# The Pretzel Logic of the 180



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

This is an interesting critique of the 180 by Chump Lady. Thoughts?

The Pretzel Logic of the 180


----------



## lenzi (Apr 10, 2012)

She's critiquing the use of the 180 as a deceptive, manipulative tool to try to win back a cheater. The methods advocated in this particular case are very "cheater-centric", meaning that the betrayed spouse is being advised to jump through hoops to try to win back the wayward partner, and most of the suggestions made are just ridiculous.

That's not how the 180 is advocated and implemented- at least not by the seasoned posters on this board.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

lenzi said:


> She's critiquing the use of the 180 as a deceptive, manipulative tool to try to win back a cheater. The methods advocated in this particular case are very "cheater-centric", meaning that the betrayed spouse is being advised to jump through hoops to try to win back the wayward partner, and most of the suggestions made are just ridiculous.
> 
> That's not how the 180 is advocated and implemented- at least not by the seasoned posters on this board.


I'm not familiar with Michelle Weiner-Davis is her stuff widely used?


----------



## lenzi (Apr 10, 2012)

I have no clue.

Looking back at the methods suggested, many of them are spot on, if taken as a way to move on with your life, and away from the cheater. But not to try to "trick them to come back".

These are among the worst:

_Do not be nasty, angry or even cold – just pull back and wait to see if spouse notices and, more important, realize what she will be missing_

_You need to make your partner think that you have had an awakening and, as far as you are concerned, you are going to move on with your life, with or without your spouse. _

Yeah ok


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

lenzi said:


> I have no clue.
> 
> Looking back at the methods suggested, many of them are spot on, if taken as a way to move on with your life, and away from the cheater. But not to try to "trick them to come back".
> 
> ...


Yeah because that is the time you feel the most loving, happy and warm. :scratchhead: I do think some counselors try to place part of the blame for a spouses affair on the BS. BS are not angels but they did not deserve to be forever scarred either.


----------



## Racer (Sep 24, 2009)

Not necessarily showing the opposite emotions of happy, etc. Sort of how I dealt with that was considering her a ghost haunting my life. She'd rattle her chains... and I'd roll my eyes sort of like "really... you've been doing that for weeks Mrs. Ghost... ooooh.... scary..." then go on with my business.

And my business sometimes were fun and happy things. That sort of annoyed the ghost who wanted me to feel what she wanted me to feel. Sorry... I liked going out with a group of guys and doing stuff. So I'd come home with a smile on my face and in the background hear chains rattling refusing to let it get to me.... "f'n ghost, go haunt your boyfriend."

Basically; Stop caring, pretend they died, and that was a good thing for you. "Go into the light....." encouragement from time to time isn't bad either.


----------



## Pamvhv (Apr 27, 2014)

For me the 180 is about healing myself and learning to live without my PoSStbX.


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

lenzi said:


> She's critiquing the use of the 180 as a deceptive, manipulative tool to try to win back a cheater.


Truthfully, the 180 is sometimes presented as a method to win back the wayward spouse. I've seen it recommended a numbers of times to snap the WS out of the so called "fog".


----------



## Cabsy (Mar 25, 2013)

I've seen a few variations, but I think the 180 is best as a real detachment and not a ploy. The chips will fall where they may, with or without the spouse.


----------



## Pamvhv (Apr 27, 2014)

Cabsy said:


> I've seen a few variations, but I think the 180 is best as a real detachment and not a ploy. The chips will fall where they may, with or without the spouse.


Mine I definitely want to fall without the spouse. I just want to get better.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

There is always a possibility that the so-called 180 or any other "moving on" activity will cause a WW to be attracted back to the BH. It's long odds, since they're in a constant dopamine haze of "lurve," but it does happen sometimes, usually about the time the new GF moves in. However, most people setting out to use that move as a ploy will fail, because they can't sell it.


----------



## helolover (Aug 24, 2012)

I like Tracy, or CL as she's known. I see her points in this. Her blog posts helped me a lot to realize how jacked up my situation was and how I was a kibble provider. Pure gold. 

Everything with a grain of salt. Michelle W-D and Tracy. They have a data point(s) on this and share their perspectives. It is not a one size fits all solution. 

The 180 (or variant) is just a way for the BS to stop doing what they're doing, go NC if possible and get their crap together in order to fight for a R or D. Either way, it's a battle.

Actually, CL is a member of this board. I'd like to hear her perspective on it.


----------



## helolover (Aug 24, 2012)

ThePheonix said:


> Truthfully, the 180 is sometimes presented as a method to win back the wayward spouse. I've seen it recommended a numbers of times to snap the WS out of the so called "fog".


I agree. If I advise it, I use it as a tool to detach - not to chase or look mysterious. 

Often around here it is construed as a magical formula in order to bring a wayward of the affair fog. It usually backfires when used as such.


----------



## Lovemytruck (Jul 3, 2012)

I agree with some of the other posters, the 180 is not a tool to "win" back the WS. I recommend the 180 frequently as a tool for those who are suffering emotionally. It really is more of a tool to detach, heal the hurt, and get out of the hole (no pun intended).

I did it when I was down, and I know it was the path for me to come to terms with a D and a new life. We realize that a WS is not worth pursing. We realize a new path is often better.

I do think Chumplady has valid points. It seems her article was mostly from the viewpoint of using the 180 to win a WS back. 

Maybe we are looking at it from the other side; we see it as a way to dump a cheater and heal.


----------



## russell28 (Apr 17, 2013)

Truthseeker1 said:


> This is an interesting critique of the 180 by Chump Lady. Thoughts?
> 
> The Pretzel Logic of the 180


I think it's spot on.. it echos what I'm sure many think as they read through some of those absurd bullet points in the 180.


----------



## Racer (Sep 24, 2009)

Part of why the 180 might get them back. A common wayward trait is selfishness and they see themselves as ‘the prize’ and convinced themselves you deserved it for something you did (or didn’t do). To be treated like they aren’t special, wanted or desired… to not be pursued or cared about or whatever… drives them nuts. In their heads, your reaction should probably be one of panic and “please don’t leave me; I’ll change for you, I learned my lesson…” You should be angry, scream and yell. You are denying them that fantasy or reacting like they’ve anticipated. 

Remember, they’ve probably gone over the discovery in their heads a hundred times and anticipated your reaction and come up with how they should react to it. Becoming absolutely unpredictable throws them off. They are reacting to you, not visa-versa where you are reacting to them. That puts you firmly in the driver’s seat and a heavy influence on their emotional state. You are now that greener grass on the other side of the fence. You are now that one they wonder; ‘what will they do next’? And since you aren’t giving them that information, their mind gets to hop on that hamster wheel and go for a spin trying to guess. 

The normal reaction begins with them just trying to regain that control. They will push you to react how they expected because they know how to deal with that. Don’t take that delicious bait. Don’t play their game. Just ‘ghost them’. Your life is better without them. They should feel this instead of the opposite.


----------



## hopefulgirl (Feb 12, 2013)

The 180 is just one tool, and Davis introduced it in her book Divorce Busting - it's generally advised for people who are not sure they want to give up on their marriage yet. Davis doesn't sell it as foolproof - one benefit is that she thinks it's helpful for the crushed ego of the one who's being left behind and there is a POSSIBLE side benefit of confusing/intriguing the wayward enough to spark their interest, to start to shake off a little of what we call the "fog." She also suggests using it if you've tried chasing and pleading, and that hasn't worked - try this, just because it's something completely different. And it may not work either, so you may have to give up the 180 approach as well.

Chump Lady is rarely in favor of even considering R with a cheater, so she's not going to have much use for it.


----------



## NextTimeAround (Dec 15, 2011)

180 behavior can also be a useful tool in other relationships. I've been dong the 180 on my mother. ie say very little; do not engage in any differences of opinion and so on.

she has been behaving more respectfully towards me. I don't get the sense that she is trying to bait the way she used to. I saw her a couple of weeks ago. She siad that my brother joked that I must work for the CIA, given how little they know about me these days.

I will never assume that we will ever have the comfortable mutually respectful mother daughter relationship that so many women's magazines like to promote. On a micro level, these days, even when she gives me a compliment I'm just waiting for the moment when she's going to deliver an insult.

In any case, overall, the 180 is good for many types of relationships. And when one does the 180, they may finally notice how much of a fool they had been treated by the other person, that it accelerates the moving on process.


----------



## chumplady (Jul 27, 2012)

Just seeing this. My article was a critique on the specifics of the 180 as outlined by Weiner-Davis. I find her list contradictory and yes, absurd in places.

I am all for detachment. I say in my article I agree with some of this very advice. What I do not agree with is any advice that comes from a place of manipulation and crazy. That I can "nice" you out of an affair. (Implied that I "meaned" you into an affair.) That I can control another person's behavior through my behavior.

We only control ourselves. Detachment is good because it puts the focus on the BS (chump) and not the cheater. I think people need to ask themselves "Is this relationship acceptable to ME? What are MY values? What are my deal breakers?" Instead of throwing all their energy at the cheater and what they're thinking or trying to prevent them from doing whatever. 

I am skeptical about R, but I'm not anti-R. I do think it is a very long shot, because cheating is based in entitlement and authentic R is based on humility. And most people coming out of an affair do not lead with humility. 

I also think, on the subject of R, that it is an absolute non-starter to try and reconcile with someone who is not *demonstrating* remorse. A lot of my writing is to get people to look at actions over talk. To stop putting weight on the "possibilities" and look at the "what is." 

Just my $.02.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

chumplady said:


> Just seeing this. My article was a critique on the specifics of the 180 as outlined by Weiner-Davis. I find her list contradictory and yes, absurd in places.
> 
> I am all for detachment. I say in my article I agree with some of this very advice. What I do not agree with is any advice that comes from a place of manipulation and crazy. That I can "nice" you out of an affair. (Implied that I "meaned" you into an affair.) That I can control another person's behavior through my behavior.
> 
> ...


I'll up your 2 cents by a full quarter.

MWD's 180 idea is a lot more about trying to manipulate and control the other person than you have taken it to task for being.

To understand it, you have to look at where it originates, and it originates outside of the context of adulerty.

When she first started selling this idea, it was more about spouses who were leaving just because they were fed up with their partner's behavior, so the instruction was "Look at what you are doing to drive your partner away".

That is the origin, the genesis if you will, of this particular "gem".

So if you're nagging, stop that. Look at the things you are doing to drive your partner away, blah, blah, blah.

The message was "what is wrong with you that is driving your partner away?". Period.

Now take that line of thinking and import it into a context where you are dealing with unethical and unkind behavior like adultery. It's a setup for mired-down codependent victimhood as you try to control bad behavior that is not within your control, and it never was.

The bottom line is that cheating is an abuse of trust, it's emotionally abusive as well, and it reveals a deeply flawed character IN THE CHEATER. Nobody else. It's not up to anybody else to control somebody else's horribly bad behavior unless they have been sentenced to serve a prison sentence by the court, and then that job falls to paid correctional officers and not their spouse 

The 180 is horrible, horrible, horrible advice to give to anybody dealing with a spouse with basic character issues.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

chumplady said:


> Just seeing this. My article was a critique on the specifics of the 180 as outlined by Weiner-Davis. I find her list contradictory and yes, absurd in places.
> 
> I am all for detachment. I say in my article I agree with some of this very advice. What I do not agree with is any advice that comes from a place of manipulation and crazy. That I can "nice" you out of an affair. (Implied that I "meaned" you into an affair.) That I can control another person's behavior through my behavior.
> 
> ...


Love your articles including this one. Most cheaters do lack humility and have a certain sense of entitlement. Even if they R - you wonder how many are truly remorseful Unfortunately for most their infidelity leads to ZERO consequences. 

Thanks for checking in!


----------



## PamJ (Mar 22, 2013)

I pretty much agree with the chump lady on some of the more absurd sounding ones and, even after reading many posts on the subject here, I too was confused about when/why/how the entire 180 concept would work.

I agree and did some of the things that included detaching and trying to act normal mostly because I had young kids the first time and could not be a wreck all day, and later more to keep myself feeling 'normal' so I could make it through the day. We run a business together, I work out of our home, so I was around him often during the day. I had never heard of the 180 and didn't until I came here March 2013.

I did not do these things to make myself seem more desirable and worthy to him. On the last D-Day I was angry when I had proof that he lied, denied and trickle-truth trying to minimize the fallout. Then, I just shut down because I realized I could never make him do what I wanted him to do. He had cheated while we were supposed to be having the best year of our life in a long time in R.

He did come around when he saw my reaction, because he was scared, but I did not do it for that result, it was my natural reaction. He had never intended to leave so he was worried he had lost it all. 

I did not believe he was sincere and it took a while for me to listen to what he had to say, and, even then he tried to minimize and give false excuses. It was a long process.

I think it's hard to take something like a 180 and tell everyone this is what they have to do, but, like everything else, you take what you need, and leave the rest.


----------



## Paladin (Oct 15, 2011)

From what I remember of the 180 post, there is an entire paragraph dedicated to explaining that the 180 is not a manipulation tool and should not be used to try and influence the behavior of others. It is meant to be used as a way to detach and prepare for being single again.

Like much of what CL posts, her *criticism* (her bread and butter for those that dont know) is only applicable when employing her narrow interpretation of the 180 advice, and misses the actual point completely.

Its easy to say "Sure they tell you that the 180 is for YOU, but you would not actually do X, Y, Z unless it was to have a better marriage etc etc etc... *chump*"

Another narrow interpretation of #6, as she assumes that the advice is to not seek help from loved ones and to "keep secrets" when in reality the advice is to avoid asking loved ones to help save the marriage because if you are using the 180, your spouse is not interested in staying married to you.

I wont even touch on 12 since she is hung up on one word "act"

13 is another gem as CL assumes that a respected MFT and social worker is somehow unaware that infidelity is devastating. So would CLs advice be to cry, sulk, pout, and wallow in depression?

15 so being less talkative and not making an effort to start conversations makes you a passive aggressive cyborg? Next...

I can see her point on 17, as the language could be stronger and should not include the bit about making the DS think anything, what the DS thinks is not important when doing the 180.

Again, 18, I can see the bit about "if they notice" being problematic, but the advice itself is solid. Nothing is gained by being nasty, other than the DS feeling like they are getting attention. Yes anger is normal, and people kill for all kinds of stupid reasons, not just infidelity, why even go there? Saying that the DS is coming home to a cheerful improved you misses the point. If the DS is still living with you, they are coming "home" to a bed, not a partner or spouse. 

Same with 19, the DS should not be a consideration, and if the situation is really nasty, showing any kind of negative emotion will simply serve to satisfy the DS. It is also good practice to keep the emotions in check for when you are out and trying to date again.

Anyhow, the rest of the criticism is all very similar, ignore the premise of the advice, and knit pick the sentence structure of the list, because obviously they are lying to you when they tell you that the 180 is a tool for moving on and working on yourself, not a tool for working on a marriage (alone or otherwise).

This type of "reasoning" works when your goal is to be polarizing, divisive, and combative, politicians do it all the time by focusing on the minority of issues that divide people, and ignore the majority of the issues people actually agree on. In CLs case, its a matter of click baiting, and to her credit, she does it fairly well.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Paladin said:


> From what I remember of the 180 post, there is an entire paragraph dedicated to explaining that the 180 is not a manipulation tool and should not be used to try and influence the behavior of others. It is meant to be used as a way to detach and prepare for being single again.
> .


Read the books, and all self-contradictory disclaimers aside, that's BS.

Any time you do anything to elicit a specific response in somebody else it is by definition manipulative.

Magicians manipulate their audiences, so do movies and musical performers and acrobats. Not all the things we do to provoke a kind of response in others, though, is really about trying to control somebody else or requires us to abandon healthy boundaries entirely.

All that business about being the person your spouse fell in love with and the cute aphorisms like "It takes one to tango", though, are about trying to change your spouse's mind. It's about manipulating them, but it doesn't get really weird until you put it into a context where the spouse is doing something that reveals very poor character... like cheating.

When you take what is in the divorce remedy and divorcebusting and thrust it into a context where somebody is being abused by an unrepentant cheater, you are just becoming an enabler of abuse.


----------



## Paladin (Oct 15, 2011)

TimeHeals said:


> Read the books, and all self-contradictory disclaimers aside, that's BS.


What is BS? The fact that the 180 advice is given to help someone move on and specifically states that it should not be used as a tool to manipulate the DS?



TimeHeals said:


> Any time you do anything to elicit a specific response in somebody else it is by definition manipulative.


With you so far, how does this apply to the 180 when the above is considered? Or should we just ignore the stuff that doesnt fit our criticism and say things like "doesnt matter if they say you should use the 180 to work on yourself and move on, they are lying and the 180 is actually meant to manipulate a person who presumably doesnt give a rats ass about you." 



TimeHeals said:


> All that business about being the person your spouse fell in love with and the cute aphorisms like "It takes one to tango", though, are about trying to change your spouse's mind. It's about manipulating them, but it doesn't get really weird until you put it into a context where the spouse is doing something that reveals very poor character... like cheating.


Not every word of every sentence will work for everyone. My interpretation of the 180 includes the understanding that the work you are doing is solely for your own benefit and has nothing to do with spouses (especially cheating ones)

It is a way to build self confidence, independence, an active social life, and to expand on ones hobbies so less time is spent dwelling on the ****ty circumstances that lead to needing the 180 in the first place.


----------



## sidney2718 (Nov 2, 2013)

NextTimeAround said:


> 180 behavior can also be a useful tool in other relationships. I've been dong the 180 on my mother. ie say very little; do not engage in any differences of opinion and so on.
> 
> she has been behaving more respectfully towards me. I don't get the sense that she is trying to bait the way she used to. I saw her a couple of weeks ago. She siad that my brother joked that I must work for the CIA, given how little they know about me these days.
> 
> ...


I agree. But in all these cases the 180 is being used as a means of detaching from another person. That's why it is working with your mother -- she doesn't want you to be detached. But as a tool to win back a WS, it is problematic at best. It CAN work. There is a shock effect involved, but most often it just triggers a response such as: "I knew I was right in having an affair, my spouse just doesn't give a s**t."


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

You know to this day I still don't understand the purpose of the 180 if you were truly trying to get someone out of the "fog" wouldn't divorce papers be just as effective if not more so then playing rudimentary mind games with someone :scratchhead: It just feels like you're fighting crazy with crazy expecting sanity and serenity as a result..



If your wayward spouse has their head in the clouds/fog then I would imagine being served divorce papers and the diving up of marital assets would make for a more stronger wake up call rather then trying to presenting oneself as neutral or indifferent..


----------



## sidney2718 (Nov 2, 2013)

Truthseeker1 said:


> Love your articles including this one. Most cheaters do lack humility and have a certain sense of entitlement. Even if they R - you wonder how many are truly remorseful Unfortunately for most their infidelity leads to ZERO consequences.
> 
> Thanks for checking in!


Except that there are a fair number of reconciliations, even here. We don't see them all the time because after the R they have no particular need for being here.

Consequences imply punishment of the wandering spouse. Perhaps a good spanking will do the job? There has to be remorse for a reconciliation. I agree with that. But the reconciliation itself is between two adults who have to learn to trust each other all over again, who have to learn how to treat each other all over again, and who have to work on themselves very hard.

But it does happen, especially when the causes of the affair are known and being worked on.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

xakulax said:


> You know to this day I still don't understand the purpose of the 180 if you were truly trying to get someone out of the "fog" wouldn't divorce papers be just as effective if not more so then playing rudimentary mind games with someone :scratchhead: It just feels like you're fighting crazy with crazy expecting sanity and serenity as a result..
> 
> 
> 
> *If your wayward spouse has their head in the clouds/fog then I would imagine being served divorce papers and the diving up of marital assets would make for a more stronger wake up call rather then trying to presenting oneself as neutral or indifferent.*.


:iagree::iagree:


----------



## sidney2718 (Nov 2, 2013)

xakulax said:


> You know to this day I still don't understand the purpose of the 180 if you were truly trying to get someone out of the "fog" wouldn't divorce papers be just as effective if not more so then playing rudimentary mind games with someone :scratchhead: It just feels like you're fighting crazy with crazy expecting sanity and serenity as a result..
> 
> If your wayward spouse has their head in the clouds/fog then I would imagine being served divorce papers and the diving up of marital assets would make for a more stronger wake up call rather then trying to presenting oneself as neutral or indifferent..


The idea is that the real 180 prepares you emotionally to be able to divorce the WS. For most people just finding out about cheating does not make them instantly divorce. As examples I give you TAM, which is filled with folks who have infidelity problems and who have not yet decided to divorce.


----------



## xakulax (Feb 9, 2014)

sidney2718 said:


> The idea is that the real 180 prepares you emotionally to be able to divorce the WS. For most people just finding out about cheating does not make them instantly divorce. * As examples I give you TAM, which is filled with folks who have infidelity problems and who have not yet decided to divorce*.



touché


----------



## Racer (Sep 24, 2009)

sidney2718 said:


> Except that there are a fair number of reconciliations, even here. We don't see them all the time because after the R they have no particular need for being here..


Um... those of us in R have to put up with constant "I don't know why you won't divorce" and name calling... You sort of have to have thick skin to stick around. It's not really that pleasant or supportive of a place for those looking to R. You are constantly told you are wrong to do so. 

That's actually one of the reasons I do stick around; for those who might want to try it without the whiny 'please don't leave me' mentality people seem to think we have....


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

Racer said:


> Um... those of us in R have to put up with constant "I don't know why you won't divorce" and name calling... You sort of have to have thick skin to stick around. It's not really that pleasant or supportive of a place for those looking to R. You are constantly told you are wrong to do so.
> 
> That's actually one of the reasons I do stick around; for those who might want to try it without the whiny 'please don't leave me' mentality people seem to think we have....


Every person should choose their own path Racer. I wish you luck on yours.


----------



## lenzi (Apr 10, 2012)

Truthseeker1 said:


> Every person should choose their own path Racer. I wish you luck on yours.


Do people often choose other people's paths?


----------



## lenzi (Apr 10, 2012)

Racer said:


> Um... those of us in R have to put up with constant "I don't know why you won't divorce" and name calling... You sort of have to have thick skin to stick around. It's not really that pleasant or supportive of a place for those looking to R.


Generally speaking most posters do not support reconciliation but I've seen some situations where reconciliation is a possible option and members have received supportive advice suggesting just that. 

In your case? 



Racer said:


> I keep getting asked questions and the rugsweeping thread got my noggin working.
> 
> My story is bad; WW, 6 OM, 1 OW... EA’s, LTPA’s, ONS’s, Kissing, sexting, etc. Sexless marriage, resentful petty wife. Entitled. TT for a couple years. Unremorseful for the first. False R. All the nasty stuff


I read some of your back story..one of the worst I've read..even after DD..your wife was completely remorseless, for years, then she came around a bit at the end but you never got the full truth, and presently you have no real relationship with her, you simply "exist" together in the same house.

I can see why most would not see reconciliation as a valid option for you, and as I read your back posts I was just shaking my head wondering why you stay.

No name calling, just wondering. What's in it for you other than financial stability?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Paladin said:


> From what I remember of the 180 post, there is an entire paragraph dedicated to explaining that the 180 is not a manipulation tool and should not be used to try and influence the behavior of others. It is meant to be used as a way to detach and prepare for being single again.
> 
> Like much of what CL posts, her *criticism* (her bread and butter for those that dont know) is only applicable when employing her narrow interpretation of the 180 advice, and misses the actual point completely.
> 
> ...


:iagree:


----------



## Trickster (Nov 19, 2011)

There is no infidelity in my marriage and I am doing the 180. I waiver a bit to and fro, but do my best to stay on task.

I have done this to detach. I have done this to discover new interests, new hobbies, get in shape and find things to do without my wife. Most of the 180 is about boundaries and respect. My wife was my only friend for 20 years. The 180 is changing that. The 180 made me realize I had issues of my own to work on. I am doing that. It hasn't changed my wife one bit...I no longer care. I don't need my wife for anything anymore...I feel better about myself than I did when I was trying to gain her love. The 180 is liberating. ..
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

lenzi said:


> Do people often choose other people's paths?


People often try to cajole other people into taking the path they think is best for them.


----------



## TimeHeals (Sep 26, 2011)

Paladin said:


> Not every word of every sentence will work for everyone



Yeah, I know what you mean. Basically describing a manipulative pick-me dance as "not manipulation" when it is all about manipulation doesn't work for me.

Words have meanings.

And implying that you must do something to win somebody back--when they happen to be cheating--and saying that's not what's going on pretty much strains all credibility, and what's even funnier, is cheaters usually know this because they have been playing that game before their spouses even got into that game.

Terrible, terrible advice.


----------



## Paladin (Oct 15, 2011)

*Re: Re: The Pretzel Logic of the 180*



TimeHeals said:


> Yeah, I know what you mean. Basically describing a manipulative pick-me dance as "not manipulation" when it is all about manipulation doesn't work for me.
> 
> Words have meanings.
> 
> ...


Its up to you how you "interpret" the words, and I agree, they do have meaning. When I read "The 180 is a tool that is meant to help a person detach, move forward, and prepare for being a better individual for their own benefit, and is not a tool for working on a relationship" in addition to "The 180 should not be used to try and manipulate the WS," for some odd reason I interpret those statements at face value.

Some people just go hook line and sinker for inflammatory, polarizing, and divisive rhetoric. That's why click baiting, and talking heads on political television tend to be so effective at drawing and keeping an audience. Far easier to keep a person angry and short sighted, vs helping them reach some kind of meaningful progress through understanding. The people who practice click baiting and various other types of combative methods of communication, tend to always be at an advantage, because they can simply attack, over and over and over, by invalidating other people, or their points of view without making any effort to understand their position.

Like marginalizing a persons attempts at self improvement by calling it a "pick me dance" and insisting that what they are doing is not self improvement at all, but some kind of delusional attempt to "win back" a person who is not interested in a relationship with them. Additionally, adding a bit of sarcasm and patronizing a person by saying "I know what you mean" when the reality is quite the opposite and they actually have no idea of "what you mean" at all, is just icing on the cake.


----------



## COguy (Dec 1, 2011)

Don't a lot of people start the 180 with the intent of getting their cheating spouse back, only to change over time into not wanting them back once they are focusing on themselves?

I think that's a trend we see time and again on these forums. It's very difficult for someone who WANTS to save their marriage to just turn a blind eye to their spouse and marriage. It usually takes some time for this shift to take place, especially if the divorce or affair came as a real shocker.

Sometimes starting the 180 with the wrong motives (control/manipulation/to win them back) can end up being done for the right reasons (bettering yourself and detaching). I agree with CL that trying to win back a cheating spouse is a bad idea, but sometimes doing the right things for the wrong reason is a better alternative.


----------



## Truthseeker1 (Jul 17, 2013)

COguy said:


> Don't a lot of people start the 180 with the intent of getting their cheating spouse back, only to change over time into not wanting them back once they are focusing on themselves?
> 
> I think that's a trend we see time and again on these forums. It's very difficult for someone who WANTS to save their marriage to just turn a blind eye to their spouse and marriage. It usually takes some time for this shift to take place, especially if the divorce or affair came as a real shocker.
> 
> Sometimes starting the 180 with the wrong motives (control/manipulation/to win them back) can end up being done for the right reasons (bettering yourself and detaching). I agree with CL that trying to win back a cheating spouse is a bad idea, but sometimes doing the right things for the wrong reason is a better alternative.


After the shock of being cheated on the BS needs to do what they can to heal themselves because ultimately the scars are theirs and theirs alone. The cheating spouse put them there but ultimately it is up to the BS to actively try to pull themselves back together. Fair - no but infidelity is not fair. Whatever the BS needs to do to get to the other side they should do .


----------



## Lovemytruck (Jul 3, 2012)

COguy said:


> Don't a lot of people start the 180 with the intent of getting their cheating spouse back, only to change over time into not wanting them back once they are focusing on themselves?
> 
> I think that's a trend we see time and again on these forums. It's very difficult for someone who WANTS to save their marriage to just turn a blind eye to their spouse and marriage. It usually takes some time for this shift to take place, especially if the divorce or affair came as a real shocker.
> 
> Sometimes starting the 180 with the wrong motives (control/manipulation/to win them back) can end up being done for the right reasons (bettering yourself and detaching). I agree with CL that trying to win back a cheating spouse is a bad idea, but sometimes doing the right things for the wrong reason is a better alternative.


:iagree:

Just catching up.

It is a definite pattern. I did the same thing.

It seems the whole process could be diagramed for easy illustration.

Betrayal - discovery - denial - rugsweeping - trickle truth - more discovery - pleading - exposure - affair ending - devastation - 180 - improvement - detachment - limbo - divorce - new path.

Something like that. Time frames vary. Some end before the "new path" with R, or a long time in limbo.

Have a great weekend!


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

Racer said:


> That's actually one of the reasons I do stick around; for those who might want to try it without the whiny 'please don't leave me' mentality people seem to think we have....



How CWI reveals a man is a whiny 'please don't leave me' kind of guy: Because they want to know how to keep her no matter what she dishes out to them, how she treats them, how much they cheat, or much they disgust her.


----------

