact.*



Rookie4 said:


> Don't say that, Seven. I was hoping it would die of natural causes.


Maybe it did. Maybe this is the undead thread.


----------



## Rookie4 (Nov 26, 2012)

Unfortunately, This might be the case. But in the event that there is a ZA, I want the girl with the AK on my team.


----------

