Exposure: good for the goose...

[that_gal]

MY A is within the first month of being exposed. I hope I eventually feel 'liberated' and 'free', but right now the only emotions I'm finding is shame! Have any of you heard the song "Let it Rain" by David Nail? If not, its a good youtube song to look up! Even though the roles are reversed, the lyrics; "living with the shame ain't nothing like the pain I saw on her face" There will never be anything like the pain I seen on my husbands face! I knew it would be painful for him. But had I had any indication that I would bring him to his knees, I never would of allowed myself to get involved with an EA to begin with. However, I do agree, your forced to an abrupt halt when things are exposed. Your no longer on 'your time' and run things 'your way', its all full out transparency or nothing.

[donnamaybe]

This is a very interesting point, FN!

 

I think, almost NEVER is the affair exposed by the AP DURING the affair!

 

Why do YOU think that is?

 

I cannot think of one good clear reason for it.

 

Can you?

 

Because they fear that which most often happens - the bus tires finding their mark.

[Lucky_One]

It also seems very wrong to betray the trust of a man that you say you love. I expect that MMs don't really like it when their OW call their wives and inform them about the EMA; it seems a good way to make a man very quickly hate you.

 

The entire EMA is a pact against the world - a situation of "you and me" - "I've got your back, baby".

 

It could almost be seen on a par with breaking vows of marriage. MM breaks his marital vow to BS. OW breaks her affair vow to MM. People can argue the difference between the two types of "vows", but that will not negate the fact that most OW feel very, very strongly about the bond that they feel with their MM, and many will say that they believe that they are in a "parallel marriage" of a sort. There have also been many, many EMAs where MMs buy rings for their OW, and some have even made vows to each other.

[Silly_Girl]

This is a very interesting point, FN!

 

I think, almost NEVER is the affair exposed by the AP DURING the affair!

 

Why do YOU think that is?

 

I cannot think of one good clear reason for it.

 

Can you?

 

I came very close. He had the option to tell her or I would. He actuslly reckoned he wouldn't be cross in the slightest if I told her, but accepted it was much more respectful and appropriate coming from him.

[woinlove]

It also seems very wrong to betray the trust of a man that you say you love. I expect that MMs don't really like it when their OW call their wives and inform them about the EMA; it seems a good way to make a man very quickly hate you.

 

The entire EMA is a pact against the world - a situation of "you and me" - "I've got your back, baby".

 

It could almost be seen on a par with breaking vows of marriage. MM breaks his marital vow to BS. OW breaks her affair vow to MM. People can argue the difference between the two types of "vows", but that will not negate the fact that most OW feel very, very strongly about the bond that they feel with their MM, and many will say that they believe that they are in a "parallel marriage" of a sort. There have also been many, many EMAs where MMs buy rings for their OW, and some have even made vows to each other.

 

I understand someone lying and hiding because it suits their own purpose, but making anyone feel they have to lie or hide because of a "vow" seems like some kind of manipulation or emotional abuse. One takes a risk when one relies on the dishonesty of others and it is unwise to ignore that risk. The risk works both ways. Some MM/MW end up confessing to their BS and as nemo points out, the BS then may tell others.

[Spark1111]

I came very close. He had the option to tell her or I would. He actuslly reckoned he wouldn't be cross in the slightest if I told her, but accepted it was much more respectful and appropriate coming from him.

 

Well then I salute you SG, for having a boundary, a standard and enforcing an action.

 

Way to go!

[reboot]

It also seems very wrong to betray the trust of a man that you say you love. I expect that MMs don't really like it when their OW call their wives and inform them about the EMA; it seems a good way to make a man very quickly hate you.

 

The entire EMA is a pact against the world - a situation of "you and me" - "I've got your back, baby".

 

It could almost be seen on a par with breaking vows of marriage. MM breaks his marital vow to BS. OW breaks her affair vow to MM. People can argue the difference between the two types of "vows", but that will not negate the fact that most OW feel very, very strongly about the bond that they feel with their MM, and many will say that they believe that they are in a "parallel marriage" of a sort. There have also been many, many EMAs where MMs buy rings for their OW, and some have even made vows to each other.

 

You said this in all seriousness too didn't you?

[MissBee]

You said this in all seriousness too didn't you?

 

 

As crazy as it seems...it's probably true.

 

I have seen things on LS that puzzle me, but people express that this is their life and thought process.

 

But in terms of the feeling of trusting and making a pact...I think for a lot of As it is like that, especially on the OW's part it seems. Where she will do all to protect this relationship she has and if she wants this man in her life...then she will most likely not go around blabbing, as as Lucky_One pointed out, that's a sure way to lose that man. People have such a hard time with NC...so imagine how much harder it would be for most OPs to declare they are telling and deal with a fall-out that could mean losing their lover prematurely?

 

There usually seems to be no benefit in the OW/OM exposing the A while everything is in full swing and they're inlove and living on promises or good times at least. That to me would be a premature ending. It is perhaps upon being frustrated, feeling betrayed, ongoing drama, impatience etc when thoughts of exposure come to mind but otherwise...I do believe the sentiment is that things can and will be worked out between them and the MP, and "their relationship" and no other person needs to be told in order for that resolution to occur.

Edited October 25, 2011 by MissBee

[reboot]

 

But in terms of the feeling of trusting and making a pact...I think for a lot of As it is like that, especially on the OW's part it seems. Where she will do all to protect this relationship she has and if she wants this man in her life...

 

I have no doubt many/most OW/OM feel this way. Because, wow, that's exactly the same way the BW/BH feels!

 

The problem is, the MW/MM kind of has this same pact with more than one person. What the hell kind of pact is that?

[MissBee]

I have no doubt many/most OW/OM feel this way. Because, wow, that's exactly the same way the BW/BH feels!

The problem is, the MW/MM kind of has this same pact with more than one person. What the hell kind of pact is that?

 

See the thread on the taboo word: fog.

 

It's all very irrational a lot of times. The illogical actions, expectations and irrational feelings that a person can possess. In As, a MP can somehow believe that they can truly honor both those pacts to the detriment of no one and with minimal complications. Surely in my former A, until the point he realized he couldn't, he tried to...for a very long time he convinced himself (and I too allowed myself to be convinced) that somehow one could live out 2 pacts in a mutually exclusive, fulfilling way for all people. Perhaps some will say that they have successfully done this...but for most, I do think it eventually comes to a head/fork in the road.

Edited October 25, 2011 by MissBee

[Lucky_One]

You said this in all seriousness too didn't you?

 

Yes.

 

And trust me, as a married woman, I truly believe that the vow of marriage trumps. But back then, I would have confidently told you that the promises that MM and I made to each other for honesty, commitment and trust were as sacred as the ones I made to a spouse.

 

I started off my "online life" on two other message boards. I have seen OW who have apartments with their MM, who travel to all out of town work events with their MM, whose families know and accept MM, who wear rings designed to be a symbol of the love between them, who say that their MM spend every weekend with them, who say that MM routinely goes home after midnight and then brings coffee to OW in bed the next morning on his way in to work, whose MM pay for household expenses; I even remember one MM who bought his OW a car. EMAs like that really DO seem to the OW to be a "parallel" marriage.

 

You can argue all you want that the MM is lying to the wife, so he just as easily could be lying to the OW. True, but getting a OW who is relatively happy in the EMA and who loves this man deeply to believe that is a challenge. (Yeah, you can call it fog!)

[Lucky_One]

And it just hit me. The reasons for the exposure as outlined by FindingNemo are different for a BS or an OW.

 

The BS (if following the MB idea about exposure) is trying to reconcile a broken marriage.

 

The OW is trying to force a decision. She isn't trying to reconcile an EMA; exposure would be counter-productive to a "strong affair" (if we want to consider that an affair IS a relationship, and as such, there can be healthy, unhealthy, strong, or weak ones).

 

Bottom line, most OW exposures are done, IMHO, with a unspoken desire for the marriage to fail and for the MM to stay with the OW by default, so to speak. Not exactly the best way, for me, to gain a life partner.

 

There are a few I have seen where OW expose because the MM will not stop contacting her and they want the contact to stop; in some cases like that, I can see where exposure can be an effective thing.

 

But there is definitely a danger that the exposure backfires on the OW. Many times, society shuns the OW. Heck, as a divorcee, I had married friends who didn't want me around their husbands in social situations, and I wasn't an OW. If they had known that I had been a WS, then they probably would have snubbed me on the street. My own sister's H was cheated on by his first wife, and they both are very bitter about affairs and AP; I don't think she would have been highly supportive of me had my OW-ness come out. It would have broken my parent's hearts, I believe. If my son had found it, it could have broken the strong bond that we share, and changed his entire outlook on women, on relationships, on marriage, on trust, on life. I was definitely as invested in keeping the EMA a secret as MM was.

[OWoman]

I logged into Marriage Builders.com. I wanted to learn a bit about what it takes to make a M work. Why? I thought that if I understood the things that build up a M, maybe I'd know how to handle an R better for the future.

 

So I learned about the principle of Exposure. Basically, the on-site Dr(s). believe that a BS upon discovering an A should tell friends and family about it. This will force the WS to end the A, shame the AP into leaving the couple alone to work themselves out and give the BS a support system.

 

My question: if Exposure is good for the BS, can it also be good for the AP? The fact is that WS' lie through their teeth to the APs about the state of their Ms. If the AP were to "expose" to friends and family and BS, could the following be the result?

 

1. The WS is forced to choose one way or the other.

2. The BS, who has been in the dark, is now informed.

3. The AP now also has his/her own support system.

4. The AP brings a forced end to their personal hell and in some way starts the process of getting out of being an accomplice to the lies, cheating, gas lighting, etc.

 

We sometimes advise APs not to expose and bring pain to the BS, but if exposure is good for the BS, can it be good for the AP too? All opinions are welcome.

 

The bolded resonates for me. The more people we told about the A, the more people supported us. I have no doubt that that social support played a critical role in my H being able to leave his xBW, knowing it wasn't "fog" or whatever she may have tried to gaslight him into believing, because so many other trusted friends and family could confirm what he was feeling and experiencing.

[MissBee]

Yes.

 

And trust me, as a married woman, I truly believe that the vow of marriage trumps. But back then, I would have confidently told you that the promises that MM and I made to each other for honesty, commitment and trust were as sacred as the ones I made to a spouse.

 

I started off my "online life" on two other message boards. I have seen OW who have apartments with their MM, who travel to all out of town work events with their MM, whose families know and accept MM, who wear rings designed to be a symbol of the love between them, who say that their MM spend every weekend with them, who say that MM routinely goes home after midnight and then brings coffee to OW in bed the next morning on his way in to work, whose MM pay for household expenses; I even remember one MM who bought his OW a car. EMAs like that really DO seem to the OW to be a "parallel" marriage.

 

You can argue all you want that the MM is lying to the wife, so he just as easily could be lying to the OW. True, but getting a OW who is relatively happy in the EMA and who loves this man deeply to believe that is a challenge. (Yeah, you can call it fog!)

 

 

 

Interesting situations....

 

Seems strange on one hand, but from my native culture, situations like these are common place. Men sometimes have whole other families and it's "understood" and never addressed, denied or some go through get lengths to separate their two lives. But in any event the "sharing of a man" happens and in some situations it is more normalized than in others.

 

Taking rings and vows though...wow...that's a bit much. I wonder if in those cases the person is also happy with their spouse at home and just want two women (or more), as in my native culture, sometimes it isn't unhappiness...it is simply wanting more than one woman and they try to treat both of them well...although of course in many more cases it's just them wanting to mess around and there is no thought of treating them well. If they are indeed unhappy though, it makes it that more incredulous.

[MissBee]

And it just hit me. The reasons for the exposure as outlined by FindingNemo are different for a BS or an OW.

 

The BS (if following the MB idea about exposure) is trying to reconcile a broken marriage.

The OW is trying to force a decision. She isn't trying to reconcile an EMA; exposure would be counter-productive to a "strong affair" (if we want to consider that an affair IS a relationship, and as such, there can be healthy, unhealthy, strong, or weak ones).

 

Bottom line, most OW exposures are done, IMHO, with a unspoken desire for the marriage to fail and for the MM to stay with the OW by default, so to speak. Not exactly the best way, for me, to gain a life partner.

 

There are a few I have seen where OW expose because the MM will not stop contacting her and they want the contact to stop; in some cases like that, I can see where exposure can be an effective thing.

 

But there is definitely a danger that the exposure backfires on the OW. Many times, society shuns the OW. Heck, as a divorcee, I had married friends who didn't want me around their husbands in social situations, and I wasn't an OW. If they had known that I had been a WS, then they probably would have snubbed me on the street. My own sister's H was cheated on by his first wife, and they both are very bitter about affairs and AP; I don't think she would have been highly supportive of me had my OW-ness come out. It would have broken my parent's hearts, I believe. If my son had found it, it could have broken the strong bond that we share, and changed his entire outlook on women, on relationships, on marriage, on trust, on life. I was definitely as invested in keeping the EMA a secret as MM was.

 

I agree.

 

Hence, to answer Nemo's question in short: I don't believe the tactics to reconcile a marriage are translatable to the ends of an affair. If one wants their affair to end, they don't need to expose it to end it and if they want it to continue, they most likely won't achieve that by exposing it, and if they want to force the hand of the MP to leave the spouse and be with them fully, that may very well backfire. I see less benefits to an OW/OM exposing an affair than a BS doing so.

[pureinheart]

I think on MB, they advise against exposing to the employer. They say that the WS could lose his/her job leading to financial difficulty for the family, or even if the AP is a workmate a sexual harassment suit. That's of course a BS exposing. But I bet the same goes for an AP.

 

This one I'd be careful with as setting out to get a person fired from their employment could result in prosecution.

[thomasb]

Bull, A lot of companies have no fraternizing policies. And the threat of lawsuit is if one is in a superior position. Damn good reason to fire someone.

[pureinheart]

I logged into Marriage Builders.com. I wanted to learn a bit about what it takes to make a M work. Why? I thought that if I understood the things that build up a M, maybe I'd know how to handle an R better for the future.

 

So I learned about the principle of Exposure. Basically, the on-site Dr(s). believe that a BS upon discovering an A should tell friends and family about it. This will force the WS to end the A, shame the AP into leaving the couple alone to work themselves out and give the BS a support system.

 

My question: if Exposure is good for the BS, can it also be good for the AP? The fact is that WS' lie through their teeth to the APs about the state of their Ms. If the AP were to "expose" to friends and family and BS, could the following be the result?

 

1. The WS is forced to choose one way or the other.

2. The BS, who has been in the dark, is now informed.

3. The AP now also has his/her own support system.

4. The AP brings a forced end to their personal hell and in some way starts the process of getting out of being an accomplice to the lies, cheating, gas lighting, etc.

 

We sometimes advise APs not to expose and bring pain to the BS, but if exposure is good for the BS, can it be good for the AP too? All opinions are welcome.

 

I don't think the results are ever good. I think it is incredibly vindictive and manipulative in most cases.

 

Whatever is discovered in a marriage should be on a need to know basis, using discretion.

[thomasb]

Exposure is a wonderful tool to end a spouses affair. Rarely do affairs survive the light of day. The shame and humiliation is incredible. I know. My wife told everyone. And I had confessed. Sent me into a tailspin.

[pureinheart]

Bull, A lot of companies have no fraternizing policies. And the threat of lawsuit is if one is in a superior position. Damn good reason to fire someone.

 

That is the companies issue then, and would be then taken up with the Labor Board of that state. I am speaking of a person on the outside trying to get another person fired using personal info. It CAN be prosecuted.

[reboot]

I don't think the results are ever good. I think it is incredibly vindictive and manipulative in most cases.

 

Whatever is discovered in a marriage should be on a need to know basis, using discretion.

 

In your opinion....

[thomasb]

That is the companies issue then, and would be then taken up with the Labor Board of that state. I am speaking of a person on the outside trying to get another person fired using personal info. It CAN be prosecuted.

 

 

 

I fail to see how a person can be prosecuted for telling the truth! If you are speaking of slander or liable they cannot if it is fact.

[Elizabeth Southerns]

It's possible that organisations exist that care about who their employees have sex with, but most don't. They would be interested only if it contravened company policy, such as a manager using his or her position to get a subordinate to have sex with him or her; a teacher having sex with a student; a priest having sex with an altarboy; or a job applicant having sex with the chair of the selection committee during the selection process. Beyond that most organisations deem it your own business and would look unfavourably on someone wishing to cause trouble.

[thomasb]

Very few employers wish to have deceitful people working for them and would fire or lay them off at the first chance. I would. And I am an employer who cares if time I pay for was used to promote this type of behavior.

[findingnemo]

For some reason "qoute" function is not working for me.

 

MissBee, it's true that an AP wouldn't be expected to consider exposure while happy with the relationship. But at some point, while the A is going on, an AP may feel frustrated and wonder how to end this. It is suggested to tell the MP it's over and to go into NC. While NC is extremely difficult IME, I wonder whether if in addition, exposure would help ensure the end of the A. For one thing, the MP would be busy trying to sort themselves out and would themselves go into strict NC as we see after d-days.

 

We all know how hard it is for both parties to resist a resumption of the A. Usually it happens slowly and as they like to think, innocently. "We need to talk and get closure. Let's meet for coffee." something along those lines. When a MP decides that they can't lie anymore and suddenly exposes him or herself, the A is effectively over (that is if the MP exposed so that he/she could try to sort out the M). Can this not be true if an AP decides to end it by i) telling the MP and ii) exposing? Although I don't like to compare it to a drug addiction, if the AP's goal is to bring this to an end, wouldn't exposure be an effective way to do this?