Good things from As

[Owl]

I'm not implying that she's mentally ill...not at all.

 

What I'm saying is that PEOPLE WHO HAVE ENGAGED IN AFFAIRS often re-write their past within their own minds, and often have a tendency to look at their actions and try to find the best possible "meaning" that they can out of them.

 

It's a form of mental justification/rationalization.

 

I'm not saying she's mentally ill.

 

I'm saying that she's now looking at her past, to include her past actions...and looking at affairs in general with a perception that's pretty different from what most others see...her viewpoint is altered to a large degree by a need to make what she did seem "ok" in her eyes. Even if she doesn't admit it to herself.

 

Her H sees her actions, her motivations, and even her viewpoints on relationships and marriage FAR differently than she does...and I'm betting that if he were posting, he'd note that her viewpoints on this stuff are FAR, FAR different and vastly changed from what she'd communicated BEFORE her affair.

 

I'm suggesting that the reason that it's so different from other viewpoints, and the reason that it's (likely) far different from what it used to be has a lot to do with conflict avoidance within her own heart/mind.

 

Not mentally ill...just a mental "defense mechanism" that helps her cope with the fact that she did something that previously probably considered to be so "bad" that she'd never have considered it. Now that she's done it...it can't be that "bad", right?

[nyrias]

@nyrias: So now you're saying that the trauma and pain of DISCOVERY is what not discovering an affair will not lead to. Allrighty then. You can't say the marriage isn't dead either. It is - the BS just doesn't know it is. The WS does though. That's half the people involved.

 

Well .. saying the marriage is "dead" is kind of meaningless because "dead" is not very well defined.

 

Technically, in many cases, discovery of an A, not the A itself, led to divorce. Certainly there are cases where the marriage continues when the A is not discovered. It is reasonable to guess (and unfortunately i do not have the stats to back me up) that for all the marriages with As, the ones where the A is discovered are more likely to end.

 

Thus, i would hypothesize that whether a A is discovered, makes a DIFFERENCE to the chances that a marriage will end.

 

What else do you have in mind when you say a marriage is "dead"?

[nyrias]

You keep promoting this warped idea that what you don't know won't kill you and it's old. Even if there are no STDs involved there is still pain and trauma, dude.

 

If you don't get the logic, fine. Other seems to be able to comprehend.

[donnamaybe]

One thing I most definitely comprehend is that this thread's topic stems from the fact that someone is promoting an A as a positive thing.

 

I disagree.

[nyrias]

Understood, but realize that slavishly adhering only to the "concrete" consequences of an affair is also the refuge of the cheater in denial. e.g. "I haven't really done anything physical yet" while out having drinks with another woman, under the guise of "working late."

 

 

Now this is getting lively. Please do make the case for how a concealed affair can lead to guilt on the part of the BS...

 

1) Uh? what refuge for what denial? It is obvious my logic does not preclude the significant consequences if discovered. It applies equally to a drink in the bar, a EA on the Internet, or making out (except of course the case of possible STD). It certainly, if the cheater is logical and apply the same reasoning as i do, does NOT provide a "refuge".

 

You are confusing rationalization to the analysis of consequences. They are different concepts. For example, it is certainly true the a cheater can reduce psychological trauma to the BS if the A is well hidden, it does not change the fact that it is wrong in the pre-dominent American culture. So this logic itself does not justify or rationalize the action. And while the BS does not know, the WS does know and he/she is as affected by the moral culture of this country than the BS.

 

2) Oh, that is obviously a typo. The party who would feel the guilt is the WS. I claim that my logic/reasoning is sound, however, i won't claim that i am immune to typos.

 

 

Lastly, are you claiming that there is no substantial differences in the consequences, and the psychology of the parties whether a A (and once again, let's take STD out of the question) is discovered or not?

[Owl]

Damage is often done whether or not the A is "discovered".

 

All of the emotion, time, money, etc... that the WS spends/invests in building a relationship with their A partner is done by WITHDRAWING that same amount of time/attention/emotion/money/etc... from the marital relationship.

 

One of the most common comments by BS's is that they knew that "something" was wrong, even if they didn't know about the A. The distance, the more time spent away, the reduced communication, etc... all of this created additional stress on the marriage...and very often emotional confusion and pain for the BS.

 

D-day provides an EXPLANATION for the confusing situation that most BS's find themselves in.

 

I don't disagree that there are all kinds of emotional impacts to a BS from an affair...bruised egos included.

 

But the damage done isn't just limited to a bruised ego.

[nyrias]

Damage is often done whether or not the A is "discovered".

 

All of the emotion, time, money, etc... that the WS spends/invests in building a relationship with their A partner is done by WITHDRAWING that same amount of time/attention/emotion/money/etc... from the marital relationship.

 

One of the most common comments by BS's is that they knew that "something" was wrong, even if they didn't know about the A. The distance, the more time spent away, the reduced communication, etc... all of this created additional stress on the marriage...and very often emotional confusion and pain for the BS.

 

D-day provides an EXPLANATION for the confusing situation that most BS's find themselves in.

 

I don't disagree that there are all kinds of emotional impacts to a BS from an affair...bruised egos included.

 

But the damage done isn't just limited to a bruised ego.

 

Are you claiming it makes no difference, in terms of psychological impact, and the likelihood of the continuation of the marriage, whether the A is discovered or not?

[Snowflower]

Damage is often done whether or not the A is "discovered".

 

All of the emotion, time, money, etc... that the WS spends/invests in building a relationship with their A partner is done by WITHDRAWING that same amount of time/attention/emotion/money/etc... from the marital relationship.

 

One of the most common comments by BS's is that they knew that "something" was wrong, even if they didn't know about the A. The distance, the more time spent away, the reduced communication, etc... all of this created additional stress on the marriage...and very often emotional confusion and pain for the BS.

 

D-day provides an EXPLANATION for the confusing situation that most BS's find themselves in.

 

I don't disagree that there are all kinds of emotional impacts to a BS from an affair...bruised egos included.

 

But the damage done isn't just limited to a bruised ego.

 

Well said, as always owl! You summed up my thoughts perfectly with what happened in my marriage.

 

My H did the damage with his subsequent actions during his affair: the distancing from me, emotional withdrawal, inconsistency.

 

I knew something was wrong and even if I had never found out about his affair...my marriage was severely damaged by his behavior during his affair.

 

Even if he had ended the affair (not telling me the truth) and tried once again to be a good husband, he had already done so much damage.

 

OTOH, I think I would have figured it out sooner rather than later even if, in my case, I had never heard his confession. Nothing else made sense except for an affair so it was in a way, a relief to have some of his craziness explained.

 

So I agree with the point that the damage is done in many cases whether the BS definitely knows about the affair or not.

 

IMO, the damage was done and the BS knows something is wrong-in many cases. Unless the WS is just a superb liar and awesomely good at compartmentalizing, the BS can feel the change.

 

I know I did and it seems most BS know something is wrong even if they can't put a finger on it.

[Owl]

Are you claiming it makes no difference, in terms of psychological impact, and the likelihood of the continuation of the marriage, whether the A is discovered or not?

 

Clearly not...re-read my post.

 

I said that there is damage done whether the A is discovered or not.

 

The A is destructive to the marriage whether or not it is discovered. It will typically erode and eventually destroy the marriage, discovered or not.

 

And...if you ask most people who've been a BS...they'll tell you that they would prefer to know the truth rather than not to know it. Granted, there are exceptions...there are to pretty much anything.

 

But...it's not discovery that's the source of the pain...you'll rarely find a BS who will tell you that they'd rather not have known...it's the actual fact that their spouse conducted themselves in the manner that they did. The betrayal, etc...

 

Why do you try to spin this so that an affair is ok so long as it's kept hidden? What's your reasoning behind this?

 

As someone else suggested...change it so that you're not talking about infidelity...how about someone with a drug addiction? Is the addiction "ok" as long as it's hidden from their spouse?

[nyrias]

Clearly not...re-read my post.

 

I said that there is damage done whether the A is discovered or not.

 

The A is destructive to the marriage whether or not it is discovered. It will typically erode and eventually destroy the marriage, discovered or not.

 

And...if you ask most people who've been a BS...they'll tell you that they would prefer to know the truth rather than not to know it. Granted, there are exceptions...there are to pretty much anything.

 

But...it's not discovery that's the source of the pain...you'll rarely find a BS who will tell you that they'd rather not have known...it's the actual fact that their spouse conducted themselves in the manner that they did. The betrayal, etc...

 

Why do you try to spin this so that an affair is ok so long as it's kept hidden? What's your reasoning behind this?

 

As someone else suggested...change it so that you're not talking about infidelity...how about someone with a drug addiction? Is the addiction "ok" as long as it's hidden from their spouse?

 

No i am not spinning anything. However, I am amazed of how some people here think that application of logic, and not condemning A every 3 sentences is a sign of "justification", "spin that it is ok".

 

Do you have a problem separating the concept of consequences .. i.e (event A leads to event B), and justification (i.e. causing event A to happen is ok)?

 

As for the discovery of A .. let me further ask you .. is it your position that the DAMAGE done is the *same* with or without discovery (without STD)?

 

DAMAGE, in this case, is defined as psychological effects, and physiological effect on the BS.

 

Sure, the BS would prefer to know about the A after the fact. That is not relevant to whether he/she would experience the traumatic pain *if* he/she would have known.

 

I have made no statement about whether any of these actions are "ok". All my statements are only relevant to the consequences.

 

I am glad you brought up drug addiction. If you examine the situation closely, you will find that it is almost impossible to hide a drug addiction because of the physiological effects & symptoms. And directly to your question ... no it is not "ok" even if the addiction is hidden. But at the same time, if for some miracle it is actually hidden, i would predict that the "damage" (using your words) to the spouse in this case would be DIFFERENT than if it is discovered.

 

In fact, in a drug addiction scenario, if discovered, the spouse will suffer MORE than just the trauma of betrayal, unlike A. Since drugs are usually only available through illegal means & an addict can become uncontrollable, there may be additional fear, on the BS part, about safety, and health issues.

 

Now the interesting question is, for you and other poster here, would you prefer your spouse to be a drug addict, or have an affair?

 

(and wait ... are you going to accuse me of making both "ok" now because i didn't condemn them every 2 sentences?)

[Owl]

One question to clarify the situation here...what is it you're trying to "prove" with all this discussion?

 

What "point" are you trying to make?

 

It seems to me that a lot of us (myself included) have "assumed" that you have a point...and may have misunderstood what it was.

 

But honestly, I'm now wondering if you're just up for the discussion/dispute, and really have no 'point' to your posts here.

 

If I've misunderstood your intent...feel free to clarify and/or correct me...that's what I'm interested in...your intent.

 

Debate for it's own sake bores me quickly. If you've got a point you're trying to make...make it clearly, so we can discuss it appropriately. If you don't have a point and are just doing this for the "fun" of discussion/dispute...make that clear so those who like such things can continue.

[nyrias]

One question to clarify the situation here...what is it you're trying to "prove" with all this discussion?

 

What "point" are you trying to make?

 

It seems to me that a lot of us (myself included) have "assumed" that you have a point...and may have misunderstood what it was.

 

But honestly, I'm now wondering if you're just up for the discussion/dispute, and really have no 'point' to your posts here.

 

If I've misunderstood your intent...feel free to clarify and/or correct me...that's what I'm interested in...your intent.

 

Debate for it's own sake bores me quickly. If you've got a point you're trying to make...make it clearly, so we can discuss it appropriately. If you don't have a point and are just doing this for the "fun" of discussion/dispute...make that clear so those who like such things can continue.

 

Hahah .. cutting to the chase, don't we? Let me throw a few comments out.

 

1) I do enjoy discussions and intellectual exchanges. I cannot deny that may be driving some, but not all of my intent.

 

2) I found that this site is very much driven MOSTLY by knee-jerking moral reaction to cheating and does not fully consider the details, and the intricacies of the interactions. Sure, cheating is wrong but psychologically, legally, and health-wise, there are different degrees of damage caused by the different dynamics of discovery, and the context/actual acts of betrayal.

 

All of these are swept under the rug. This trauma due to the discovery of cheating is a good example. I think this place can use some honest, more logical reasoning. A change of tone may actually stimulate discussions & make the advice more useful.

 

3) I also find the attitude here that if cheating, in EVERY SINGLE CASE AND CIRCUMSTANCES, is not characterized as the most damaging, without different, despite the circumstances, than the poster is "justifying" it, or making it "ok". I found that attitude intellectually dishonest.

 

So I guess i have a point. I dislike intellectual dishonesty. My point is that we need to face up to whatever it is before one should put the moral interpretation over the situation.

 

I have no problem if you say that it is as wrong whether the cheating is discovered or not (which is a moral judgment) but i have a BIG problem if you say the consequences (i.e the damage) is the same psychological-wise.

 

4) And "excuse" me for not condemning infidelity every 3 sentences. I think i have made myself abundantly clear that cheating is wrong (in today's culture, and i certainly NOT immune to be part of it) on many posts. I don't feel like repeating myself on that point (not that i don't sometimes repeat SOME of my points). And i don't believe any of my other posts, including ones in THIS thread, is inconsistent with that position.

[Owl]

OK...you're here to debate and prove your viewpoint intellectually. Got it. With that knowledge, I'll step back and let others who enjoy that kind of thing play. Thanks for the honest answer.

 

Just out of curiousity...do you/have you posted here as someone else?

 

Your use of statistics and much of how you phrase things seem very familiar to me.

[nyrias]

OK...you're here to debate and prove your viewpoint intellectually. Got it. With that knowledge, I'll step back and let others who enjoy that kind of thing play. Thanks for the honest answer.

 

Just out of curiousity...do you/have you posted here as someone else?

 

Your use of statistics and much of how you phrase things seem very familiar to me.

 

No i have not. I have only ONE handle on this site. Can you kindly point out who (or the post) else uses statistics and presented similar arguments?

 

It may be worthwhile to read those posts.

[donnamaybe]

OK...you're here to debate and prove your viewpoint intellectually. Got it.

AKA "emotionlessly." Works great with R's, don't it?

[nyrias]

AKA "emotionlessly." Works great with R's, don't it?

 

Of course. I do not see a valid reason to become emotional towards a stranger. Sure, there will be a normal level of sympathy towards the wronged but there would be no more or less than reading about a victim on the newspaper.

 

Anything else would be dishonest. And i do believe honesty is highly valued here on LS.

[donnamaybe]

Of course. I do not see a valid reason to become emotional towards a stranger. Sure, there will be a normal level of sympathy towards the wronged but there would be no more or less than reading about a victim on the newspaper.

 

Anything else would be dishonest. And i do believe honesty is highly valued here on LS.

Sure, but there are a lot of emotions involved in R's, the breaking up of them, cheating, the fallout from it, etc. etc., and to remove that completely from the discussion is to remove a huge aspect of the R situation. You want to discuss R's only in analytical terms. Just isn't valuable, IMO.

[Spark1111]

Actually, what is emotionally the MOST dishonest is not disclosing feelings for another, pre-affair.

 

It wouldn't be called an affair then. We wouldn't be here healing from pain.

 

No one would have any reason to debate you at all, if people were honest.

[nyrias]

Sure, but there are a lot of emotions involved in R's, the breaking up of them, cheating, the fallout from it, etc. etc., and to remove that completely from the discussion is to remove a huge aspect of the R situation. You want to discuss R's only in analytical terms. Just isn't valuable, IMO.

 

You didn't read careful enough.

 

No one said we cannot discuss emotions. I am saying personally i am not emotionally involved in the this discussion.

 

And you are also wrong that emotion cannot be discussed in scientific terms. There is a literature of happiness, of example.

 

You can easily find it searching for the term "happiness" in google scholar.

[Owl]

Nyrias, I'd suggest that if you want to discuss A's analytically, you start your own thread dedicated to the subject.

 

That way the focus here turns back to the OP's thread, which was whether or not "good" can come from an affair.

[reboot]

There are a number of posters here that seek to dominate every thread they participate in, and they feel completely justified in doing so, because, after all, theirs is the only opinion that matters to them, and therefore should be the only opinion that matters to anyone else. After a while, I just start skipping over their posts because I know there's never going to be anything fresh in them.

[nyrias]

Nyrias, I'd suggest that if you want to discuss A's analytically, you start your own thread dedicated to the subject.

 

That way the focus here turns back to the OP's thread, which was whether or not "good" can come from an affair.

 

"Good" is a consequence, even though the OP does not define it very clearly. Cause & effect. Reasoning clearly has a role to play.

[Mr.Harris]

If you don't get the logic, fine. Other seems to be able to comprehend.

 

Your "logic" is not even a logic. And just because a few people agree doesn't mean your whatever-you-want-to-call-it deems true globally.

[John Michael Kane]

There are a number of posters here that seek to dominate every thread they participate in, and they feel completely justified in doing so, because, after all, theirs is the only opinion that matters to them, and therefore should be the only opinion that matters to anyone else. After a while, I just start skipping over their posts because I know there's never going to be anything fresh in them.

 

People who rant about others having the same "narrow" opinion on infidelity are the ones who are narrow minded in their own view.

[Owl]

"Good" is a consequence, even though the OP does not define it very clearly. Cause & effect. Reasoning clearly has a role to play.

 

Great...why not start a thread on the subject of cause and effect in infidelity so that those with the same pseudologic/empiricist bend can participate with you? This isn't the topic of this thread.